Biometrics at the Statue of Liberty

gurps_npc writes "There is an interesting CNN article about the Statue of Liberty finally opening again (it was closed since 9/11 for security reasons). They have increased security to 'airport levels', and offer lockers for people to rent, partly to keep those incredibly dangerous objects like swiss army knives away from the fragile Statue of Liberty. But instead of keys, the lockers use fingerprint readers to open and close (approximately one reader for every 50 lockers)." The article notes that the design was dictated by the Transportation Security Administration.

Comments

Differing Slashdot summaries

[RobertB-DC]

Somewhat off-topic, but at the moment, the Slashdot front page offers a slightly different version of this story summary (even after hitting Refresh). In fact, the story even disappeared from the front page for a moment, and I thought it was destined to be a ghost article.

Here's the info, for posterity, with differences in bold.

Your Rights Online: Statue of Liberty Checks Fingerprints Against FBI Watchlist

Posted by michael on Thu Aug 12, '04 11:13 AM
from the oh-the-irony dept.
gurps_npc writes "There is an interesting CNN article about the Statue of Liberty finally opening again (it was closed since 9/11 for security reasons). They have increased security to 'airport levels', and offer lockers for people to rent, partly to keep those incredibly dangerous objects like swiss army knives away from the fragile Statue of Liberty. But instead of keys, the lockers use fingerprint readers to open and close (approximately one reader for every 50 lockers). The privacy violation is of course that the lockers ALSO check your fingerprints against the FBI Terrorist Watch List. The article does not mention if any record of the finger print is kept by the FBI if it does not match. It also does not mention if the machine themselves keep a record of your fingerprint after you recover your stuff."

Note that the editorial comment about the TSA design requirement wasn't in the original, either.

Re:Fine, but acknowledge Clinton sucked ass, too

[Pentultimate Aeon]

These quotes are taken slightly out of context:

"We can't be too concerned with protecting the rights of ordinary Americans." - Bill Clinton.

Actually, the quote is:

President William J. Clinton: "We can't be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans to legitimately own handguns and rifles...that we are unable to think about reality." USA Today, March 11, 1993

Still an unattractive quote to a lot of folks, but when you stick a period in the middle of that sentence, its meaning changes a bit, no?

Also:
"We're going to take some things away from you, for the common good." - Hillary Clinton, very recently.

Yes, she said it. But what was she talking about, and who was she talking to? Was she talking about freedom? Rights? Liberties? Noooo... tax dollars.

Here it is in a slightly broader context:

From:
http://www.sfexaminer.com/article/index.cfm/i/0629 04n_clintons

Headlining an appearance with other Democratic women senators on behalf of Sen. Barbara Boxer, who is up for re-election this year, Hillary Clinton told several hundred supporters -- some of whom had ponied up as much as $10,000 to attend -- to expect to lose some of the tax cuts passed by President Bush if Democrats win the White House and control of Congress.

"Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you," Sen. Clinton said. "We're saying that for America to get back on track, we're probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

There is a big difference between taking away tax cuts from the wealthy, and taking away all American's civil liberties.

Be wary of context when you see a quote, folks.