Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Prisons Across the US Are Quietly Building Databases of Incarcerated People's Voice Prints (theintercept.com)

Posted by msmash on from the stranger-things dept.

In New York and other states across the country, authorities are acquiring technology to extract and digitize the voices of incarcerated people into unique biometric signatures, known as voice prints. From a report: Prison authorities have quietly enrolled hundreds of thousands of incarcerated people's voice prints into large-scale biometric databases. Computer algorithms then draw on these databases to identify the voices taking part in a call and to search for other calls in which the voices of interest are detected. Some programs, like New York's, even analyze the voices of call recipients outside prisons to track which outsiders speak to multiple prisoners regularly.

Corrections officials representing the states of Texas, Florida, and Arkansas, along with Arizona's Yavapai and Pinal counties; Alachua County, Florida; and Travis County, Texas, also confirmed that they are actively using voice recognition technology today. And a review of contracting documents identified other jurisdictions that have acquired similar voice-print capture capabilities: Connecticut and Georgia state corrections officials have signed contracts for the technology

Authorities and prison technology companies say this mass biometric surveillance supports prison security and fraud prevention efforts. But civil liberties advocates argue that the biometric buildup has been neither transparent nor consensual. Some jurisdictions, for example, limit incarcerated people's phone access if they refuse to enroll in the voice recognition system, while others enroll incarcerated people without their knowledge. Once the data exists, they note, it could potentially be used by other agencies, without any say from the public.

80 comments

  1. But what if by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But what if the prison is our own mind?

    1. Re:But what if by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lay off the drugs son.

    2. Re:But what if by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But what if the prison is our own mind?

      Kill the warden.. Otherwise there is no escape.

  2. Being in prison isn't consensual? by ranton · · Score: -1, Troll

    But civil liberties advocates argue that the biometric buildup has been neither transparent nor consensual.

    I never realized people in prison are forced to do things against their will. Are they forced to be there against their will too?

    This very well may break many laws prisons need to follow, but forcing inmates to do things against their will seems to be built into the concept of a prison.

    --
    -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    1. Re:Being in prison isn't consensual? by darkain · · Score: 3, Informative

      I mean, you read the last part of TFS, but what about the rest? Did you miss this part?

      "Some programs, like New York's, even analyze the voices of call recipients outside prisons to track which outsiders speak to multiple prisoners regularly."

    2. Re:Being in prison isn't consensual? by bugs2squash · · Score: 1

      and the people outside of prison ?

      --
      Nullius in verba
    3. Re:Being in prison isn't consensual? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 2

      and the people outside of prison ?

      Oh, in some ways, the entire US seems like a prison.

      We're all prisoners now.

      Or, at least that's the way we're sometimes treated.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    4. Re:Being in prison isn't consensual? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " but forcing inmates to do things against their will seems to be built into the concept of a prison. " - Certain things yes. Other things no. You're overbroad and open-ended. Prisoners DO in fact still have rights albeit limited rights.

      Now they can only recently have DNA forcibly extracted from them and for specific crimes through a specific process. Anything else would be potentially illegal and thus kicked out of court if brought as evidence.
      This is a new legal avenue because a voiceprinting wasn't really a thing until the last few decades and no one realized the legal / privacy implications of it.

      So there's also the idea that once a prisoner has been incarcerated and done their time, including a parole or probationary period if applicable, they should be restored and have no further burden to the state outside of registration.

      That means using their incarceration period to justify ongoing consequences indefinitely once released have to be very carefully spelled out and carried out, or again we're violating people's Constitutional rights.

      I don't think you were trying to say it's a simple consideration but you leaving it open-ended like prisoners could have their forever-privacy invaded beyond specific tested law, I think that has yet to be decided - and not as casually as you did.

    5. Re:Being in prison isn't consensual? by SuperKendall · · Score: 0

      The deal is though by calling a prisoner they are fair game to monitor so that you can make sure they are not engaged in criminal activity from prison... I don't see why that would not extend to anything they could do with a recording of the conversation which also seems like a good idea for prisoners.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    6. Re:Being in prison isn't consensual? by ranton · · Score: 0, Troll

      I mean, you read the last part of TFS, but what about the rest? Did you miss this part?

      "Some programs, like New York's, even analyze the voices of call recipients outside prisons to track which outsiders speak to multiple prisoners regularly."

      Good point, I had forgotten about that part of the summary when I read the last paragraph. I have never called someone in prison, but if there isn't some kind of "this call is being monitored and reviewed by prison officials and other agencies ..." message at the beginning of the call then I agree there is a problem. IANAL, but a quick Google search seems to confirm there is no reasonable expectation of privacy during a prison phone call, at least in Florida (the first article I found). Which is what I would expect.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    7. Re:Being in prison isn't consensual? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You bootlickers are always so eager to throw away everyone else's right to privacy

      I can picture you goosestepping past me in 1940's Germany

    8. Re:Being in prison isn't consensual? by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      Some years ago, a babysitter we hired had, unbeknownst to us, a boyfriend in prison. She called him in prison a couple of times from our house phone.
      We let her go for other reasons.

      One evening, the phone rings. "This is a call from WTF Prison, for Mary Jones. Will you accept the call and charges?"
      "No, I will not". And I hung up.

      In this scenario, now my voice print would be captured and logged. Not cool.

    9. Re:Being in prison isn't consensual? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody seems to have a problem with FB and Google doing this sort of thing. One or both of them are definitely recording / transcribing voice of everyone within distance of a phone (not just during call-conversation). So what is new here?

    10. Re:Being in prison isn't consensual? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Absolutely. I agree 110%. Why, prisoners aren't even people, not really. We can make them do anything we want.

      Anything.

      Of course, that means that if you are ever convicted of a crime and put into prison for any time at all and for breaking any law at all you automatically loose your "rights" to be considered a "human". But what the hell. They're not human. Screw 'em. Am I right?

  3. Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    They're in prison. They have no rights. Collecting there voice prints should be a good day for these scumbags. We should be executing 100 times more of them, harvesting there organs and using them for medical expeiments.

    Now imagine if libtards were in charge, it would be "whats that you murdered 200 people? ok, here's your free TV, internet access, and 100 voting ballots pre-filled with democrat party names!"

    1. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's such a relief that I'm not the only one who's happy that all of our personal information is up for grabs for anyone and everyone who stands to make a profit, without oversight, consequence, or regulation.

    2. Re:Good by nonBORG · · Score: -1

      Amazon, google and others are doing the same for people not in prisons. I wonder why people care so much about those in the prisons rather than those that will get sent to prison in the future for failing to use the correct gender pronoun with voice print proof matched via googles 'secret' database.

      Or if in China for saying a joke about the party etc.

      --
      You can't handle the truth! - Because I don't post left all my comments get modded down, bye bye Karma.
    3. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "They're in prison. They have no rights" - Exactly wrong, and moronic.

      "Collecting there voice prints" - Their, not there, moron.

      "We should be executing 100 times more of them" - Self execute, moron.

      "harvesting there organs" - Harvesting where organs? Moron.

      "Now imagine if libtards were in charge" - Mueller is in charge. Call him whatever you like.

      Trump the traitor dies in prison for his lifetime of frauds, and there's nothing you uneducated faggot ass can do about it, deplorable non-person.

      Enjoy.

    4. Re:Good by nospam007 · · Score: 1

      "We should be executing 100 times more of them, harvesting there organs and using them for medical expeiments."

      You definitely could use one of their grammar-organs.

  4. mass biometric surveillance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Don't want mass biometric surveillance in prison? Don't do something that would put you in prison, dumb ass. If I had my way, you wouldn't get out again.

    1. Re:mass biometric surveillance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      If I had my way, you wouldn't get out again.

      .

      I've been to prison and I'd like to see you tell me to my face that I should never have been released.

      We'd have ourselves a BIG time, you and me.

    2. Re: mass biometric surveillance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Cool. Except when your visit to prison was sponsored by corrupt officials and bogus charges, like if you happen to be their political opposition. Then they get free (for them) state sponsored surveillance on your every move after that.

    3. Re:mass biometric surveillance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If you're assaulting people over a disagreement, then you're kinda proving their point.

    4. Re:mass biometric surveillance by ranton · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I've been to prison and I'd like to see you tell me to my face that I should never have been released. We'd have ourselves a BIG time, you and me.

      If you're saying he needs to be legitimately scared to tell you that to your face, you are the type of person who shouldn't have been let out.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    5. Re:mass biometric surveillance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fuck yuo bitch you can't tell me i deservr to go to prison ill kill you ill kill all of you

    6. Re:mass biometric surveillance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I haven't been in prison. He should legitimately be scared of being an asshole to people he doesn't know, generally speaking. Hiding behind keyboards for your adolescent lives has made you unaware of consequences for what you say.

      Liars, shittalkers, propagandists, etc... those people would all be fair game for some ramifications for their actions if they tried it in person. That's part of the societal contract and they are violating it. There are consequences.

      The fact that idiots talk shit out their ass online is proving my point, they would find themselves educated with speed and prejudice in the meatspace. Now, do continue pretending that everyone who went to prison deserved it.

      That was the original ignorance that was objected to, that which you are now defending tacitly.

    7. Re:mass biometric surveillance by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 5, Informative

      Don't want mass biometric surveillance in prison? Don't do something that would put you in prison, dumb ass. If I had my way, you wouldn't get out again.

      That would be all well and good if the laws and justice system in the US were a little more sane. The population of the US is currently 326 million (2017). The population of the world is 7.5 billion(2017). The 2016 US prison population was 2.3 million including federal, state, local, immigration, military, juvenile. and civil detention facilities. The 2016 prison population for the entire world was 10.35 million. The US has 4.3% of the worlds population but houses 22% of the prisoners in the world. There are also 3.8 million people on probation and 820K on parole. That works out to 6.92 million people who are actively registered in the criminal justice system. That's a little over 2% of the US population.

      With the number of laws on the books in the US, damn near the entire population could be arrested on any given day for an infraction. It just matters if you get caught, of if a police officer feels like finding something to charge you for. There are many states that have laws about which positions are legal to have sex with your spouse, in the privacy of your own home. In one of the Carolinas it's illegal to sing off key. There's a town in Arizona that it's illegal to wear suspenders, and another that it's illegal for a woman to wear pants.

      There are 646K people incarcerated in local jails. Of those, 70% haven't been convicted yet as the justice system is backed up. There are almost 5500 people who are in civil detention centers in over a dozen states. These are people who were convicted of sexual crimes and have already served their entire sentence. But they are still confined, well, because.

    8. Re:mass biometric surveillance by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 3, Funny

      In one of the Carolinas it's illegal to sing off key.

      The voice print database will be especially useful over there.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    9. Re:mass biometric surveillance by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 1

      The US has 4.3% of the worlds population but houses 22% of the prisoners in the world.

      Obviously something about Americans makes them highly predisposed to being criminals.

    10. Re:mass biometric surveillance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been to prison and I'd like to see you tell me to my face that I should never have been released. We'd have ourselves a BIG time, you and me.

      If you're saying he needs to be legitimately scared to tell you that to your face, you are the type of person who shouldn't have been let out.

      Cut him some slack. His prostate probably had a BIG time in prison.

      Ask your cellmate if anal sex is right for you!

    11. Re:mass biometric surveillance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quit being a cunt. Felons don't lost their right to get pissed, any more than you do.

    12. Re: mass biometric surveillance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hurrah for state-sanctioned rape and torture!!

    13. Re: mass biometric surveillance by astrofurter · · Score: 1

      "With the number of laws on the books in the US, damn near the entire population could be arrested on any given day for an infraction."

      Alas, it seems we have become Stalin's Soviet Union.

    14. Re:mass biometric surveillance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You deserve to go to prison.

    15. Re:mass biometric surveillance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hiding behind keyboards for your adolescent lives has made you unaware of consequences for what you say.

      Feel free to reveal your own identity then, Mr. Tough Guy.

      those people would all be fair game for some ramifications for their actions if they tried it in person.

      Talking shit isn't illegal. Assaulting someone because they're talking shit is. If you don't know the difference, you will find yourself on the wrong side of prison bars at some point.

      The fact that idiots talk shit out their ass online is proving my point, ...

      You're an idiot talking 'shit of of your ass online'. Anyone can talk tough online but until now you're just being an anonymous coward. Quite literally so.

      Now, do continue pretending that everyone who went to prison deserved it.

      Yup, prisons are full of innocent little darlings who "didn't no nuttin". Or maybe they're like you and believe assaulting people over verbal disagreements shouldn't be illegal? It is. If you break the law, you go to prison.

      That was the original ignorance that was objected to

      In the eyes of an idiot, an intelligent person will seem ignorant indeed. Again, what it boils down to is that assault over a verbal disagreement is and will remain illegal. If you don't get that very simple to understand premise, you won't get the rest either.

    16. Re:mass biometric surveillance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been to prison and I'd like to see you tell me to my face that I should never have been released.

      Sure thing, cupcake. The only prison you ever saw was your mom's basement.

    17. Re:mass biometric surveillance by ranton · · Score: 1

      Quit being a cunt. Felons don't lost their right to get pissed, any more than you do.

      Of course they can get pissed. But they cannot assault someone which is why the OP was implying would happen.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    18. Re:mass biometric surveillance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you walked around hitting people all day you'd be in prison. In prison you'll see that most tough guys are only tough when it's time to deal with smaller people.

      If I ever wanted to hit you in real life I'd just wait for my chance to push you down the stairs. Works on everyone large and small. I used to do it to people in the military and while it didn't make me a tough guy.. I didn't go to prison either.

  5. Awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most prisoners when released commit more crimes, now we can detect them by their voice.

    Great work!!!

    1. Re:Awesome by bobbied · · Score: 2

      Most prisoners when released commit more crimes, now we can detect them by their voice.

      Well.. We already have their fingerprints and I expect their DNA.. So how's this different?

      Personally, I think this is a good idea, but only if the data is only kept until the person in question has fulfilled their sentence, including any time on probation if they are released early. Once the "debt to society" has been paid, delete it.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    2. Re:Awesome by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      The different is who they later call all over the USA for the decades after prison.
      Every other criminal they call will have a voice print.
      Every non criminal they call is connected to a criminal voice print and is kept on file as a direct new connection to a criminal.
      Smart phones, VoIP, OS approved chat software, that big brand virtual assistant/intelligent assistant will all be waiting for that voice print for decades.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    3. Re:Awesome by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 1

      Once the "debt to society" has been paid, delete it.

      Like their fingerprints and their DNA.

    4. Re: Awesome by astrofurter · · Score: 1

      Yay cybernetic totalitarianism!

  6. Purpose by duke_cheetah2003 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The purpose of this is to prevent inmates from hijacking/sharing each other's phone cards and usage of the phone system.

    It basically prevents Prisoner A from using Prisoner B's phone time because (s)he won't have the same voice print. This is mostly a good thing, inmates can no longer share phone time, or steal it from each other, or even trade it. Everything inside a prison becomes a valuable commodity to be traded for other commodities.

    This is an environment where you someone just might beat you within an inch of your life for a fucking prestamped envelope, ok?

    I was not aware it was being used for anything outside the jail/prison system though.

    1. Re: Purpose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't that what guards are for? Like they could recognize you with their human eyes. There shouldn't be a bunch of loose phones floating around in the first place, and the prison can't monitor phone calls on contraband phones it doesn't know are there.

    2. Re:Purpose by Hentes · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That problem only exists because of the artificial scarcity placed on phone calls, which does more harm than good.

    3. Re:Purpose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It basically prevents Prisoner A from using Prisoner B's phone time" - There are better ways to easily accomplish that without unfought privacy implications.

    4. Re:Purpose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      It's better to just outright not allow any phone calls to these unpersons

    5. Re:Purpose by WolfgangVL · · Score: 1

      The purpose of this is to prevent inmates from hijacking/sharing each other's phone cards and usage of the phone system.

      You actually buy that line?

      We let prisoners get buttraped in the shower, shanked in the yard, and allow gangs to form in the population, but we can't have them phone-cards for the phone system we control and directly profit off of getting mixed up, why, that would be downright WRONG!

      Sure, we're doing this to help with prison system phone card theft! All of that juicy data collection and biometric collection of prisoners, friends, and family is just an unfortunate side effect! Honest! Well of course we have to strip phone privileges if they don't comply! We cant have them talking to friends and family without our protection! That would be dangerous!

      "We're just looking out for the prisoners well-being!" So no american prison employee ever.

      --
      You are being ripped off every second of every day, so that advertisers can help rip you off even more tomorrow.
    6. Re:Purpose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Prison is meant as a punishment/rehabilitation, not a vacation for ne'er-do-wells.

      Aside from access to a lawyer and important family/personal business there should be no phone access. If you think this is doing harm then you're going to have to cite something that shows this. Otherwise you're just blowing hot air.

    7. Re:Purpose by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Its lets federal investigations track everyone after prison and anyone new they talk with gets connected to the voiceprint.
      Hops of connections to a criminal and collect it all.
      What was once used over a war zone is now collect it all at a federal and state budget level.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    8. Re:Purpose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, that's bullshit. A simple time log filled out by the guards who brought an inmate to the phone is enough to prevent time stealing.

      And no, it's not ok that you may be beaten nearly to death for an envelope.

      There are multiple uses for this system. The first is to funnel tax payer funds into business hands. Second is to train voice algorithms to improve data mining techniques. Etc... Look at how owns the voice companies and what other things those businesses do. As always, follow the money.

      Keep in mind in less than 10 years we'll have issues with people posting accurate, computer generated speeches in voices of other people. The tech to do this already exists today, it just isn't in an easy to use software package yet. This database will make it trivial to generate any fake voice transcripts from these people. With the current amount of fraud in police investigations, you can be sure it'll be used in this way.

    9. Re:Purpose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      EXACTLY.

      Government is Worthless, all it does is keep trying to FUCK YOU.
      Whatever it can get away with, for tens to hundreds of years.

      FUCK the GOVERNMENT.

      For one really good solution you can voluntarily handle yourself...
      Search Youtube: Larken Rose

    10. Re: Purpose by astrofurter · · Score: 1

      If you really believe that's the purpose, I've got a bridge to sell you.

    11. Re:Purpose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      https://www.stthomas.edu/media/interprofessionalcenter/FinalListeningSessionReport140318.pdf

      There you go. Lots of cited studies in there too for further reading even.

      In case it is not obvious, someone serving time being cut off from nearly all contact with their network is not going to be doing particularly well when they get out... Especially not if the sentence is fairly long. There are heaps of studies showing the negative impact of isolation..

    12. Re:Purpose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A prisoner killed themselves in the prison where a friend is serving time.
      Media attention on that caused the prison to clamp down and cut off all print media from inmates for a 3 month period citing 'security concerns'. Newspapers where the prison is mentioned frequently 'go missing' before being delivered even though access to news media is a protected right.

      Several staff members keep police brutality memes on their walls and in 'secure' areas in view to the inmates. Stuff like a boot on a face with the caption "You were saying?" and another mocking prison rape. Fun times!

    13. Re:Purpose by jouassou · · Score: 1

      The point of prison time is to rehabilitate them. Most people who are cut off from regular contact with friends and family, will just end up on the streets when they're released, and then obviously make their way back to prison. If you're condemning them to a life in prison anyway, you might as well just give them the death sentence, that would be much more humane.

    14. Re:Purpose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where did that undiluted horseshit come from, that prisons are for rehabilitation?

      They're for exacting vengeance and for scaring the general population into submission, and because we don't have the balls to kill people who do bad things. Making it so anyone can be arrested at any time, is a sign that the system is functioning exactly as intended.

      Now move along, Citizen, nothing to see here, and you've got consuming to get back to.

  7. Quietly Building? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does that mean they are having prisoners whisper?

  8. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  9. Kendall doesn't understand or care for legality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So why would anyone expect Kendall to understand that prisoners still have rights once released from prison, and that this lasting beyond their term or any limiting period is untested legal ground? Of course he doesn't see.

  10. Quietly by bwd777 · · Score: 0

    At least they are being quiet.

  11. My voice is my passport. Verify me! by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    My voice is my passport. Verify me!

  12. All hail Godhead Trump!!!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All hail Godhead Trump!!!!!!

  13. south CAPTCHA: whitens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Lifetime slavery. Long live General Lee!

  14. Queitly? by AlienBrain · · Score: 1

    So they're recording whispers?

    1. Re:Queitly? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      The decades of later mil/law enforcement use to connect all criminals to other criminals and other people is the unexpected part of the budget growth.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  15. voir dire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just refuse to convict next time you're on a jury. Or better yet, tell them no, you cannot follow the law because it isn't just. That really gets their attention, and there isn't anything they can do about it because you aren't the convict.

    1. Re:voir dire by magarity · · Score: 2

      Just refuse to convict next time you're on a jury. Or better yet, tell them no, you cannot follow the law because it isn't just. That really gets their attention, and there isn't anything they can do about it because you aren't the convict.

      It would be a sad abuse of that power if you used it not because of the particular case but because you didn't like some aspect of the penal system.

    2. Re:voir dire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just refuse to convict next time you're on a jury.

      You might have a different opinion if you were the victim. But you sound like an idiot, so maybe not.

  16. Re:This call might be recorded... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I always figured the "this call might be recorded for training purposes" disclaimer when calling support and billing numbers meant, training of AI systems and not of actual human beings.

    The message is invariably "this call may be recorded", not "might". They're not advising you of something that has a chance of occurring, they're granting you permission to record the call.

  17. Re:This call might be recorded... by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

    No, no, no. They're informing you that they may record your call, and therefore pass the legal obligation in two-party-consent states.

    Of course, that would mean you could also record the call. (I think, IANAL, you may also have to tell them that this call may be recorded from your side.)

    --
    Your ad here. Ask me how!
  18. criminals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    By 'incarcerated people', you mean convicted criminals. Also, not 'prisoners', convicted criminals.

  19. Re:This call might be recorded... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a little more mundane then that. If you work at a support call center taking calls, a certain number of your calls get randomly recorded and then listened to and scored on how well you handled the call normally, and that's thrown in with things like how long you are taking on calls on average and such to determine how well you are doing.

    It's also entirely possible when training employees, they may use one of these recordings as a demonstration for how you are and aren't supposed to handle calls.

    The message is really mostly affecting the person you are talking to, though, not you.

  20. Such anger, much despair by stevent1965 · · Score: 2

    Some public policies in this country are setting precedents that are immoral, unethical and, sadly, not illegal. This is one. This has appalling implications for the future of this nation, if you think about it. Incarceration is supposed to be its own punishment, sufficient to the crime. Educate yourself on the cost of making phone calls from prison: https://www.prisonphonejustice... Now look at prison commissary practices and some of the companies that are profiting by selling 30 cent ramen noodle packages for a dollar: https://www.keefegroup.com/ and https://www.prisonpolicy.org/r.... Don't be fooled by the specific product prices in the example. Commissary prices are grossly inflated compared to those available in a competitive retail environment. Plus, inmates are paid slave wages: https://www.prisonpolicy.org/b... Twelve cents an hour is common in federal prisons. Now we hear about the unethical practice of creating voiceprints with neither knowledge nor consent of those being voiceprinted. It's shameful. Immoral, unethical, shameful. By the way, if you're one of those single-note, hard-core, "fuck them they committed a crime" type of people, just move on, OK? You have no idea what you're talking about and I won't waste my time engaging with you. Go take your unvaccinated children on a playdate, or something.

  21. POLICE/FBI MUST/SHOULD HAVE BIOMETRIC DATA!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How useful/important fingerprint data to police/FBI to catch criminals?
    How many crimes solved & how many criminals got caught, because of police/FBI having fingerprints of criminals?

    What percentage of all crimes committed, are comitted by ex-cons?
    (I would guess probably more than half!)
    If police/FBI did not have any fingerprints etc of ex-cons, would not make that, catching ex-cons, doing any new crime, a lot harder?
    (Also consider that, ex-cons would have a lot of experience/knowledge, about how/why they got caught before! So catching them would be always harder than any new criminal!)

    Police/FBI catching criminals is, obviously, extremely important service for common good of general public!!!
    & Police/FBI having any/all kinds of biometric data (fingerprints, voiceprints, irisprints, DNA-prints) of criminals is, obviously, extremely important/valuable for catching criminals!!!

    IMHO, talking about the need for protecting privacy of people in prisons, who are PROVEN CRIMINALS, is UTTERLY RIDICULOUS!!!
    & not allowing Police/FBI to take their ANY useful kind of biometric data, is ABSOLUTELY GOES AGAINST COMMON GOOD OF GENERAL PUBLIC!!!

    IMHO, the people who are trying to stop Police/FBI to take any biometric data of criminals, are NOT really representatives of general public!
    General public never chose/voted them to be their representatives!

    IMHO, if anyone really thinks, the question of, whether Police/FBI can take/record any/all kind of biometric data of criminals, or not, really needs to be decided,
    then only ones supposed/allowed to decide it, are the people of general public!!! & nobody else!!!
    Meaning, only, a national/statewise public referendum, can decide such question!!!
    (So, imagine, if this referendum question asked to whole general public:
    Police/FBI must/should have any/all kinds of biometric data (like fingerprints, voiceprints, irisprints, DNA-prints, ...) of criminals, or not?
    Answer: YES/NO)

  22. Useful Abuse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These prints and databases will be extremely helpful when trying to doctor evidence, create scapegoats, remove suspicion from police or influential politicians by changing the voice on evidence to be submitted to that of actually-convicted criminals, and probably a dozen other tricks already in use that I'm simply not crooked enough to have imagined.

    Will it in any way ever be used so as to protect innocents from recidivists? Hell no. That was never, is never, and will never be the intent behind something like this. But oh what a tangled web it will help weave.

    Those doing this need to be stopped - and being 'the law' it's not through legal means we can do it.

  23. This is nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is nothing. Just wait until Apple, Amazon, and Google get in on the game by selling their Alexa/Siri/Ok Google/etc voice profiles for fun and profit.

    Anything you say or do can and will be used against you. Just wait.

    1. Re: This is nothing. by astrofurter · · Score: 1

      Yay for cybernetic totalitarianism! Yay dystopia! Yay!!

  24. Re: Kendall doesn't understand or care for legalit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Criminals and suspects need to be beaten and whipped and have their heads bashed against the paddy wagon roof. Cops need to stay safe as they protect us from potentially dangerous bad guys.

    Unless the arrestee is Roger Stone or another Trump accomplice, in which case the mean old government agents are a threat to us decent folk.