Slashdot Log In
Indiana Bans Driver's License Smiles, For Security
Posted by
timothy
on Tue Dec 09, 2008 08:57 AM
from the one-doozy-of-an-aha!-moment dept.
from the one-doozy-of-an-aha!-moment dept.
Smelly Jeffrey writes "According to a recent article, Indiana BMV Communications Director Dennis Rosebrough states that applicants for a new or renewed operator's license or state identification card will no longer be allowed to smile and say cheese. Apparently new facial recognition software being employed by the state fails to function when the face is distorted by something as innocuous as smiling. Also on the list of taboos are hats, eyeglasses, and hair that hangs down over the face. The article fails to mention, however, the legality of beards, mustaches, and bushy eyebrows." Similar restrictions are in place for the Enhanced Driver License (which serves as a sort of limited passport) implemented by the state of Washington, among others.
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
As an Indiana resident... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:As an Indiana resident... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:As an Indiana resident... (Score:5, Interesting)
I never smile anyway, but what's with this "you can't wear glasses" rule? That seems really stupid considering I'm always wearing glasses. Will the cops now ask me to remove my glasses so they can compare my face to the drivers license?
Also:
Why is Indiana using facial recognition software? Is there now a database of faces that police are searching every time a crime is committed???
Parent
Re:As an Indiana resident... (Score:5, Interesting)
That is what the E. German border guards were famous for doing, so ... Yes, probably so. Not that this will *actually* happen, but if you meet an especially scrupulous cop (in the sense of scrupulous attention to detail and procedure) then the glasses may come off.
timothy
Parent
Re:As an Indiana resident... (Score:5, Informative)
To combat identity theft. At least that's what the local NPR news said this morning.
Apparently the BMV plans to compare your new picture when you get a license to all your previous license pictures. If it looks significantly different, they'll take extra steps to ensure that you are, in fact, who you say you are.
I was at a seminar today where the General Counsel for the Indiana BMV explained the reason for the new regulation in more detail. Apparently, Indiana had been attracting fraudsters who would apply for a driver's license under someone else's name. In order to prevent this, the clerks at the BMV compare all past driver's license photos with the appearance of the person trying to get the new license. If the clerk noticed a discrepancy, the person was flagged and they needed to have a hearing and provide further proof that they are who they say they are to get the license. That has been going on for "some time."
Under the new system, the photos will be additionally compared using facial recognition software. Further, the system will check faces in its database against one another to determine if someone is getting licenses under multiple names. The software is somewhat limited in that things like smiles and glasses throw it off, hence the regulation.
In other words, the system isn't trying to make it easier for the police, FBI, interpol, etc. to catch you -- it's trying to make it easier for the BMV to catch people applying for licenses fraudulently. At least, that's what the General Counsel said.
Parent
Re:As an Indiana resident... (Score:5, Funny)
"License and registration, please."
"Hold on, officer, I need to put on my eyebrows."
Parent
I'm glad I'm not a Hoosier (Score:4, Interesting)
As those who have read my old sm62704 journals know, I was very nearsighted all my life, until I got a cataract in my left eye that was caused by prescription eyedrops. My eye surgeon implanted a CrystaLens inside it (you will be assimilated, resistance is futile), and my vision in that eye is better than 20/20 now. The doctor said I should no longer have any "corrective lens" restrictions on my driver's license.
My driving record was exemplary so last time my license was renewed I could have had it done by mail, but I went in anyway, extatic. For the first time in my life I was going to have a license without vision restrictions!
Also for the first time, I'm smiling in the picture. In light of the circumstances, how could I not?
And it actually looks like me, unlike every other picture I've ever had on my license. You should vote those morons out of office. A picture of a normally happy person who is frowning does not look like him.
Note to the mods- "Hoosier" is not an insult. Indiana is known as "the Hoosier State", and that was the motto on their license plates for decades. Indiana's citizens are proud to be hoosiers.
Parent
Re:I'm glad I'm not a Hoosier (Score:5, Funny)
It's a sad comment on the state of Slashdot's moderation system when you have to preemptively explain a fairly common phrase you used because you have a reasonable expectation that someone will mistake it for "flamebait."
To take this even further off topic, our local hockey team is called "the Canucks," and the company I work for disperses season ticket amongst the sales staff to use for marketing purposes. The CEO recently complained that he had attempted to send an email three times, but nobody received it and he didn't get a bounce back. Turns out the nanny filters on the mail server quarantined his message due to a racial slur - he'd mentioned that the "Canucks" tickets were available.
Parent
Re:As an Indiana resident... (Score:5, Funny)
If you want a really embarrassing picture on your driver's license, you could always move to Virginia:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owvO640ODwA [youtube.com]
Parent
Speechless (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Speechless (Score:5, Insightful)
*I wish I didn't have to do this, but for the record, the above is satire.
Parent
Re:Speechless (Score:5, Informative)
I'll probably get flamed for this, but the last time I went through Orange County, the TSA agents were actually really nice!
They smiled. They were polite. They seemed to be serious about their job without being jerks to the passengers. Someone left their expensive camera behind at the security checkpoint and an agent chased them down to give it back to them.
I have had the other experience, but I just wanted to give them props that were due.
Parent
Re:Speechless (Score:4, Informative)
And not that I blame them. They deal with thousands of people every day who are usually in a hurry and therefore rude to them. I have a short temper with people who can't follow simple directions. Heaven forbid someone who's in line for 20 minutes read one of the 30 signs that tell you to take your shoes off (for example) or the automated announcement every 5 minutes over the PA that tells you what to be ready for.
I try to be polite when I travel, a simple "thank you" can go a long way..
Parent
Re:Speechless (Score:5, Informative)
Except that if you read the article (I know, this is /.), you would know that this isn't for any of those purposes. It is to stop people applying for multiple licenses under different identities.
Facial recognition is very hard to do well*, most systems have terrible accuracy rates. Since all the images in this system are from the same source, the BMV, they may as well try to standardise the images as much as possible to make the system as accurate as possible, reducing the number of misses and false positives.
* Despite what TV would like you to think. If you think it's easy to do well, you have been watching too much CSI.
Parent
Beards (Score:4, Interesting)
Beards are a great point. In my license picture I have no facial hair, now I have a full beard. My hair is also quite a bit longer. I wouldn't say I look like a completely different person just a mere two years after getting this one taken, but I doubt I would be recognized by this facial recognition software.
Re:Beards (Score:5, Interesting)
Not a problem with the Government's planned ID card scheme. This will require you to notify the Government of "drastic" appearance changes [independent.co.uk], or face a £1,000 fine.
I don't know if big bushy beards and long hair would count, but it's worrying nonetheless.
Parent
A testament to the technology (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I think its more of a testament to the Indiana DMV. I know in my state, nobody feels like smiling after waiting in line at the DMV!
Re:A testament to the technology (Score:5, Funny)
Its okay, terrorists never smile ...
Parent
A solution to this... (Score:3, Interesting)
... is for those people who don't want to be detected by the recognition software to go around smiling when in the view of cameras that use it?
Re:A solution to this... (Score:4, Funny)
I'm pretty sure the guy smiling and sweating in the trench coat when its 80 degrees out is going to attract somebody's attention.
Parent
Re:A solution to this... (Score:5, Funny)
You've never been to Manhattan, have you?
Parent
Missed Opportunity (Score:5, Insightful)
Why not tell people, "you can smile if you want to for your license, but we also have to shoot a picture of you not smiling"? Then, record both images, so that the recognition software has two looks available for that individual. Heck, get a shot of them with and without glasses, too.
This approach would make people happy, promote friendliness, and improve security.
Papers, please. (Score:5, Insightful)
Real ID [google.com] should make any sensible person cringe. Take five minutes and read how the federal government has mandated a variety of criteria for states' drivers licenses, the cost of which to the states is in the millions and is entirely unfunded (not to mention unconstitutional!) and poorly executed in states where it has been effected.
Take a moment today to call your state legislators and see where they stand on your states' Real ID compliance. If they oppose it, congratulate them and consider donating to their campaign. If they support it, swear on your mother's grave to see them unseated and replaced with a responsible legislator.
Re:Papers, please. (Score:4, Insightful)
Real ID should make any sensible person cringe. Take five minutes and read how the federal government has mandated a variety of criteria for states' drivers licenses, the cost of which to the states is in the millions and is entirely unfunded (not to mention unconstitutional!) and poorly executed in states where it has been effected.
I think opposing Real ID should make any sensible person cringe. Why? Because it doesn't mandate any "new" criteria that almost every state isn't already collecting on you if you have a drivers license. What it is doing is trying to make the 50 states DLs uniform. Those that really oppose it don't like it solely based on money issues. Privacy issues aren't even a real issue with it as you are already submitting that same info to the state any way. Now why do states oppose this based on money issues? Base some states have had statewide RMSs for police for years and it fairly trival in their state for their police to read their state DL licenses and import into their RMSs and it's mainly been paid for once. The thing is it would be nice if the police from TX, CA, FL, NY could just as easily read other states as their own. That's the entire issue that some already have their system in place and don't want to change even if the feds paid every penny.
I think this'll something like NIBRS or UCR where the feds would like the states to do it, but realistically it won't be until the next big change in RMS for those states that currently oppose this to even consider adopting it. At that time, they'll whine that they want to keep their current format as well.
Parent
Re:Papers, please. (Score:5, Insightful)
21 states have rejected it because it would be too expensive, too invasive, and/or pretty much unconstitutional.
Pennsylvania's Dept. of Transportation effected many of the points of Real ID without an edict from the PA legislature, and there are many legislators not pleased with this. One point required a multimillion dollar contract with a security firm whose technology was cracked reliably just a few months later (I wish I could find evidence on the 'net of this, but I trust the person who told me, as he's been following Real ID religiously since it was introduced).
You're advocating a national ID card, essentially. That's one stop shopping for identity thieves--just like social security numbers are now--and it won't do a thing to stop "terrorists" and other malfeasant souls. It's also terribly close to the "papers, please" seen in many places throughout time.
Parent
Re:Papers, please. (Score:5, Interesting)
>>>What it is doing is trying to make the 50 states DLs uniform.
"I have searched but I cannot lay my hand on the part of the Constitution that grants the U.S. that power." - James Madison. QED the law is unconstitutional.
Of course so is the U.S. law that mandates drinking age be 21 and forced many states to change their age of consent from 18 to 21. I still don't understand that one... even though I agree with age 21 I think the decision should be left to each government for its own specific region. If Wyoming wants the drinking age to be 18, let Wyoming do so. I don't live there, so what do I care what the Wyomingites do?
Parent
Re:Papers, please. (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
No license for Slash (Score:5, Funny)
Also on the list of taboos are hats, eyeglasses, and hair that hangs down over the face.
So I guess Slash is out entirely.
Re:No license for Slash (Score:4, Funny)
A visual aid [wilsdomain.com]
Parent
Indiana bans smiling, for security (Score:3, Funny)
Residents of Indiana will no longer be allowed to smile in public when the Homeland Security Alert Level is Orange or Red, to improve security. Image recognition software is not able to easily recognize and track citizens movements if they smile, which causes terrorism and child pornography.
Not Even Realtime (Score:3, Insightful)
BMV Communications Director Dennis Rosebrough said if a criminal went to get a driver's license under his name, the criminal's photograph would be compared to an old photograph of Rosebrough and the BMV could be alerted the next day that the two don't match.
This system isn't even realtime. What good does it do if a criminal gets away with a state-issued ID a full 36 hours before anyone knows that he shouldn't?
The 2008 Luthor Act (Score:5, Funny)
Also on the list of taboos are hats, eyeglasses...
Local reaction: Newspaper reporter Clark Kent was quoted as protesting this in the strongest possible terms, while wealthy socialite Bruce Wayne said he didn't really see this as a problem.
Terrorist's Toolkit available online ! (Score:5, Funny)
http://www.amazon.com/Groucho-Glasses-Fake-Mustache-Brows/dp/B001HHECYU [amazon.com]
Mustaches and other disguises (Score:5, Funny)
Easy Crack (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Nothing new under the sun (Score:5, Informative)
This is a rule in the UK already for passports, driving licenses, immigration applications etc. Also the background can't be pure white, no hair can be covered (except for religious reasons), only one person per picture, and it's quite tightly defined where in the photo the face must be.
Parent
.. except for religious reasons.. (Score:5, Informative)
And the employee that gives out the passport is not allowed to question your believe. By this reasoning someon managed to gat a official id card dressed as joker [theregister.co.uk]. He later fialed to a a drivers license as joker because the employee refused. In that case you also seem to have no rights.
by the way, later his card was taken in because the card is still owned by government..
Parent
Re:.. except for religious reasons.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Brilliant - actually, I'm glad they allowed him to keep his hat. Saying people aren't allowed to do things, but then making an exemption for religious reasons is pointless (as now the rule doesn't apply to everyone), and discriminatory against those who have other reasons. But it's particularly annoying when they make judgements and claim that some religious reasons are acceptable, whilst some religious reasons are not. Whilst I accept that this guy probably had different intentions, in general, who's to say that someone's belief that they must wear a hat because they think they're the Joker, is any less legitimate that someone's belief they must wear headwear because they think God told them to?
As for UK passports not allowing smiles - I'm amused that most of the photo machines still have photos on the outside showing people with smiles (not to mention with dogs in the pictures, or random "fun" backgrounds added in...)
Parent
Re:Nothing new under the sun (Score:4, Interesting)
As in the Netherlands, so probably an EU thing. Again, I don't know the rationale. A quick browse suggests, again, that it's for biometric purposes, and that a smile with bared teeth distorts the biometric data of the face too much. A smile without teeth bared is allowed, though, here.
Stefan.
Parent
Re:Nothing new under the sun (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Nothing new under the sun (Score:5, Insightful)
One, the glasses partially hide your face.
Two, if the photo has you without glasses, they can always compare you to it by asking you to take your glasses off. If the photo shows you with glasses, they can only compare by getting you to wear the same glasses.
Next episode, why they have braille on drive-thru ATMs.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:So to be a terrorist... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:hmmm, no. (Score:5, Informative)
That's generally a feature of fascist regimes, but not "the basic tenet", and it certainly isn't why we dislike fascism. Many European countries from 1945 to the mid-eighties also "bundled the powers of state and industry", but they were hardly fascist.
Fascism is defined by extreme nationalism and a disregard for basic human rights. That's what sets it apart from other more benign ideologies.
Parent
Re:hmmm, no. (Score:5, Funny)
Well, that's a relief. At least as we descend into a totalitarianist police state, I can take comfort in the fact that the regime isn't technically fascist.
Parent
Re:So Give 'em What They Expect (Score:5, Interesting)
Favorite "getting carded" story:
I'm in an airport bar that has a very conspicuously posted sign "We ID All Guests". Ok, fair enough. I order my beer, bartender cards me, no sweat.
A few minutes later, a man older than me (I'd guess he was mid to late fifties) sits down and orders a drink. The bartender asks for his ID. He starts ranting and raving about how unreasonable this is, finally relents, and pulls out a badge case. He shows her his "Retired Placer County Sheriff's Dept" ID. She looks it over for a second, hands it back to him and says "I'm sorry, sir, I'll need to see something with your birthdate on it."
You could have fried an egg on this guy's forehead.
He did finally show his driver's license, finally got his drink, and *then* noticed the sign hanging behind the bar. He eventually sheepishly apologized, but the rest of us just sat and stared at the moron making a scene.
Parent
Re:So Give 'em What They Expect (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent