“I mean, when you get pulled over, you want a friendly picture for the cop to look at.”
CHRISTOPHER GEORGE
Virginia driver opposed to the state’s new ban on smiling in driver’s license photos
Quirky as it may seem, a new no smile policy will soon be in place at all Virginia DMVs, through it’s already made it to Roanoke. When drivers now go to get their picture taken for their license, they’ll be asked to keep a neutral expression. A dull face, versus a smile, will make it easier for DMV to use face recognition software in the future, if the move is approved by state lawmakers. The software would help crackdown on identity fraud, an ongoing problem in Virginia.
“I think anything to keep people from doing stuff illegal, I’m fine with that,” said Toby Brown. “Well, they do the same thing for the passport. You can’t smile when you get a passport,” said Amy Nichols. Another new change, instead of getting your driver’s license the same day, you’ll get a temporary ID good for 30 days, until the real one is processed at a central location in Danville and mailed to you.
It appears the DMV will be the collection point for the state to capture your pre-crime image. This will inevitably lead to a ban on smiling anywhere there is a use for face recognition cameras, which will of course be everywhere. Do you feel safer yet? We are being governed by idiots.
#6 or you could just wear a mask
interestingly in the UK when you register your car with the DVLA you are signing the actual owenership of the vehicle over to them, and just registering yourself as the registered keeper.
Cheney as asked to smile in order to get within the dull face range.
#21 Total rubbish.
DVLA has nothing to do with vehicle ownership. If you buy a car with finance, the finance company own the car until you’ve paid up. You cannot give ownership of a car to the DVLA if you don’t actually own it yourself.
China’s involved, I just know it!
@#, eaze: “its just a more accurate way of identifying people’s faces. it has nothing to do with civil liberties and should not be clouded with them.”
Govt. should not collect biometrics data from citizens at the point which citizens can’t avoid for normal daily lives: ex. drivers license. Such collection is what makes this civil liberty issue. I don’t mind Govt. collecting biometric photos of convicted criminals or of people in charge of extreme security sites/data/… who work for the Govt. But collecting biometrics from my drivers license photo is where it crosses the line from free society to police state.
No smiling in the first state. (Delaware) Also, no glasses – my driver’s license picture is the only picture of me without glasses taken in the last 50 years. Yeah, I started wearing them early.
But I wonder, I am so near-sighted and with a high astigmatism that my eye shape, size, and placement is different when viewed through the glass lenses as opposed to not. Will that invalidate the face recognition?
all your smiles are belong to us
11 Olo Baggins of Bywater said, “and only an iris scan is reliable over time.”
Umm, no. Eye damage can occur. It’s not really any better than finger print in that respect. DNA is FAR more reliable over time…
“We are being governed by idiots.”
IN GENERAL, these guys are who were voted in. We get the government we deserve.
BTW this means all we have to do to avoid face recognition is go around with a sh*t eating grin all the time.
We have this in Canada now – you can’t smile for passport or driver’s license photos.
Interestingly, you can insist on wearing a face-covering veil and burka if are a female Muslim. (Or if you are pretending to be one.)
What are you people trying to hide? What are you doing that you don’t want people to be able to identify you? Do you think it would be fine for you to walk around wearing a ski mask all the time? That’s essentially what you’re asking for: “I want to be unidentifiable to the police should I commit a crime”
#28, ummm, that’s incorrect. Iris damage is rare, otherwise it’ll never change throughout your life. Fingerprints are easily damaged, permanently and temporarily. And fingerprints are easily faked, too.
DNA is irrelevant.
#31…This subject reminds me of the RFID paranoia prevalent on this blog.
#32:
“Iris damage is rare”
Can you still read the iris through a cataract? Or a colored contact lens?
dunno, just asking.
Summary of a study on eye surgery vs iris scan accuracy:
Cataract surgeries change iris textures in such a way that iris recognition systems, which perform mathematical comparisons of textural biometric features, are able to detect these changes and sometimes even discard a pre-enrolled iris considering it an impostor. In our study, re-enrollment proved to be a feasible procedure.
…
From a biometric FAQ:
Colored contact lenses can reduce the accuracy of iris scans, as can the use of drugs that dilate your pupils.
I think its ignorant that they wont give ya license to ya til 30 days i mean i payed almost 40 bucks for freakin things!
im often roaming all across the internet almost all of the time which means that I have a propensity to browse considerably, which isn’t typically a good matter as nearly all of the web sites I see are made up of pointless rubbish copied from various other internet sites a thousand times, on the other hand I’ll hand it to ya this website is in truth enjoyable and even seems to have some original substance, so thank you for breaking the trends of solely replicating other people’s blogs