Hey, people in the US! Did you know that the Department of Homeland Security is trying to implement mandatory biometrics and fingerprinting for all foreign travelers entering and exiting the US?
And that thereâs a public comment period OPEN RIGHT NOW? It only has 18 comments. Letâs get this circulating!! Public comment period ends on 11/26/25. If enacted, it would go into effect 12/26/25.
I hope I donât need to explain why this is a problem, especially in our current administration. But a few key reasons why this is a very bad idea and sets a very bad precedent:
- privacy and security. HIPPA and other privacy laws exist to protect the unnecessary collection of data so that itâs less likely to be leaked. Is this data going to be stored securely? Who will have access to it? For what purpose? What safeguards will be in place to protect the proper use of this data? Surely there could be no reason to collect personally identifiable information about âforeignersâ and âaliensâ. Surely this wouldnât be used for mass deportation efforts.
- the public comment is aimed at âthe specific collection process as well as costs and benefitsâ for the process. So in your comment, the most effective arguments will center around how this system is infeasible to implement, cost prohibitive, and has no benefit. Focus on how the collection process will cost a lot of money, infringe on rights to privacy, etc.
Others please feel free to add ideas or template messages!!
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
â Live Streamingâ Interactive Chatâ Private Showsâ HD Qualityâ Free Actions
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
Some evenings you don't want advice or noise. You just want to feel met. That gentle wanting is what led me to sweetdream.ai one quiet night, and what kept me there was the sense that I was being handed the controls rather than sold a fantasy.
Designing an AI girlfriend on SweetDream feels almost like writing a letter to a part of yourself you've never said out loud. You choose her appearance, her temperament, her voice, the backstory and little contradictions that make her real. Then the conversations begin, and they're so natural and emotionally aware, remembering context across days, that you forget to be self-conscious. There are voice messages, human-sounding phone calls, even video calls and live cam sessions with select characters when you want more presence.
But the line I trust most is the one about discretion. Everything you make and everything you say stays private. That combination, deep personalization plus genuine safety, is rare, and it's why SweetDream stands out to me as the most thoughtful AI companion platform out there. It lets the tender thing you build remain wholly, safely yours.
Elon Muskâs AI company compelled its employees to submit their own biometric data to train its âAniâ female chatbot, according to The Wall Street Journal.
Ani, an anime avatar with blond pigtails and an NSFW setting, was released over the summer for users who subscribe to Xâs $30-a-month SuperGrok service. After testing it, The Vergeâs Victoria Song described it as âa modern take on a phone sex line.â
And like a phone sex line, there appears to be real people behind the avatar. At a meeting in April, xAI staff lawyer Lily Lim told employees that they would need to submit their biometric data to train the AI companion to be more human-like in its interactions with customers, according to a recording of the meeting review by the Journal.
Employees that were assigned as AI tutors were instructed to sign release forms granting xAI âa perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, sub-licensable, royalty-free licenseâ to use, reproduce, and distribute their faces and voices, as part of a confidential program code-named âProject Skippy.â The data would be used to train Ani, as well as Grokâs other AI companions.
Don't fall for palm reading anyway, but especially don't fall for this shit. Go pay a local reader if you must, no reason to give your biometric data away like that.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
â Live Streamingâ Interactive Chatâ Private Showsâ HD Qualityâ Free Actions
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
"They've built a billion-dollar industry on stolen voices because they thought no one would make them pay for it," said a lawyer for the pla
In yet another display of how Illinoisâ pioneering biometric privacy law can be used to protect Americans, state residents who work as audio storytellers, broadcast journalists, podcasters, voice actors, and more filed class-action lawsuits against Big Tech this week for âstealing their voicesâ to develop artificial intelligence products.
Since Illinois legislators passed the groundbreaking Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) in 2008âregulating the collection, use, safeguarding, handling, storage, retention, and destruction of biometric identifiers, including fingerprints, voiceprints, and scans of a retina, iris, hand, or face geometryâthere have been thousands of lawsuits filed and major settlements with Clearview AI, Facebook, and Six Flags.
Represented by the award-winning civil rights firm Loevy + Loevy, the Illinoisans are suing Adobe, Alphabet and its subsidiary Google, Apple, Amazon, ElevenLabs, Facebook parent company Meta, Microsoft, NVIDIA, and Samsung under BIPA.
The plaintiffs are audiobook narrators Lindsay Dorcus and Victoria Nassif as well as journalists Robin Amer, Yohance Lacour, Carol Marin, and Phil Rogers. Journalist Alison Flowers is part of all lawsuits except those against Amazon and Apple. Their lawyers noted that âbetween them, they have multiple Emmy and Peabody awards, several Pulitzer Prizes, several Alfred I. duPont-Columbia University awards, an Edward R. Murrow award, a James Beard award, a SOVAS award, and many, many other honors.â
Their cases focus on the voiceprint of each plaintiff, which is âa digital fingerprint of the human voice,â as the complaints explain. âIt is a mathematical capture of the acoustic featuresâpitch, timbre, resonanceâthat emerge from a personâs distinctive physiology, combined with the speech patterns that person develops over a lifetime: accent, cadence, articulation. Like a fingerprint, a voiceprint identifies the individual. Like a fingerprint, it cannot be changed.â
The Adobe case targets Firefly, the companyâs family of generative AI models. The complaint states that the company âtreated the human voices that built Firefly as ownerlessâignoring the speakersâ rights, taking their voiceprints without asking, paying them nothing, and giving them no notice that their voices were being used at all, and âbuilt a mirage of commercial safety around products whose construction violated the one thing Illinois law requires before collecting a voiceprint: consent from the person.â
The Google filing points out that the company âhas been a repeat defendant in BIPA casesâ and even âpaid approximately $100
million to settle BIPA claims arising from Google Photosâ face grouping feature,â among other high-profile settlements.
The Meta suit highlights that âno defendant in any biometric-privacy matter pending in the United States has had more direct, more sustained, or more financially consequential notice of BIPA than Meta,â given that the company âhas paid the three largest biometric-privacy settlements in American history,â including $650 million to resolve claims under the Illinois law regarding Facebookâs photo tag suggestions.
âBy the time Meta released Voicebox in June 2023, MMS in May 2023, and SeamlessM4T in August 2023, Meta had been a BIPA defendant for nearly a decade and had paid more than $2 billion in biometric-privacy settlements,â the complaint continues. âThe technology Meta built using plaintiffsâ voices now competes with plaintiffs in the markets where they earn their living.â
The Amazon filing details similar harm to plaintiffs:
Amazon extracted plaintiffsâ voiceprints without notice or consent, depriving them of the right BIPA guarantees to make an informed decision about the collection and use of their biometric data. Amazon retains those voiceprints in its commercial models and continues to profit from them. Amazon has further disseminated those voiceprints, encoded in model parameters, through its cross-affiliate, subprocessor, and integration-partner networks. The technology built on those voiceprints now displaces plaintiffs in the markets where they earn their livingâthe broadcast journalism, investigative podcast, audiobook narration, voiceover, and voice performance markets that the voice products are designed and sold to serve.
âWhat we are seeing is an illegal and unethical exploitation of talent on a massive scale, and one of the largest violations of biometric privacy ever committed,â said Loevy + Loevy attorney Ross Kimbarovsky in a Thursday statement.
âThe legislators who wrote and passed BIPA had the foresight to realize that biometric privacy was going to be a major civil rights issue in the 21st century,â the attorney continued. âSocial security numbers can be changed, passwords can be reset, and credit cards can be canceled, but once your biometric data is compromised, thereâs nothing you can do about it.â
âThese companies know the law, know their liability, and know exactly how to build consent systems that comply with BIPA,â Kimbarovsky added. âTheyâve built a billion-dollar industry on stolen voices because they thought no one would make them pay for it.â
In addition to Illinois, Texas and Washington state have enacted biometric privacy laws, while California, Colorado, Connecticut, Utah, and Virginia have comprehensive consumer protection policies that apply to such information, according to Bloomberg Law. However, efforts in Congress to enact federal legislationâsuch as the National Biometric Information Privacy Act and the Facial Recognition and Biometric Technology Moratorium Actâhave been unsuccessful.
Fun fact about sharks: they have dermal denticles, which is basically teeth on their skin. If youâre close enough, you can see that a sharkâs skin is rough, or feel it, but the actual shape of the dermal denticles can only be seen under a microscope. Iâve known that for a while, but Iâd never actually seen a close up picture of it until now, so I thought Iâd share it with the class.
The first picture is shark skin under a microscope, the second is a close-up, and the last picture is from further away. They all have dermal denticles, but I chose to show a thresher shark for three reasons, because I think theyâre cute, because I felt like it and because I can.
See, look at that little fucker, looks stoned out its box and cute as fuck.
Me trying to navigate an increasingly hostile internet as a grown adult in the UK while Starmer supporters celebrate 'protecting children' by introducing laws to harvest all our biometric data
