Comment by BloodyIron

The problem with biometrics, as in biologically unique biometrics (fingerprints, blood, retina, etc) is that once it's in a database, you're fucked *for life*. It's unrealistic to destroy said records with absolute certainty in the entirety of the universe. Data is pervasive, and biometric databases are likely the most lucrative data to sell and share.

Biometrics are abusable in so many different ways, I probably don't know them all. But here's some thoughts around that.

It's proven that police have for decades planted evidence to falsely incriminate individuals. Placing a gun at the scene of an occurrence is one example. The difference is if biometrics are "planted" they are biologically unique to you, and you have no reasonable way of disproving that "you did it".

And then there's silently denying you. Whether it's a nation's border entity, or perhaps an insurance provider, biometric data can be used to uniquely identify you and connect you to things that *are* legal, but the Administration de jour doesn't "like" (read: LITERALLY RIGHT NOW). Say something to upset the babbis in the white house? Did you give your blood to 23andme? Your fingerprint to a government agency? Yeah, good luck getting in/out of the USA freely.

Biometrics needs to be a *global and universal right to refuse*. In that, IMO you must be always able to say "no" and have it be legally binding to *any* entity saying "give me your XYZ biometrics", except _maybe_ if you're a *convicted* criminal.

This goes far beyond the whole "I never thought about it that way" problems, this is a you're fucked for life if you give away any of it. It's time we make the time to get ahead of this problem that already exists.

Join me.