• Travelers can opt out of facial recognition at US airports by requesting manual ID verification, though resistance or intimidation may occur.
  • Facial recognition poses privacy risks, including potential data breaches, misidentification, and normalization of surveillance.
  • The Algorithmic Justice League’s “Freedom Flyers” campaign aims to raise awareness of these issues and encourage passengers to exercise their right to opt out.
  • CodandChips @lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Brit here. About eight years ago I flew from London to Belfast and return for business. We don’t need a passport to travel to Northern Ireland, just photo id like driving licence is fine.

    Coming back to London I approached the gate and before I could pull out my wallet to show my id, the guard says " Good evening Mr. Codandchips have a safe journey "…

    Yes they have facial recognition, the cameras are visible but you don’t notice them.

      • communism@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        It isn’t necessarily. Had a police officer greet me by name once (had never interacted with this officer or the station they were from). They’ll have the data necessary to identify you by sight. If you’re a British citizen the British government most likely has a photo of you somewhere if you have any photo ID, not to mention if your face is known to the state through other means eg through interaction with the criminal justice system.

  • Imhotep@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    For international flights, US citizens can opt out but foreign nationals have to participate in face scanning, [with some exceptions]

    I had no idea we were already at that point.

    always wanted to visit the US. I guess that won’t happen then.

    I refuse to participate in this dystopia. But I’m a little worried this will make me a recluse

    • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      4 months ago

      Trust me you’re already a recluse relative to most by being on here. If you observe what passes for a “normal” “person” these days, they will endlessly scroll algorithmic ai-generated incomprehensible horrors on Tiktok, then purchase something through an ad from temu, they do not think. They are gone.

      But once you stop worrying that you may be saying no to experiences too much purely on principle, then you’re free to go even further and eradicate surveillance capitalism influence from your life altogether. One day you can ascend to even go smartphone-free.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        One day you can ascend to even go smartphone-free.

        Ascended to that in late 2014 because using a smartphone was a trigger for my anxiety.

        Back to using those since 2020 because of WhatsApp calls, apps for every shit and such being needed in life.

        • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          I have two these days, one Google™️ Pixel™️ for all government and job bullshit, and one crappy old riced to hell and back Sony for everything else. No Google play, no SIM, rooted and ROM’d, no problems, just a neat multi tool in a pinch.

      • JackbyDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        If you observe what passes for a “normal” “person” these days, they will endlessly scroll algorithmic ai-generated incomprehensible horrors on Tiktok, then purchase something through an ad from temu, they do not think.

        Can you just like, not be so damn condescending and elitist? Literally saying people who use TikTok and purchase stuff from Temu are sub-human

        • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Yeah I’m sorry, I just feel pretty strongly about this I guess and Lemmy is one of the few safe places to vent to like-minded folks.

          To explain myself a little: It’s not the “normies” that the techy people hate, it’s the perverted messed up world those less savvy in technology live in and everything about it, and with how much we’ve learned to circumvent corporate control it’s often a culture shock to see that people just take it, even stuff like online ads or algorithmic content feeds, stuff I haven’t experienced in probably a decade, like as if that’s just normal, and the sad part is it is for so many.

          Imagine if most of the world population was just falling for pyramid schemes or other blatant financial scams constantly. That’s how it feels.

          It becomes all too easy to blame the people rather than the systems that led to this, and sometimes it just feels like nobody outside of the hacker (classic definition) circles really gives enough of a shit to take control of the few things they can, and this is late stage capitalism, so I can’t really blame them, we’re all so tired just trying to survive.

      • Emerald@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        they will endlessly scroll algorithmic ai-generated incomprehensible horrors on Tiktok

        How is that much different from scrolling Lemmy? They are both social media

        • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Because Lemmy is Free, as in Libre and as in free beer, it is open source, and on top of all that, it’s not run for-profit by a single large corporate entity, it’s decentralised structure precludes that by design.

          There is nothing actually wrong with websites or forums like this or “social media”, not anymore than there is anything wrong with atoms even if humans found a way to make a weapon of it.

          In this case technology is weaponized by capitalism, and they’ll do anything to make you think it’s anything but the corporations who are to blame, misinformation on top of misinformation.

          The “mental health effects” of social media or smartphones are all just corporate distractions from the fact all those are really effects of capitalism. Even cryptocurrency isn’t actually bad inherently, I use monero all the time, it’s a great idea actually, especially where power consumption is addressed, but capitalism made it a speculative assets and state backed players wrestle for control. AI too. Open source LLMs benefit everyone, but the lack of tech literacy turned progressives against it and the played right into OpenAI and the rest of those scumbags’ hands.

          The fact that those who aren’t immersed in tech don’t know this is why all is lost. For the common man - they won, and it’s all black box products made to exploit people to the last drop.

  • 1984@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    It’s about normalizing survellience, and the article also says this as an opinion further down in the text.

    Everyone can see that we are going towards the society in black mirror, with social scores, and people being punished for not complying with rules of any kind. I’m glad I’m kind of old because the future will suck.

  • King3d@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    I refuse to go through the body scanners, but the last time I went through the airport there wasn’t anyone trying to opt-out. I seriously doubt if the radiation perv scanner doesn’t get people to do anything, this won’t either.

  • StereoTrespasser@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    82
    arrow-down
    43
    ·
    4 months ago

    If you already have a passport and opt out of facial recognition, you’re only deluding yourself into a false sense of privacy. In fact, if you enter the screening area at all in an airport, you are kidding yourself if you think you can maintain some semblance of privacy. The government knows what you look like. Calm down and move on with your life.

    • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      78
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      4 months ago

      Fuck calming down. That’s how we got into this mess in the first place. People are to complacent with privacy. Anyone that thinks this attitude won’t lead to terrible things is a fool.

      • CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        The reality is that the ship for that kind of privacy has shipped a long time ago. Like a hundred years ago. The reality is that the authorities know details about every single person that passes through an airport. You can’t get in or out without a passport/identification.

        There is virtually no expectation to privacy at an airport. It’s a public place that is heavily monitored for good reason. And that fact isn’t hidden in the slightest. You are legally required to freely and honestly identify yourself to the authorities.

        If this was at your local bus stop, then you’d have a point. But not at airports.

        Also, the serious discussion about privacy should have started with the introduction of the smartphone. That’s when the conversation would have mattered and made a difference. But that ship has sailed.

        • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          For hundreds of years women couldn’t vote and minorities were categorically segregated. Things aren’t perfect for those groups now either but those ships had sailed and it was only because some people were vocal and outraged about it. If you’re not pissed off and making a little bit of a scene about what’s happening to human rights including privacy rights you’re part of the problem. If you see somebody protesting their picture in an airport security line, don’t be one of the sheep in the line saying hurry up buddy, you’re slowing us down. Tell the people around you he’s got every right to be upset about this. A bit of awareness and resistance is a good thing.

          • CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            For hundreds of years women couldn’t vote and minorities were categorically segregated.

            That’s a strawman analogy. We’re not talking about privacy as a whole. The discussion here is about the supposed right to privacy at, what amounts to, a government controlled entrance point into the country. You have to identify yourself no matter which technology is being used. There’s no anonymity at an airport (from the government). Whether it’s technology or a piece of paper, you are legally required to identify yourself.

            I keep saying this over and over, but if you want to talk about digital privacy, focus your energy on smartphones and the internet. The impact for privacy violation and the impact for regaining privacy rights is the most effective there.

            Only a subset of any population has any interaction with an airport and the privacy implications there are next to nothing (because there is no right to anonymity there).

            • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              The more you let a government stick high resolution 3d cameras in your face and shrug it off because you’ve already lost privacy the stronger their database becomes, the more complacent you become, the more willing you become to let them do it at the train station, the post office, the crosswalk, etc. The more willing you become to put your palm on their palm reader and retina in their retina scanner when they deploy that technology. I’m not dismissing better avenues to focus efforts, I’m acknowledging the increase in surveillance and potential for abuse in the absence of any proven benefit to the people that are allegedly protected by these changes.

              • CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                But they don’t need to do that track where you go and what you do. They’re already doing that with smartphones. That was my point.

                And for the record, they don’t need 3D cameras for anything. A photo off of Facebook is enough. I worked in that field and developed that kind of software.

      • Cosmicomical@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        won’t lead

        I would say we are already seeing / have already seen bad things happening because of this complacency. Buf of course worse things will happen if we don’t take measures.

      • huginn@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        21
        ·
        4 months ago

        You’re never going to live in a world where you’re allowed to fly without photo id amigo.

        • JayObey711@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          I don’t know but have you ever taken a domestic flight? Or even a Schengen one? Open border policy woks wonders for data security and also quality of life in general

        • SulaymanF@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          4 months ago

          That’s a strawman, who said otherwise? Showing ID is one thing, storing your ID and tracking your trips is another.

            • SulaymanF@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              4 months ago

              Is that what I said? No. Of course it can be and is tracked. But I’m not going to Hand over my biometrics and make it easier for them.

              • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                4 months ago

                Exactly. If they need it, they can issue a lawful order, and that has certain prerequisites here in the US. I’m guessing international airports have special rules, but I’m only going to hand over what I’m legally obligated to and force them to dance around my 4th amendment rights or face a lawsuit.

        • Dave.@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          You’re never going to live in a world where you’re allowed to fly without photo id amigo

          Move to a different country.

          Eg in Australia I can book a domestic ticket and have two interactions after that:

          • x-ray/security where they scan my carry on
          • boarding at the gate where they scan my pass.

          No photo ID - or any ID really - needed. Now there’s enough dribs and drabs of information when I book the ticket and etc etc that they can identify me, but there’s nothing stopping someone from booking a ticket for someone else under their name.

          • GBU_28@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            Wait are you really arguing Australia as a privacy and security IMPROVEMENT on three rest of western countries?

            • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              4 months ago

              It sounds like it is an improvement for domestic flights. I don’t see anything that invalidates that argument…

        • ddh@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Yes, but Cinnabon doesn’t need to scan my face while I’m there. Every little bit helps.

        • CyaL8r@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          28
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          That’s not what the other user is saying - we have to fight to keep what rights we have, and maybe one day gain some of the ones we lost

          • kautau@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            4 months ago

            Their message is correct but they’re mad at that “calm down” part and addressed it poorly

            User 1: if you fly using a passport, the government knows what you look like, whether or not you opt out of facial recognition, being a Karen at the airport won’t help with you

            User 2: Fuck that, if we are complacent, more privacy will be taken away from us

            User 3: You can’t fly without a photo id

            Seems to me the user you responded to knows what they are saying, and you’re both right. You don’t have a right to fly on an airplane without a legal verification of who you are. We should have a right to verify our identity without facial recognition software. But that happens with laws, not making scenes at airports

            • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 months ago

              Honestly, we should have a right to fly w/o providing ID as well. I don’t need it to ride the bus or local train, and I don’t think I need it for a greyhound bus (if I pay w/ cash). I’ve heard you can maybe get away w/o ID on Amtrak, but their official policy says it’s required.

              So why are airplanes so different? Fatalities per mile on airplanes are among the lowest of any form of transportation, so I highly doubt terrorism is a significant, statistically relevant factor here. I think they do it because they can, not because it actually helps reduce risk in any meaningful way. I don’t see any basis for needing an ID for any form of mass transit, you should only need it for driving to prove that you have the privilege to do so.

              I really don’t understand why law enforcement is so infatuated with checking my ID…

    • ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      I went vacationing in another country and it was kinda uncomfortable being scanned by cameras, then scanning my passport, then moving across country lines and getting cameras and another scanning of my passport.

  • credo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    I’m okay with the TSA scan (pre-check) since… you know… they already have you if you took a picture for your ID.

    Those “clear” people however. Who TF thinks it’s a good idea to hand your biometric info to a corp?

    • Limonene@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      4 months ago

      How did you get into TSA Pre without providing fingerprints? I tried once, and they strictly refused to let me apply because I wouldn’t give fingerprints.

      • credo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        Well, I’ve had DLs in multiple states and they all required fingerprints. The little digital ones. Maybe that’s not the case everywhere though.

        • ThunderWhiskers@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 months ago

          Oh, weird. They don’t require prints for a DL in TX, but we’re already closing in on an authoritarian state anyways. I didn’t know this was a thing.

          • toddestan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            It probably has to do with whether the driver’s license is Real ID compliant or not. Here in Minnesota, you have the option of getting the Real ID license that can be used as a federal ID card for things like flying, or the regular old driver’s license which soon will really only be good for showing you’re allowed to drive a car.

            I only have the regular driver’s license so I don’t know what all getting the Read ID involves, but having your biometric data scanned and stored seems like something they’d require.

            • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              I’m in Utah and have a “real ID” or whatever (the little gold star) and never had my fingerprints taken, eyes scanned, etc. If they required that, I’d say no and just use my passport instead, which also didn’t require biometrics.

    • Zectivi@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      4 months ago

      Clear is now a TSA “vendor” for the precheck process. The machines they use for the sign up process - at least the airport I was at - don’t have the eye scanning camera in the kiosk.

      The Clear representative I was asking questions of had said they don’t require eye scans for Clear, though that is the default. People can ask to use just fingerprints, which he said does disrupt the terminal process as the agents don’t think to ask if fingerprints were what was registered when the eye scans fail.

      I am not advocating for Clear. I refuse to use them. I simply do want to call out that they are one of 3 who handle the process for the TSA now. People do have a choice of which of the three to use.

    • Infynis@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      4 months ago

      There’s no way my ID photo would work for facial recognition. I don’t plan on giving them anything new before I’m forced to

  • TragicNotCute@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    4 months ago

    Like I get it, it’s scary and I don’t want them to have my data, but my picture is being taken ALL the time basically everywhere I go. Is putting my foot down for this specific type really making a difference?

    • themadcodger@kbin.earth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      I have global entry, so they already have my biometric data. I’d love to not here scanned, but this point it wouldn’t be anything they didn’t already have.

    • techt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Put your foot down everywhere then – it’s a fallacy to think that it’s not worth it to resist data harvesting because it already gets collected “everywhere” anyway, take one step at a time to make it harder and harder. Opting out of this is just one step.

    • NOPper@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      It’s the only real way to push back that other folks will notice if enough of us do it.

      Last time I went through DC a few weeks ago they were using these. I saw a sign saying you’re welcome to opt out. Nobody even questioned what they were doing and were just going along. When it was my turn I politely said I’d rather not do the scan. Dude just glanced at my ID and waved me through. The next few folks behind me blinked and said they didn’t want the scan either. If enough people push back it can at least maybe slow down the normalization of constant surveillance.

  • NewAgeOldPerson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    I went thru naturalization process. They have everything already. Including DNA, retina scan, etc. So I opted for Clear. Global Entry as well. They have it all already. May as well fast track going thru customs.

    • WolfLink@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      4 months ago

      Clear is run by a 3rd party company. TSA pre-check is run by the government. TSA pre-check comes free with Global Entry, you just need to sign up for it.

      • NewAgeOldPerson@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Yeah I have pre because I have had global entry for a while (8 years now I think). Got clear because where I am, it changes wait time from 30 minutes to 5.

  • slickgoat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    The game was lost for me when I started getting fingerprinted at certain airports. This privilege used to be reserved for suspected criminals. Now we’re are all suspected criminals on a default setting.

  • AlecSadler@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    4 months ago

    The last time I flew they did this, but there was a huge sign that said photos are immediately deleted after verification…is this not true?

    • SulaymanF@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      It’s discussed in the article. We can’t really be sure if they do, but they already store the measurements of your face along with other bits of metadata. They could reconstruct your face with it even without the photo. It’s a deceptive claim, because even if they throw away the camera video they still have your face for all intents and purposes.

    • Infinite@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      4 months ago

      Just for example, that’s an easy way to save just the biometric signature and have very few people question it.

      • jet@hackertalks.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Also, bureaucratic lies can be technically true. They copy the photo from the original device to a database, then delete the photo on the device. So it’s technically true the photo was immediately deleted, it’s just also copied and persisted forever. And a bureaucrat will proudly stand in front of you all day and tell you they deleted the photo, and they will sleep well that night with not any concern

        • ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Judge would declare that unlawful on the spot but without malicious intent whoever did it would have qualified immunity since a judge hasn’t already ruled on that specific case so it’s a wash.

          • jet@hackertalks.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Unlawful to tell the truth? it was deleted, it’s true. What else may or may not exist is not part of this statement, we deleted the photo from the device within seconds of scanning it. 100% no perjury required.

            Your point about qualified immunity is so good, it’s a joke. No police officer from east side of Wichita has ever run someone over, back and forth until their spin was broken, using BF GoodRich KO3 tries before, so it was impossible for the officer to know that it was violating the law. The closet case law we have is when Officer Daniels ran over his ex-wifes lover in using his duty vehicle using BF GoodRich KO2 tires, and on the West side of Wichita - but that is such a different situation no reasonable peace officer could have known it was illegal using the KO3 tires.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Get clear ones. Most (all?) of those security cameras use IR illumination to ID you, so you can have lenses that allow visible light through, but mess up IR scanning. I think you can get them w/ prescription lenses if you email the creator, so you can legitimately tell them you need your glasses to see (if you need a prescription, that is).

            • csm10495@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              Then just ask to not be facial scanned. Last airport I went to had signs saying you could opt out.

              Then you don’t need weird glasses either.

              • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                I’m less worried about the face scanning (you can opt-out, as you said), I’m more worried about the camera scanning in other parts of the airport. The glasses combat the most common form of face scanning, which uses IR illumination. It also works at grocery stores and whatnot, which is especially important if you’re a POC and likely to be racially profiled as a shoplifter (I’ve read some horror stories).

                It does paint a bright red target on my chest since they show up as a massive bright light source on IR feeds (if a security guard happens to watch), so it’s more a form of protest than anything.

  • merde alors@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    198
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    For international flights, US citizens can opt out but foreign nationals have to participate in face scanning, with some exceptions.

        • Dagnet@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          32
          ·
          4 months ago

          I remember when travelling in the US (Im a foreigner) there was a vip pass thingy to skip lines and enter without even talking to a migration officer (I think). Really seemed like a rich person pass

          • noseatbelt@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            4 months ago

            I’m Canadian and I used to have a pass like that. It was $50 at the time and valid for 5 years.

          • M500@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Yeah, there are two different programs. One is for domestic flights and one is for domestic and international.

            I did the domestic flight one once because it was free with my credit card.

            But I had to fill out some forms and interview in person.

            I only got to use it once because they vip lanes were always closed.

            It’s only worth it if you need to travel a lot.

            Additionally, I’ve never really suffered long lines through airport security.

            The long lines are typically at immigrations and you can’t skip those outside of being a diplomat or private jet rich.