But really, I don't need a reason other than I'm uncomfortable with it. I worry about people who are comfortable with it..
You are missing the point.
>those sensors are still pointing at your face
some phones have a popup front camera. The camera is inside the phone. It is obscured and it would be alarming if it pop up on its own accord.
This just sounds like textbook paranoia to me (as in, the actual dictionary definition as an illogical fear that impedes your normal life), because there's nothing reasonable about thinking FaceID is compromised to the point that you have increased your personal safety by not using it.
I don't agree with the premise that disabling bio-metric security impedes a normal life. Nor has OP given me any reason to believe they are afraid of it in the situations you described.
Passwords and pass codes (when managed well) are perfectly normal security tools to use to ensure your privacy on a device you own.
Maybe we should do something about this rather than being defeatist and giving up on privacy.
I personally oppose all forms of biometrics for security, as it can neither be invalidated, nor is it safe from physical coercion. I also oppose biometric use for "tracking attention" because it's none of anybody's business but mine.
While I consider your example valid in a vacuum, it poses a substantial privacy and financial risk in the real world. If a car that tracks attention also phones home, your insurance carrier may raise your rates or cancel your plan for occasional glances away (sneezes, children, etc), regardless of an actual problem on the road. Such measures ought to only exist locally within a car, but I have absolutely no faith that it will be implemented that way given the current data shared along those lines.
And that is a completely different issue. The OP just wants to prevent that type of thing when they can.
If I walked up to several individuals (maybe even you) on the street with a camera and tried to take a close-up, a lot of them would object. I don't think "why not let me take it, it's already online someplace" would be a convincing reason to allow it.
In many jurisdictions including where I live in, taking pictures at public places is allowed by law whether or not some other human happens to be in the frame of my picture. It is called "incidental inclusion".
Others can request me to exclude them from my picture but they can only request, they cannot force me to do so. Of course, if someone asked, I am going to be nice to them and try and exclude them from the picture. Others could also try and move a bit this way or that way so that they don't get included in my picture. We live in a society and we can work it out.
In reality though, nobody makes such a request because most people know the law and they know that if they are out there in the public, they could become part of other pictures by incidental inclusion.
I might break your phone. How difficult would it be to sue me and for what purpose?
> I might break your phone. How difficult would it be to sue me and for what purpose?
Easily. Damaging someone else's property is not even remotely on the same level as taking a photo of someone? How do I know it wasn't their _job_ to do so?
Honestly if you think that level of escalation is okay I hope to never meet you in person.
And trust me I find people taking photos of me creepy also but it's easier to block my face myself than to smash the person's device and expect to walk away.
Then it is not assault. See? The problems already started. The best you can get after an ardous process is an apology and a reinboursement, the worst would be it coming back at you.
Where I live, they recently declared gazing at a woman "indecently" as a small sexual crime, same as unrequested flirtatious comments to strangers. I have grabbed phones before, but I admit I haven't broken any. YMMV
Correct! I don't see where I implied otherwise!
I have the legal right to ‘analyze your face’ if you are out in public. Why do you believe that there’s something special about a highly secured, on device FaceID capture that makes it more dangerous than a guy with a camera across the street?