More potential concerns afoot for touring Kgirls.  The facial recognition program has been in limited use so far since 2020, mostly at international POE's, but it's being expanded to include 25 airports within the US.    The airports are listed in the link.  Most of the cities that have Kgirl agencies are included.  (Notable exclusion so far are Chicago and Philly.)

 
Will this cause an increase in photoshopping for Kgirl ads?  It seems to me that lately, there have been more girls gradually returning to honest photos.  

-- Modified on 6/6/2023 10:06:45 AM

Irrelevant to this industry! 90% of K-girls use stock photos and the other 10% use photos from so many years ago.

-- Modified on 6/6/2023 10:53:31 AM

But I think the last statement might suggest less need:
“Right now we're seeing good results from it,” the spokesperson said. “In fact, we're seeing very very positive outcomes in terms of how the technology matches the person standing in front of the travel document checker program to the picture on their identification document.”

 
So unless they are looking to match the facial scan at the airport to escort ads I don't think they have any more to worry about than they do already.

If you're a wanted felony, worry.  Not sure how this applies as "potentially afoot for touring kgirls".  

It's standard operating procedure for the government to chip away at our privacy a little at a time.  If they came right out and said we all need to report to a facility to receive out ID implant, there would be a revolution, but by eroding our rights a little at a time, we hardly notice it. They do the same thing with inflation.  If they told us to turn in all of our money for 10 cents on the dollar, there would be chaos, but by devaluation through inflation, Americans reluctantly accept it a little bit at a time.   Some people just say, "It could be worse", and it usually will be, sometimes sooner, sometimes later.  Of course, they are not going to tell us they are saving the photos or using them to catch people in crimes if they are, but I know some Kgirls who have already had their passports seized at the airport while TSA and ICE investigated their suspicions that they might be sex workers.  A well-known Bay Area girl told me they kept her passport for two months when she returned from vacation in Cancun.  (I told her she was not smart to vacation outside the US).  The UK is already farther down the road with this than we are.  When I go through immigration and customs at Heathrow, they take my photo each time and store it in their database.  I predict that will be coming as part of this TSA effort.  Wait and see.  

 
They're emphasizing "the good results" based on the only positive point in all of this, and that is to speed the passengers through security, but its not difficult to see how this will escalate over time to keep track of the movement of Americans and the potential for widespread abuse and invasion of privacy.

If I were really concerned about this, either as a client or one of the providers, I would be MUCH more concerned about things like Ring doorbells at the condo. Local LE has abused those private camera functions all too many times.

 
I do agree that government and policing (and pretty much every other organizational structure people create) behave with the give an inch and they will take a mile but what mile they want is almost always one driven by money. So while there is something some can gain by expanding this I'm not sure TSA or DHS really drive that much funding from it. Nor do they really gain by providing much support to local LE in vice investigation. Perhaps they will find some way to sell the services to other LE agencies in the future but I don't think that's really in place now. I don't think they are interested in sharing either just from a "it's our domain and we don't want others involved" perspective you get all across (and within) both intelligence and policing organizations.

 
You might not be aware of this but Korean Air and at lease in Incheon airport the use of facial recognition has been in use for a couple of years at least. I think the girls that tour here are already used to that so it being something in airports here not really something of a shocker to them. Those who are permanent residents in the States might be more incline to worry. But again, TSA would need to be using some image DB related to escort ads. If they already have that type of structure in place they might use it but if their infrastructure is about verifying the passengers in some terminal are the people who got screen at a check point that scanned their documents adding such a connection would be expensive. Who is going to provide that funding -- they will need to have some return on spending the money that makes the legislative effort worth while.

 
If it's going to become a big issue I think that is a good way down the road. I think recent history supports that as well. Pretty much every bust that was of interest has always been described as some human/sex trafficking activity. Catching the girls walking themselves through the airports and getting on planes sort of undermines the whole "forced and controlled" narrative.

 
But I think we'll have an answer within the next 12 months if anyone just pays attention to the pictures -- though there is a group that seems to think all pics are already fakes/photoshopped so I don't think we an actually go higher than 100%. LOL

that it may not be time to panic yet, and that's why I couched my OP using the terminology "potential concerns" rather than "the Nazis are coming."  Lol

 
However, I will disagree with your statement that its mostly about money.  Policies that have to do with infringing on privacy rights more often have as their motivation "controlling the population, or at least "manipulation."  A good example is Covid lockdowns and school closures.  The states that eschewed lockdowns ended up having fewer deaths than those with lockdowns.  There was no money grab by government (in fact, the lockdowns were detrimental to the economy), it was all about control versus freedom and people dying was just the excuse.  

 
My point in bringing this article up is that 1) this is something we should watch for the next few years and see if the TSA mission slowly morphs from "speedy check-in" to tracking people's movements, and 2) because I know a few Kgirls who have already had problems being stopped upon entry into the US and have their passport seized because of facial recognition.  While it may not be a big deal for people traveling domestically, the airports that are POE's to the US are being expanded, and that reduces the opportunities for visitors (including Kgirls) to avoid scrutiny when entering the US.  

 
One way they will push "voluntary" participation during the transition period is to make sure the line for facial recognition is substantially shorter than the other lines with traditional screening.  Many people who are running late, and there are a lot, will opt to voluntarily waive their privacy rights in order to guarantee they do not miss their flights for practical reasons.  Yes, it's a bit insidious.  Banks have been manipulating us for years by making sure the lines are long to see a teller, but there are no lines at the ATM's.  

Using this tsa facial recognition shit to justify fake pics was such a stretch it got deaded quick.

 
It's just nonsense. Add to the fact that many kgirls who actually have a great looking face just use their own pics without much ps and don't sweat it.

 
Others... not so much and tsa has nothing to do with it. We all seen a LA booker publicly leak pre-psd and post-psd pics of a girl? Trust me, tsa ain't got nothing to do with it.

Not sure why you were quite for so long but seems like you've come back with some of the same BS personality-conflict driven reads as before.

 
Quoting CDL:
"Will this cause an increase in photoshopping for Kgirl ads?  It seems to me that lately, there have been more girls gradually returning to honest photos."

 
That is not a statement promoting the behavior but a question about some result from a change in the overall environment of travels (or postulated change in environment). If anything I would read his statement as a concern about a reversal in a positive trend. But you seem to see the exact opposite because you seem (past behavior a evidence) just want to attack his (or anyone else that you've decided is your enemy in the wars on evil agencies or providers) position rather than read from a neutral perspective.

I dont really have "enemies" on this board or in the hobby. I've never claimed anyone is "evil" - that is just you twisting my words. Deceiving and lying in order to make money is scumbafgery, but not really "evil".  

 
As far as the topic, I was talking about the attempted (for the nth time) correlation between facial recognition of tsa and psd pics. There is no such correlation, and the post by cdl implied that there was. I don't care much for fake (or genuine) concern or whatever. The whole construct rests on a postulate that girls hide or ps face because of immigration/tsa/customs. I don't subscribe to this theory.  

 
Once again, four out of five of best looking kgirls I saw face-wise over last year or so, used real pics with minimal ps. Conversely, nearly all butterfaces used heavily psd pics.

While it's anecdotal evidence and probably a small sample size, I have sincere doubts tsa monitors butterfaces and OKs pretty girls.

On what basis do you make that claim of no correlation? I have talked with the touring girls and some are concerned about their faces being recognized -- generally for multiple reasons so the risk raised in just one of them.

 
There was nothing in the post that implied support for the practice of photoshopping ads. There is a difference between between saying something might  happen (or it might increase happening) and saying it is good that more happens or that the speaker supports more of whatever was happening more.

 
Yes it is anecdotal evidence but that is not the problem with using it in this case. The failure of your anecdotal example is that you want to use it to rule out any other sources and then make accusations about the intent of someone that suggest something else might also cause the observation.

On what basis do you make the claim of correlation?

 
Being concerned about things isn't a direct proof of correlation, at all.

You know how it goes, if you say flying spaghetti monster exists, the burden is on you to prove it.

There have been multiple threads of us arguing about it many times because every thread that complains about pics being fake, gets this canned response from the usual suspects, including cdl and yourself. And many times I take my time to deconstruct these fallacious claims in these threads they devolve into "they do it because they can" reasoning. Which doesn't prove any correlation whatsoever.

 
The correlation I DO see is the one between good looking girls who know they look good and have no reason to severely alter their pics, and hurt girls who know they wont gather biz if their real mug is posted.

 
I did not say CDL or anyone else supported psd ads. I said he (and you) JUSTIFIED them because of this phantom correlation.

 
The easiest path in the world is to say yeah its bad but hey it's justified because X. And when you look closer, you realize that no monger actually asked for fake pics of ig models be used as ads. I haven't met a single monger in my hobbying career who said, I really want to see some fake ig pics of this new girl I'm thinking of toftting.

 
So just go reiterate here, since you don't seem to understand. My issue is the postulate that tsa makes the girls do fake pics in the first place. Saying it might get worse because of further tsa actions, implies that correlation exists and thus justifies fake pics. Is that clear? Like I've said, I don't buy fake concerns.

I'm sorry to tell you rocket but when a girl has the agency remove ad pics it had up due to concerns she was too easily identifiable from the pictures that is not correlation but causation.

 
As for the someone is "justifying" photoshopping, pointing to one causes/motivations is hardly justifying the action in every instance or some unqualified sense. That is just the binary straitjacket you keep trying to impose on everyone else. Very often we find that there are both reasonable (justifiable) reasons for doing something and unreasonable (unjustifiable) reasons for that action/activity. The relative proportion is largely irrelevant unless the discussion is about relative frequency, which was not what CDL was posting about.

This whole discussion is on the brink of obsoletion.  
Now that "AI"-generated pictures are becoming cheaply available, there will be little reason for orgs to use a real photo or for photoshop.  
Freshly generated pictures have these compelling advantages for orgs:  
1.  They cost far less than any pro photo, and less than a photoshop-jockey's time on a photo.
2.  They completely avoid any risk of TSA/INS, or the local cops' cameras, identifying the girl.  
3.  They completely avoid the risk of stolen photos (their other current option) being discovered thru Yandex et al.  
.
So we can expect honest photos, PS'd "real" photos, and stolen model photos all to be supplanted in time, starting approximately now.  Some especially attractive and especially fireproof girls may continue to use honest photos, as there is commercial advantage to be had, but only a few.

Once again, let's look at two examples of correlation:

You have : one girl (or was it many? How many told you this?) telling you she had to remove pics because of tsa practice  

 
Or

Me seeing that majority of girls who look good face-wise don't bother going for fake pics?  

In my case, we don't have to trust an unreliable entity that is the provider, and strictly evaluate it on correlation basis

I can list all the girls I've seen who have real pics and who look good in case you're questioning my honesty. Unlike you, I do not have any issues speaking publicly and naming names.  

 

As far as your binary straitjacket thing, I don't get what you're saying. Do you know what "under pretense" means? A lot of people use justifications and do something because of other motivation, using a pretense to mask their real purpose. Small entities do it, large entities do it, governments and alliances of governments do it. And they mainly use pretense to justify their actions at least to some subset of people. If their real purpose was accepted, they don't have to use a pretense.  

 
Every single thread that complained about fake pics had certain usual suspects jump in, put a superman cape on and defend fake pics acting as if there is a correlation.
With no proof whatsoever.

coming into the country by boat.  In fact, some orgs have joined forces to buy a large ship:

END OF MESSAGE

This isn’t a court of law, and anecdotal evidence is evidence. Rocket hasn’t disproven that some girls avoid using real pics because of fears of immigration enforcement.

He counters that he knows numerous providers who use real pics and he’s willing to name them. OK then, how about two reviewed providers that are actively touring? I would be really surprised if you can follow through with that.

Instead what will get is more beta backpedaling, choosing instead to argue over meanings of words and phrases.  Pro-tip: your interpretation of “under pretense” has no bearing on the subject of the argument is that you are currently losing.

to think it through without being worried.   Oh wait, . . . .     Lol

And, of course, the entire point is that there is not just ONE reason, or some UNIVERSAL reason for every k-girl. The use of both fake pictures and altered pictures have multiple cause/reasons.  

 
Making the claim that is the case, or making a post about a source of the occurrence of fake/altered pics, is hardly a case where someone is making any statement about other situation much less justifying the unmentioned alternative cases.

"He counters that he knows numerous providers who use real pics and he’s willing to name them. OK then, how about two reviewed providers that are actively touring? I would be really surprised if you can follow through with that.
"

You seriously think I can't name two active providers who use real pics? I reviewed one relatively recently. Baby Cherry in the bay has real pics and is considered one of the lookers rn.  

 
Once again, it's not I who needs to disprove a notion of correlation - even though I clearly can do it.

Whoever makes the correlation needs to prove it exists.

So far the only argument Jensen has named is one girl who was concerned. One! And he obviously won't name her - and in this case I won't even hold it against him.

 
But I can put up names. I'd almost go as far as to say such girls should be commended, but I really don't want to give extra points to sellers who do what they're supposed to do in the first place. You don't get credit for something you supposed to do.

You made the claim that it was merely a correlation. I provided an example where there was very clear causation. Case closed.

 
You also seem rhetorically bent on suggesting that the only reason for fake/unrepresentative pics is that of deception. Well, my example refutes that universal claim you imply as well. There a more than one source for the observations -- sometimes multiple for a given girl. Not worth arguing further.

I did not make a claim that there is a correlation. I suggest you re-read my post.

 
I said the original post ASSUMES there is such correlation, when I haven't seen a proof of it. And when the assumption is faulty and ones whole argument rests on the assumption being true,  

 
Your "proof" does not show direct correlation between TSA policies and fake pics. Mine, however anecdotal, shows correlation. Girls worry about lot of shit. Popo, relatives finding out, etc.  

 
"that the only reason for fake/unrepresentative pics is that of deception."

 
I did not say this. You keep trying to make it seem like I'm being binary, but that really isn't the case.

 
I simply asked where is the logical proof that shows fake pics correlate to tsa activities. I don't see it and I don't subscribe to willing something into existence.  

Whereas, I see a direct correlation between girl's face appearance and photoshop level.