CES 2022 To Require Proof of Vaccination For Attendees, Exhibitors

CES 2022 will be a hybrid event with in-person and digital components. However, in order to attend the event in person, the Consumer Technology Association (CTA) says you'll need to provide proof of vaccination against COVID-19. The Verge reports: As far as those who are not vaccinated, whether by their own choice or because they live somewhere without access to vaccines, the CTA says it's "assessing the acceptance of proof of a positive antibody test as an alternative requirement." It's also unknown how this will apply to events happening beyond the show floor and keynote ballrooms, or outside the CTA's umbrella entirely. We expect to hear more details about all of this long before the CES 2022 media days start on January 3rd, or when the show floor opens on January 5th. Here's an excerpt from the CTA's announcement: The Consumer Technology Association (CTA) today announced that CES 2022, the world's most influential technology event, will require in-person attendees to provide proof of COVID-19 vaccination. CES 2022 will take place in Las Vegas on January 5-8, 2022. For those who may be unable to travel to Las Vegas, CTA will again create a digital event that will run in parallel with the in-person program. Digital audiences will have the opportunity to share the spirit of the in-person event.
[...]
CTA is also assessing the acceptance of proof of a positive antibody test as an alternative requirement and will share more details on this later. Safety, security and health are a priority at CES, and we will follow state and local guidelines and recommendations by the CDC. CTA will continue to monitor and evaluate the situation and will announce additional or modified protocols closer to the show.

Re: ID will be required too then

[Hanley888]

Why do you not do your part and have photo ID always ready? Your ID should link to a worldwide vaccination database so that we can be sure every person received a vaccine and increased the safety of all person.

Re:

[drinkypoo]

There's no need for your ID to be linked to an international database, unless it's a passport.

Re:

[mjwx]

There's no need for your ID to be linked to an international database, unless it's a passport.

Even passports aren't linked to an international database.

Countries tend to run their own databases with flags for people they don't permit in. At best, participate in an international information sharing agreement, which isn't a single database everyone is entered into. Only a few countries have even limited access to another nations passport info (I.E. the Five Eyes, EU or ASEAN) and even then, it's not open slather.

Besides, with all the info foreign, let alone my 2 national governments (I'm an immi

Re:

[drinkypoo]

Even passports aren't linked to an international database.

That's true, but irrelevant to the point made. EU residents in the EU aside (who can visit different countries without needing a passport... perhaps this is also true in some other cases) if someone is in another country without a passport then they have bigger problems and their government will probably be contacted anyway.

Re:

[backslashdot]

Wait, what? You guys started it by demanding photo id and things like that. Papers is a conservative nut job invention, we're just renting it.

Re:

[sabbede]

Funny. All the "papers please" dictatorships that forced people to carry documents showing they had permission to walk around were very far to the Left.

And have you looked into the history of photo ID requirements to make sure they weren't pushed by liberals? I haven't, so I don't know if that was a one sided push or a bipartisan agreement.

Were they?

[gwolf]

Well, besides the obvious Nazi - Fascist - Falangist systems of the 1930s... I happen to be most familiar with the USA-instated dictatorships we had in Latin America during the 1960s-1970s-1980s (i.e. Argentina, Chile, Brazil, Uruguay). Prevalence of an always-with-you national ID is very, very high in those societies to date. Thank the militar regimes!

Re:

[sabbede]

Are you not familiar with how things worked in the Soviet Bloc? Ditto for the Soviet-installed dictatorships in Latin America and elsewhere.

And it wasn't that you had to have some sort of ID. Those "papers" were not just a way to prove who you were, there would only need to be one if that were the case. No, those papers were about permission. Are you allowed to be in this neighborhood? Are you allowed to be walking on the streets at that given time of day? What about your work permit? No, it does

Re:

[gwolf]

[Citation needed]

(and yes, I've been to what you'd call "Soviet-installed dictatorships". Only that Cuba and Nicaragua were not Soviet-installed, but aligned to Soviets after they fought and won their revolutions.)

But anyway, do you think the right-wing dictatorships required papers just to prove who you are? Very far from the case.

Re:

[sabbede]

I'm not saying they did. I'm also not saying Cuba's dictatorship was installed. I forget the details of Nicaragua's, but will thank you to not put any more words in my mouth.

Re:

[SirSlud]

You have an important right to vote, hence barriers like requiring types of IDs that some demographics are less likely to have the preferred tool of the disenfranchiser. You don't have a right to attend CES.

Also, you're a bad person.

Re:

[sabbede]

Except the claim that some groups are significantly less likely to have photo ID is complete bullshit. It simply isn't true. And those same groups know it and overwhelmingly (84%) support the requirement. The majority (62%) of Democrats support it.

You basically need to have been indoctrinated with the racist lie that ethnic minorities are stupid, incompetent, and unlikely to participate in civil society, to buy that "photo ID is racist" baloney. Or, be one of the people knowingly pushing that lie for

Re:

[ShanghaiBill]

Progressives like to say; "A Photo ID required for voting is RASCIST!" , "No person is Illegal!" , and "PAPERS PLEASE!"

I'm not a progressive, but there is a big difference between the government saying "Papers please" and a private company doing so.

The road to Fascism has ALWAYS been a progressive one.

Mussolini, Hitler, Franco, and Pinocet were not progressives. I can't think of any fascist who was.

Re: They're a private company.

[dada21]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

Fascism has its roots in progressivism.

Re:

[sabbede]

Wow. You're paraphrasing Mussolini. Seriously, you just summed up his description of Fascism's relationship with liberalism and conservatism. I encourage you to find out for yourself.

Re:

[drinkypoo]

You know why they had to call it "Liberal Fascism"? Because there was already a "Fascism" and it wasn't liberal.

I wish I was amazed at how obvious this was, and how it still isn't obvious to you somehow, but I've been on this here internet for a long time...

Re:

[sabbede]

Are you sure you aren't conflating a modern political insult with an actual system of government?

Re: They're a private company.

[mSparks43]

yeah. companies have even less reasons and rights to demand papers than governments do.

The only reason they want them is to sell them to the highest bidder.

Re: They're a private company.

[Type44Q]

I'm not a progressive...

You certainly do your damnedest to play one on here.

...there is a big difference between the government saying "Papers please" and a private company doing so.

There is absolutely no difference; any fool knows that businesses that are open to the public (i.e. inot private clubs, etc) have to play by the rules - this has only been affirmed repeatedly by the courts.

WTF, Bill??

Re:

[ncc74656]

I can't think of any fascist who was.

Wilson? FDR? Biden? Do those names ring a bell?

Re:

[sabbede]

Mussolini and Hitler absolutely were. Hell, at that time "Progressives" in the US were entirely behind the idea of "scientific" racism - big time believers in eugenics, and who thought Hitler was really on to something with his eugenics program. One such eugenics-loving American "Progressive" was Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger. Her plan was to use abortion as a means of eugenic control, and particularly to reduce and eventually eliminate the black population.

Look at what Hitler and Mussoli

Re:

[AATheorist]

I wish I could see the MOD POINT PvP on this post.

didnt want to go anyway

[mSparks43]

so dont really care that they wouldnt let me in even if I wanted to go.

Re:

[drinkypoo]

If you don't care, why don't you pipe down?

Answer, you care a lot, and just wanted a place to whine.

Whine on, crazy dildo.

Re: didnt want to go anyway

[mSparks43]

all for the lolz bro

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Hackers will love this

[memory_register]

I can already see them hacking or hijacking this process for the lulz. Chaos will ensue

The problem, in principle, that I have with this..

[mark-t]

... is that places that do not ordinarily have any business knowing who you are can end up demanding that you prove your identity or not be permitted on the premises.

I can appreciate that they are just trying to keep unvaccinated people out, much as bars are just trying to keep minors out. However, there is an actual *LEGAL* requirement that bars do not serve drinks to minors, and it is a natural consequence of that stipulation that necessitates being able to prove that you are who you might say that yo

And what if you're already immune?

[sabbede]

This is the problem with insisting on people being vaccinated - not everyone has to be in order to be immune, and for them, a vaccination can trigger an excessive response. Millions of people gained natural immunity by getting infected. Why unnecessarily exclude them or demand they get a vaccine they don't need? That's stupid.