Slashdot Mirror
Trans-Atlantic ID Card System
Th3P0stalDud3 writes "The Independent is reporting that the U.S. has asked the U.K. to use the same chips in their proposed identity cards as the ones in our proposed identity card. In effect, creating a trans-atlantic ID card system." From the article: "The aim of getting the same microchip is to ensure compatability in screening terrorist suspects. But it will also mean that information contained in the British cards can be accessed across the Atlantic."
Wouldn't it be shorter to just say "Oceania ID Card" ?
FTA: Mr Chertoff said yesterday that it was vital to seek compatibility, holding up the example of the "video war" of 25 years ago, when VHS and Betamax were in fierce competition to win the status of industry standard for video recording systems.
If video compatibility is such a big issue why do they keep 2 main video standards (PAL/NTSC) and continue to put region encoding on DVDs? That lame "video war" comparison is just to appease the public into accepting a "New World Order" style of international identification. Once the US and Great Britain are locked in, it will be harder for other countries to resist if they want unencumbered travel for their citizens.
Trolling is a art,
That would be awesome. I think it is important that we post unsubstantiated conspiracy theories about how this is just one more step in an inevitable march towards some dytopian future.
Our government (UK) just spend x millions in creating this ID card scheme which is says we need... Now they are going to try and sell the public the concept of dumping all that R&D and use the USA standard... When that same government uses the cost so far as a reason why we can't just drop the entire project... Does anyone see a big hole in their logic?
1984 was a good book, just not a great estimate, I think 2010 is a more realistic estimate...
FTFA: US diplomatic sources stated later that Washington did not wish to interfere in the domestic affairs of other countries.
At the risk of being modded flamebait, when has that ever stopped the US before?
If the Britons don't knuckle under, it's clear that they HATE OUR FREEDOM.
^_^
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
The US isn't "interfering"; rather, two Orwellian governments are joining forces for a common objective.
They seem to want to have a single world ID standard, which would be fine if there was one world state in which all human beings could travel freely. Unfortunately, it looks like people's citizenship will be restricted to one place, whereas all the governments of the world can get in cahoots to oppress people no matter where they go.
OMFG! An international standard for electronically readable ID cards? Big Brother is going to be the death of us all. Darn that Bush and his Consitution stomping cronies...
So, how many of you travellers appreciate using your Visa/MC/AmEx and ATM cards when you're in another country?
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
Mr Chertoff said yesterday that it was vital to seek compatibility, holding up the example of the "video war" of 25 years ago, when VHS and Betamax were in fierce competition to win the status of industry standard for video recording systems.
"I certainly hope we have the same chip... It would be very bad if we all invested huge amounts of money in biometric systems and they didn't work with each other.Hopefully, we are not going to do VHS and Betamax with our chips. I was one of the ones who bought Betamax, and that's now in the garbage," he said.
VHS and Betamax weren't intended to compromise our personal privacy. I just don't see how he would dare to compare these two completely unrelated things. Was it to try and make this sound more benign than it is?
Mr Chertoff also proposed that British citizens wishing to visit the US should consider entering a "Trusted Traveller" scheme.
I propose we stop assuming *everyone* is guilty because of what ~15 other people did. Oh wait, *everyone* hates freedom so we have to do this or we're UnAmerican, sorry, I forgot. Send me for reeducation please... I didn't learn it right the first time.
Mr Chertoff said compatability and the checking system was intended purely to track down "terrorists and criminals" and the main aim was to provide a "fair and reasonable system".
Yet it hinders and inconveniences everyone including citizens of the United States who are having their privacy violated.
"When we screen based on names, we're screening on the most primitive and least technological basis of identification - it's the most susceptible to misspelling, or people changing their identity, or fraud," he said.
I'm 100% certain that whatever method the US Government puts in place will be full of holes large enough to drive a truck through. It's not going to solve any of the problems that we have had in the past.
...that chips in ID documents are a good idea, then why not allow data sharing between friendly governments?
The bigger question, in my mind, is "Are RFID chips in ID documents a good idea?" My feeling is, "Probably not."
"Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup." --/usr/games/fortune
Why don't we just affix small "I'm a terrorist" decals on the existing IDs of terrorists; that way, we'll always know who's who! By now anyone who is a known terrorist will not be using his real ID to go anywhere. Furthermore, no amount of biometric IDing is going to point out a terrorist. This is just something to better catalogue ordinary citizens with the guise of added security.
I'm against ID cards (or, more specifically, the database behind them) for many reasons, none of which are particularly terrifying on their own.
The issue for me is that the government can't think of anything better to do with several billion pounds. At least using existing technology might lower the budget a bit.
I don't really believe Big Brother is coming. I don't believe we will really have any less privacy or freedom when forced to carry "papers". I also don't believe they will fix any of the problems our society currently has.
I'm very angry that such a massive public expenditure will benefit no one other than whoever wins the contract to implement it. Oh, and the ego of the poiliticians who are gearing up to bully it through the house.
Speaking of which, why *ARE* they so keen to force this on us? Conspiracy theorists, please go nuts.
It's people like you who make the destruction of freedom so easy. I seem to remember the commies had a name for them: 'useful idiots'.
This may just be an effort to ensure that US business gets the market for such chips.
Otherwise I'm really not sure that I see the point. No one here is arguing that you shouldn't need a passport to visit the US. British passports are already machine readable at US passport control. Why should we need an ID card AS WELL ?
Everytime Canada talks about decriminalizing cannabis the US threatens to clamp down on the border (causing us economic damage). The US is constantly messing with Canada.
It's sad how the UK has gone from world power to weak sister in less than a few hundred years.
Sort of like Putin was saying that the worst thing in recent world history was the demise of the Soviet Union? Hell that came and went in less than 100 years. The Ottoman Empire doesn't even rate "weak sister" status any more, either.
The only reason that the UK used to have such influence (relative to its size, population, and resources) was the ballsyness of their Navy (and those telling it what to do). Through that, they were able to create a world-spanning empire that, absent battleships and whatnot, wouldn't have otherwise existed. That's pretty much the story of colonial influence by all of Europe, really. But the Brits stopped trying quite a while before the Germans did, and the Russians were pretty much the last ones to give it up. You could say that they went from World Power to Weak Sister in, oh, 20 years (not counting their Spam Power, which is of course (when the power is on) quite Imperially Impressive.
At least their politicians have some balls
Much as you obviously hate Bush, I can't imagine that you think lack of risk-taking is an issue there. Do you really think Kerry would have even brought up Social Security reform? His constituency would roast him for that, as they're doing to Bush. But he went into the election saying he was going to do that, and the talking heads assured us that would be his undoing ("taking a huge chance" etc). Just an example. Do I wish he was raised on a diet of Churchillian oratory technique? Sure. Would I rather have a spineless focus group addict shaping executive policy? No.
If you're suggesting that Blair has balls because he's willing to stand on principle and keep working on something that he thinks is the right thing to do, even while his local press wail, gnash their teeth, and henpeck him about it... then, sure - that takes a certain amount of vertebrae. But isn't that exactly what Bush does? Or, are you not really talking about "balls" and you're actually talking about principle, and you just don't like them? If so, at least say so. Oh, and if you don't think that Bush's predecessor got a huge free ride from his personal friends in the media, then you weren't actually watching the coverage. Softball questions from the press don't serve anybody, but the more liberal side of the media has certainly been throwing softballs for years, and there are a lot more of them.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
The great irony is that in a recent discussion on the BBC News site, approximately 80% of respondents to a poll said they didn't want the cards, compared to well under 20% who did. Now, on-line polls are hardly the most scientific study in the world -- there was no CowboyNeal option for a start -- but IME the ones on the BBC do tend to be fairly representative when compared to proper studies.
One common objection cited in the discussion was the cost, and specifically who will wind up paying it, and how often UK governments give (mostly US-based) megacorps lucrative contracts that then strangely over-run and cost the taxpayer even more.
Another common objection was the shifting goalposts in the benefits it's supposed to bring us: pre-election it was all about anti-terrorism, until various Spanish bombings despite ID cards were repeatedly mentioned. Then it was illegal immigration, until about half the world failing to stop illegal immigration despite requiring ID was repeatedly mentioned. Now it's identity theft, but people are pointing out that super-cards could actually make it easier for professional criminals to take an identity, not to mention the hazards of locking all the key information about a citizen into a single, centralised database.
Perhaps the real reason is that the US wants it, and Blair is playing along? Not that that's ever happened before, you understand.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
And the databases will probably be badly normalised pieces of crap with redundent, dirty, incorrect and out-of-date information floating around. The applications built on these databases will be built by lowest bidder code monkeys who couldn't program their way out of a wet paper sack. As such they will not have a clue as to maintaining data integrity. Get ready for people being held without bail or legal representation on false positives.
And the companies which build and maintain the technology will be large campaign contributors and/or junket providers to the decision makers. But that will just be a coincidence. Right?
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
Oh don't worry, Britain (Specifically Blair) love the US making suggestions. We wouldn't be able to run our country without your help.
No disrespect to actual Americans, but our Governments together are a bloody liability. They just agree blindly with what the other says and ignore what the voting public want. Its a huge back slaping excercise.
Thank God both countries contain (some) sane people!
On the subject of these cards, the expected cost is supposed to be about £80 (~$140) which is really not going to be popular with the public when it launches.
I'm all for clever technology to prevent crime, but the ID card is not going to help at all.
Of course, by the time this all gets implemented, who will want to visit the US ( or UK )?
Might save a lot of time stacked up at passport control. How about scrapping the ID plan, and instead taking 1% of the budget of the ID plan
and using it to improve passport control efficiency by adding more staff?
Which US firm close to the administration is going to get this juicy no bid contract?
You're kidding, right? Interfering is what we do.
Interfering is what everyone does, if they can.
TotalFinaElf and Lukoil in Iraq. USSR all over Eurasia. France in Indo-China Burma. The whole British empire, for that matter (that would be the guys who drew the lines on the map of Iraq). And on and on and on.
The US is just as guilty as everyone else. The only difference is that they're the ones doing it now.
"We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
Your observation would be much more interesting, if there wasn't a corresponding benefit to go along with cost. As is pointed out in the article, the UK is one of several countries which's citizens are able to enter the US with no visa, or pre-entry screening.
What crap. AS a UK citizen there is no benefit to me in this whatsoever, just intrusion. We're building our own hellhole here as it is, why would I want to visit yours? Why would I care whether anyone who does want to go there needs a visa? Get over yourselves.
Definitely a good idea if you're the least paranoid. RFID tagged ID cards would be an assassins wetdream.
Gives a whole new meaning to 'This bomb's got your name on it.'.