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."
From TFA:
You're kidding, right? Interfering is what we do
^_^
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
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.
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
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...
The federal id system as proposed is a continuation of the process by which the government has been seeking to destroy the underground economy and stratify society to an even greater degree. The id system combined with the coming cashless society, educational divide, locking in of resources from the elimination of the inheritance tax can only end in a resumption of the feudal system or something very much like it. When our economy crashes (who thinks the current walmart economy can really last?) the elimination of the middle class will be complete. At this point the plan put in place by the patrician class will have come to fruition and their power will be unchallenged.
"It's so convenient to have a system where everyone is a criminal" - A. Hitler
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
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.
I suggest a little civil disobedience. Whenever asked for our ID we should repeat the phrase "Leeloo Dallas, multi-pass." in response to any further questions.
You are not a beautiful or unique snowflake -- but you could be if you got off your ass.
With CAFTA and FTAs between US and Australia, and other Free Trade agreements in effect or in progress, including Andean FTA, Australia FTA, Bahrain FTA, Chile FTA, Israel FTA, Jordan FTA, Morocco FTA, Panama FTA, Singapore FTA, and SACU FTA, you can bet that we'll see more of the same with our major trading partners.
The world will not get better through technology. We must seek to be better people.
...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.
This is yet another scary development in the long-running UK ID card saga. If any non-UK residents are interested, the current state of play is that legislation will probably soon be passed to force all UK residents to get biometric ID cards by 2008(ish).
These cards will cost us all up to £93 ($150+) each, with profits from the scheme going to private companies. Everyone's personal details will be stored in one huge database, which can be accessed by a variety of government agencies. A recent trial of the biometric technology used in the cards showed that it was quite ineffective. The Government is nevertheless convincing the electorate that this is a good idea by playing on the fear of identity theft (which the cards won't help prevent) and fear of illegal immigrants.
There's a good (as ever) article about ID cards at The Register.
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'.
No personal information? Name, address, Soc Sec # etc isn't personal?
:-D
Heck it's even worse than a passport as it can be used to access and correlate buying habbits. They could know even before you take your trip where you're going, where you're planning on staying and then see what restauraunts you ate at while you were away. Any "interesting" magazine subscriptions charged to that? Maybe even a SlashDot subscription paid on it to show just how subversive you really are.
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
Look at it like this. The US may have an awful lot of sheep that are having their freedom eroded by the political class, but the British are even more sheeplike. And all that the British prime minister gets out of this is the occasional phot with G Bush and a few well paid lecture tours after he finally gets the push - no oil billions. It reminds me of the sad comment of a member of the intelligence services: "It's depressing how little money some people will sell their country for."
Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
It's bad enough that my own Federal government is inserting itself into every detail of my private life, by owning some universal identity info that every identity transaction will use for the rest of my life. But it's giving invasive privilege to some foreign government? Starting with England, then on to some other "most favored nation" like China? Our "friends" in Saudi Arabia, as they "diversify" their global economy into the authentication biz? Who the hell are these freaks, who lie about smaller, less invasive government, then spend $2.5T every year to sell us out to their global partners in crime?
--
make install -not war
Try to travel overseas without a credit card. Heck, try to stay overnight in a chain hotel in another state without a credit card. It ain't easy.
In this case we're getting worked into a lather about two countries trying to agree on a standard for their already issued government ID cards. The information contained in them is already accessible by the two governments. The only difference is that the border inspector can just swipe/scan instead of type to get that info.
So do please enlighten me as to how this is one giant step closer to the fascist big brother state?
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
There's probably some more, but I haven't had a chance to get the latest list from Fox . . . these things change so frequently these days . . .
I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.
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 ?
Firstly, it's already very simple for people to go between the UK and the US. It'd be hard to make it any simpler - in fact, the only way to make it simpler would be to do away with passports which I doubt they will do.
The ID card will also cost a lot of money, and bring no benefit to the holder. The holder essentially has to pay a lot of money for the benefit of the government (and we already pay handsomely for that).
"If you're not doing anything wrong..." Well, maybe now with the current government. Despots have spawned from democracy before now, and in any case I doubt you get through a day without breaking at least one law. I know I almost certainly don't - from accidentally speeding to perhaps taping a CD for the car. Once you have a police state, it's easy to arrest political opponents without needing any explicit political laws - you just harrass them on all the trivial little laws everyone in the land breaks daily. *Everyone* is doing something wrong some time.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
...those 30% are guilty of terrorism...or something...
We should bring them in for questioning just to be safe.
I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.
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.
It would be rather nice if Brits and Americans could travel to and from each other's country with just an identity card, much as I understand is possible today within the EU.
Might save a lot of time stacked up at passport control.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
I truly hope freedom loving Americans, Britons, Australians, Mexicans, Spaniards, French, Muslim, Jews, Christians, and every other person of any race, creed, color, or nationality will stand up against laws that do nothing but give those in power the power to stay in power and, ultimately, the ability to abuse those who don't believe they way they do, think the way they do, talk the way they do, practice the same religion they do, have the same blonde hair they do, or live in the same region they do. I'm not trying to doom and gloom, I just took a step back and thought about all that power in so few hands without checks and balances and the ability to quash those who speak out against them and asked "How would I handle it? How would most humans handle it?" Ask yourself the same and think about it -- with all that power, do you honestly think that even the most benign person could not be corrupted?
Dream as if you'll live forever.
Live as if you'll die tomorrow.
~Anonymous~
If I am not free to go about my business without the threat of having to account for myself, then I might just as well be in prison.
I'd love to know how you've been travelling abroad without a passport all these years. Or, have you been having that same position for the last several decades? This is nothing new, just a new tool. There's no more of a "threat" now for having to account yourself than there ever has been: you've always had to account for yourself. Customs, immigration paperwork, visas - what, you think those are just new things that the Bush administration came up with in order to rule the world, just now? Please. Oh, and I'm curious how you handle things like traffic accidents, since you don't carry a driver's license or insurance paperwork or anything like that.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
the UK has gone from world power to weak sister in less than a few hundred years
More like less than 70 years, and Roosevelt was largely responsible: Lend-lease, an explicit US policy of replacing British Colonialism with US "influence",Bretton Woods and a US battleship sent to South Africa to impound British Gold Reserves pretty much ended Britain as an Economic power.
And if Canadians had any backbone, they would say fuck the US and eat the economic damage.
It's easy to claim moral high ground, until you're expected to defend it.
I suppose so - literally checking ID is reasonable enough.
The problem is the information they choose to associate with the ID. And of course I don't just mean anything else stored on the card - any real info about you is stored on a central system and just keyed off your card.
But then these systems are already around, so perhaps fussing about the key used to access them is really a distraction?
For me the most worrying aspect of the new identity card scheme are the new powers that will be granted to the state and criminal penalties that they will incur.
The Bill creates a score of new offences including;
Refusal to obey an order from the Secretary of State (6(4))
Failure to notify authorities about a lost, stolen, damaged or defective card (13(1))
Failure to renew a card (9(2))
failure to submit to fingerprinting (9(4)(b))
Failure to provide information demanded by the government (9(4)(d))
Failure to attend an interview at a specified place and time (9(4)(a))
Failure to notify the Secretary of State of any change in personal circumstances (including change of address) (12(1)).