Slashdot Mirror
UK anti-ID card campaign Gains Momentum
Jack writes "The British No2ID campaign, which opposes the creation of a National Identity Database to hold biometric data on all UK citizens, has created an online pledge as part of an effort to publicise their cause. The three-day old pledge has recently gained the attention of the blogging community, with bloggers bringing a thousand new signatories to the pledge today alone. Readers in the UK are invited to look at the No2ID FAQ on the plans for mandatory ID cards - some of it makes for scary reading." Update: 06/14 17:13 GMT by T : Side note: Tom Steinberg, director of MySociety.org (organizers of this petition) writes "The ID pledge is cool in that it is so big and successful, but it is a very small insight into what pledgebank.com can do." It's actually a much more general organizing tool.
There is a lot to be said against ID cards, but let's be honest. When I stayed in the UK I went to vote TWICE for a european election, just to show I could get away with it. When I opened a bank account, they asked me to bring a letter adressed to myself as proof of ID. If you know a mans mothers maiden name, it is as good as the PIN code to his credit card. There are a lot of good uses for near-unbreakable ID. The question is not the cards, the question is the database: who will keep it, and who will be allowed to read it. Please note you can also keep a database without issuing the cards...
10 ?"Hello World" life was simple then
Yeah but itemisation and categorisation of every asset...sorry person....in the state is a governmental dream. Saves on paper work, leaves them free to take mroe meals with their lobbyists who give them valuable ideas as to what to do with all this lovely information. And then when someone less salubrious comes to power in 30 years time, everyone's shafted - I reluctantly invoke this but it's highly relevant to point to the supremely efficient Dutch civil records at the time of their occupation ~65 years ago that eased the way to identification of certain undesirables. "Couldn't happen" then either could it.
The biometric aspect can (and should be) discussed, but I still don't see why the paper ID card is worse than a passport or a driver license regarding privacy ?
#include "coucou.h"
Theres a drama called Last Rights on Ch4 at the moment set in 2009 after a low election turnout brings a new radical party to power. They enforce curfews and shut down ISPs. All the police were carrying little PDAs with cameras and would go up to kids and point it in their eye to scan them and see if they should have been indoors, I thought that gadget was absolutely spot on - if we start having databases like this there won't be any need to carry an ID card - you'll have this crap pointed in your face for just about everything you do and if you're iris isn't on the database you're gonna be treated like the worst of the worst.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
All the Madrid bombers had valid ID also.
This is one, of the many, factors that has led to my decision to leave the UK.
I've had enough of the UK following the US into wars, the new laws that have nothing to do with terrorism and more to do with monitoring citizens - and stupid expensive schemes like the ID cards. These are a couple of the tin foil reasons, a lot more is about the way the society in the UK is going; I don't want my daughter brought up here.
I've got my visa from my country of choice, I just need to sell up and move now.
BTW I've written to my MP, my MEP, about this issue and IP laws - have you other UK slashdotters?
I'm British - and while I agree with all the statements, I am dissuaded from signing the petition because they won't let me sign without also signing up for a newsletter.
I DO NOT WANT YOUR NEWSLETTER! DO NOT SPAM ME! I BELIEVE IN THE PETITION BUT I DON'T WANT JUNK POST OR JUNK EMAIL. I AM "SIGNING" A WEB FORM I CAN LOOK AT YOUR WEBSITE IF I WANT MORE INFORMATION!!!
Until recently I've been undecided about the whole identity card debate. I can see that it would be extremely useful to make something equivalent to the British Passport compulsory for British citizens - though I never fail to be amazed at the gross incompetence surrounding even that system. I was always deeply sceptical that the government could successfully pull off a project on the scale of national IDS - their track record is abysmal. Recently my opinions have crystallised by the most recent decision to track every motorist by satellite and charge by the mile - this proposal is, in my opinion clear evidence of dishonesty, cretinism - or possibly both. Given that the UK public transport system is, in all practical senses, unusable this proposal would give unprecedented levels of information on the movements of almost every member of society. While I once saw the purpose of being able to definitively identify those born in Britain I can only find underhand motives for these policies.
I'm yet to vote (having chosen to abstain in 3 general elections) - I would now seriously consider voting for a candidate who demonstrably opposes these malicious proposals.
You're missing the point. It's not just about the ID card. It's about the database(s).
...you are not allowed to drive, because a recent police cross-check on databases, revealed that you have been driving for the last 10 weekends following a certain pattern. You were always driving about 2 hours after your visit to a pub, where you had a few drinks each time. Although you had always 2 drinks and you were below the limit, statistics showed that 56% of the people who follow the certain pattern and have the health problem you have, have increased risk of causing an accident. No action is required by you, your ID card has been updated. Have a nice day.
...you are required to attend to your local police station for an interview. You have been considered as a posible threat to national security. Although we hold no evidence against you, our database cross-checks have revealed that you belong to a high risk category. You have borrowed 4 books from your local library over the last 2 weeks; 1 on politics, 1 on communism, 1 on freedom and 1 on computer networks. You are a member of Greenpeace and an activist for a group against recent goverment actions like our recent war. You are also classified as a person who has objections with authority as your school records show, an incident at your previous employment, as well as a conversation you had with a police officer last year. You associate with a person who has broken the law once (your neighboor) and he has a friend where he broke the law twice this year. None of these facts about you is explicitly unlawful, however the combination of these facts classifies you as having a 12% chance of commiting an act which would be detrimental to our national security, within the next 6 months. USA security agencies comfirm this as well. Due to our proactive policy we would like an interview with you. The outcome of our interview will determine whether you will be sent to camp delta for reeducation or not. If you do not attend your local police station within 24 hours you will be arrested. Your ID card service capabilities have been suspended until then. Have a nice day.
You'd be required to use the ID for public services, health services, to get a job, to travel, to use private sector services, like buying a book, a dvd, a newspaper, etc etc.
Now, each goverment agency will have its own database collecting relevant information about you. Private companies will also keep their own databases collecting information about you. Ok, you're gonna say, nothing new here. I already use a card for my bank, another one to drive, another one for my local library, another one for my local supermarket etc. So what's the difference?
The difference is that you'll only use *one* card. That is *one* database *key* able to be used to run queries across any databases that keep information about you. These queries can return results in seconds with almost no effort. While nowdays, to get a profile on a person you'd need too much resources and time. So they only do it for criminals and not for your average citizen. Things will change though. Combine this with statistics, a proactive policy and the export of ID data to the US and things get scary pretty quickly. Think of the unlimited possibilities for the goverment or corporations; they could built complete profiles on you. Something that is impossible today because even though you exist on many databases, they are not integrated.
For example, you receive a letter saying...
You think this is fiction? Yes, but for how long?
VStrider.
I can't blame the Police for wanting this so badly. It must seem to the uninformed, or technically optomistic as some sort of panacea.
This would be greate if biometric evidence couldn't be planted or national databases couldn't be hacked.
It would also be good if they could come up with a card that can 100% identify you as who you say you are. Douglas Adams had great fun with this concept in Mostly Harmless. I'm sure organized crime will have even more fun. If it is statically stored on a chip it can be read, unencrypted and faked. The more faith that is put in a system like this, the more it can and will be abused.
I just can't see any way that this can help the British public. I work for one of the large computer projects that they are citing as a failure in the article. The problem here is that we take our job, keeping private information private, very seriously. This means that what could normally be a very simple application is often a megalythic nightmare. This results in slow development time and high costs, and perceived inefficiency. This is all well and good if application is essential to reducing our already expensive beurocracy, I can't imagine what would happen when they're creating a system to actively increase the it.
Scared of flying, pointy things snce 1979!
Mandatory ID was introduced in the Netherlands this year. Things have quieted down a bit since, but at first a lot of outrageous and sometimes hilarious cases made the press. Right on the stroke of midnight on new year's eve, police arrested several revellers for not having ID on them. Old grannies, and a woman with a 5 month old baby have been detained for hours for not having an ID. If the police stops a person for, say, not having a working light on their bicycle, they often ask for ID so they can stick on another fine. If there's a protest going on that the powers-that-be don't like (such as protests during Euro summits or antiglobalist protests), simply have the police go around asking for IDs and take everyone without one into custody and off the streets.
My favorite is the old lady who, when asked to produce her, pulled out one she had had for a long time (and, being issued by Dutch authorities might even still be technically valid), with her name, her picture... and a 6-pointed star with the work "JOOD" (Jew) stamped prominently across the document.
Funny thing is, the mandatory ID does nothing to combat crime. Sure, people used to give false names when caught riding the train without a ticket, shoplifting, or defacing property, but the police already had the right to detain these offenders if they had doubts about the person's identity.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Actually, the figures don't support that view. Almost 2/3rds of people didn't think the competition was worse. Problem is, they didn't agree on which of the competition was best. Thus, we are once more lumbered with a government which has got in despite being hated by the vast majority of the voters, never mind the electorate as a whole.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
Elgon
And I really want to know:what did we do to deserve this. Don't answer that if you're a terrorist - I'm talking to the law abiding non terrorist element on slashdot, plus MP3 downloaders. What did we do deserve the governemnt we supposedly elect treating all of us like criminals? Is there some subtle trend to socail masochism? Are we experimenting with a form of cultural S&M?
So why do we put up with it? There is no such thing as absolute security. We could turn the entire planet into a giant prison and take turns beating confessions out of one another, and we'd still not have absolute security - its always going to be a tradeoff agains liberty.
So maybe its time we thought a bit more about where we want to draw that line. How much liberty can you sacrifice before the security isn't worth having? How much before lack of domestic liberty becomes its own source of terrorism?
Anyone else find all this reminiscent of Nietzsche ? "He who battles monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster."
Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
States are effectively no longer able to wage war, at least not against the U.S.. Iraq proved that.
One data point does not make a proof. I'll even give you Afghanistan. Okay, two data points do not make a proof. Furthermore, while we removed Saddam from power, it's hard to see any "Mission Accomplished" in Iraq at this time.
Also, does the name China ring a bell?