Slashdot Mirror
Are National ID Cards a Good Idea?
Dracophile asks: "The Sydney Morning Herald recently ran a front-page article about a 'smart card' to access government services and that it would double as a national identity card. The article points out that the current Prime Minister of Australia, John Howard, who fiercely opposed from opposition the Australia Card idea in 1985, is now a supporter. The article goes on to say that about 100 nations have some form of ID card. Is your country one of them? What concerns were raised? How were they addressed? Have welfare fraud and other identity-related crimes decreased? Have National ID cards improved or deteriorated conditions where you live?"
No
These things do almost nothing but enable the governement to trample individual rights. This is a Very Bad Thing; the less data on me the government has, the happier I'll be; not because I'm a terrorist, but simply because I think that my civil rights are important.
No.
Do I really need to say anything else? If you have to ask, we disagree so fundamentally on the definition of "freedom" that I'd accomplish nothing more than waste wear-and-tear on my keyboard to continue further.
INFOWARS.COM
enough said.
A national ID card would put us on the slippery slope straight to an oppressive totalitarian regime!
Just like establishing a police force has resulted in a police state!
And setting up a military has resulted in a military dictatorship!
And don't forget how totally oppressed Californian dissenters are, now that California has a state ID card!
Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.
Here in the US, the social security number (and other *very* insecure methods) are already used as identification. (even though it's illegal)
It's way too easy to impersonate me right now. I'd like a smart card with a pin/biometric setup.
If you're reasons for not wanting an national ID are because the government will accumulate massive amounts of data about you, news flash: it's too late. They're already doing it. I'd rather they do it in a secure manner.
National ID cards are a very good thing indeed!
Well, you beat me by about half a second, but I think we might both get karma-spanked momentarily... All the ACs posting the same idea before us got modded into oblivion. :(
The politicians in this country are reticient to use the word id. They prefer access card. Also we do have a choice of whether to get one. Of course if you don't then you can't access government medical and welfare services. Funnily enough this was announced on the same day that the government said it wants an Australian Citizenship test to make sure you're Australian enough before entering the country. Yep we're really laid back over here.
Thats all you can say? Your goverement will trample your rights as individuals by haveing a standerdized way of telling who is who? I honestly think a national ID would be a good thing (at least here in the US). Every work a cash register and have to card someone with an out of state ID? Its easy to get away with a fake ID if you make it from a state most people are not familiar with.
Do these not count as IDs? I think here in California an ID is required.
"Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master."
http://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-0404.html#1
I'd throw in my opinion, but I'll defer to Bruce.
Worst Sig Ever
What about the need for unambiguous, authenticated, recognized proof of identity? Certainly we have long since entered the age of digital sigantures. Short of being able to provide a thumbprint, blood sample, photo, and voiceprint convieniently to anyone, a compact and secure card/ID would be the next best answer.
We can't just wish ID theft away, and the current methods of "protection" are little more than that.
Behold, this dreamer cometh. Come now, and let us slay him... and we shall see what will become of his dreams.
As an Australian Citizen I think this is a terrible idea and it will not stop any fraud, terrorism or whatever stupid reason the government dreams up to tell the public.
Firstly they will be able to be forged, just because it will be a smart card doesn't mean that you will not be able to make another one. All that you would need to duplicate the smart card is to read all the current data off the card then to program an emulator on your own card to spit out those values whenever they are requested, this is the way that a GSM card can be copied. Couple that with the current equipment that forgers use and you have a duplicate card.
However the point is kind of moot, we already have a medicare card that we need to carry around at all times should we want medical care.
I for one will be writing a letter to my local MP, I suggest all Australians do the same.
Even then the "liberal" party have a majority in government... there really isn't that much we can do.
Do your jobs properly, mods.
...I personally don't see what's the big fuss about. Back in Slovakia, we've got national ID cards (called "Citizen's Card"). We use them only for identification; the same way I use a driver's license in the US. the ID cards have five pieces of information: Your picture, name, address, date of birth, and a unique ID number. This makes it no different from a US driver's license, with the small distinction that with the exception of writing personal checks you don't give out your DL number. Instead, you use the social security number as your identifier.
Of course, I don't dispute that ID cards can be abused, for example by having them carry much more of your personal information. However, that's not the ID card's fault; it's the responsibility of the government to determine which information will be available through an ID card.
Absent any other factors, I think most slashdotters would say that not having a country-wide ID card is greatly preferable to having one.
But there are other factors. Some recent debates in the US highlights these well: the need for identification to fly, and the need for identification for voter registration. In other words, ID is already necessary to fully participate in the society.
But when ID is necessary in practice, the question shifts to one of access - can all citizens gain access to valid ID equally? And from the debates (especially regarding voting), it seems that perhaps not. A national ID card - issued for everyone, and presumably for free or at a very, very low cost, since it is mandatory - would equalize access to something that is already neccessary.
Make sure you're protesting the right thing.
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
I'll tell you what I am getting tired of--the state of VOTING!
Crappy machines on the one hand, and identity fraud on the other. It's ridiculous. One party or the other opposes any and all kinds of reform.
So let's get a paper trail (no more e-voting, thank you!)
And let's get id checks to vote.
I would have thought these would have been completely non-controversial...but apparently they are.
--
In conclusion, any kind of national ID, free to those who need it freely, that proves citizenship and can be used by states to verify voter ID, (and that can also be used by the fed govt for benefits) is about the only reason I would want a national ID.
Here is the Truth. It's a basically a Libertarian fantasy -- they want to believe that "just in case" they can disappear and not have to pay taxes to the OH SO SCARY government that is going to break down their door and READ THEIR OH SO SECRET DOCUMENTS.
In other words, it comes down to vanity. These people want to believe that they're so important that having a national ID card would somehow bring about the fall of the country.
The truth, of course, is that they ain't that important. NO ONE is so important that they need to (or even CAN) disappear like that.
Earth to Libertarians: we are not repealing taxation. You WILL pay taxes. Avoiding a national ID card is not going to make it so you don't have to pay taxes.
The problem with an ID card, as I see it, is that it gives the government lots of information about the citizenry, which it should not *need* to know. History shows us that there are always cycles of totalitarianism and 'freedom'. Having national ID cards mean that when a totalitarian authority comes to power, it can do a lot more damage.
Part of the reason the Nazis were so efficient at rounding up the Jews and other 'undesirables' was because they had good information about where they were living/employed/etc, and the Public Service was quite happy to provide that information to the SS (or whoever it was who coordinated the death camps - my knowledge of history is a bit shady). Had they had a national ID card, this process would have been even more efficient.
We should oppose an ID card, unless we're certain that such a government will never arise in our country. If you believe it never will, I think you're deluding yourself.
ps. This assumes that the ID cards are 100% secure - an impossible feat. If you consider ID card hacking, and identity theft, etc, then you uncover a heap of additional reasons why they're a Bad Thing.
You should retract your statement, human #4,321,982,324.
Don't forget we have embarrassing records on you starting from the day you were born.
Sincerely,
- The Authorities
Let me summarize:
- Watch out for Australian Gestapo.
- That's a bad analogy.
- No, it's a good analogy.
- Here's a link to a German film about police powers.
- We already have drivers' licenses; how are national ID's any different?
- Here's a humorous comment.
- It's not compulsory per se; you don't have to get the ID card. You just can't access government benefits without one... putting a *very* big carrot in front of Australians.
It's called a driver's license (or state ID card), and you get it at the DMV in your state. Or the DPS if you're in Texas. :)
The feds have "federalized," as they do, and we indeed do have a de facto national ID.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_ID_Act
Why do we really need a national id card? as a citizen, what will this id card do for me? and what the heck is wrong w/ my current state id?!
10 years ago, I had to get a new green card. I went to a police station to get my fingerprints taken with ink on a paper sheet, brought that to the INS office, had them take a polaroid, and put together my card on the spot.
Yesterday, I went to my biometrics appointment from my new green card.
They took down my name, SS#, address, and phone number, and had me sit down and wait. Next came the fingerprints, which were done with a scanner that told the operator how readable the prints were (pass/fail). When they all passed, I sat down in front of a digital camera for my photo.
Once they had all of my info, they said I'd get the new card in the mail.
Anyway, the point is 10 years ago they had a bunch of info on me probably on xeroxes and stuffed into some file cabinet somewhere. My green card was an ID card that basically got me back into the country when travelling.
Now, all of the above info is probably stored in some database, and can probably be called up instantly, and I feel that my green card was just an excuse to get that data. Not that I plan on doing anything where that may be used against me in some way, but it still bothers me for some reason.
Heck, I can't help but wonder if at some point in that process there was a secret DNA test.
Until about a year ago I was also very oposed to any sort of national ID card. Then I realised the government probably wouldn't have much more information that they already do through my passport. Why must everyone immidiatly assosiate any government innitative with terrorism? I now think it's a great idea. It's a much safer way for me to prove who I am to any body that needs to know, ie my university or my employer. It would probably lighten up my wallet to as I don't need a different ID card for everywhere I go, the one could probably be used by everyone to do what I need to do with it. That being said, in any countrys where this sort of card does exist, is it used as an all in one card? For instance do you still have to carry around a drivers licence or can that information stored on the card?
... would small as bad.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
As far as the US goes, we have national ID as such but two badly repurposed hacks that function along similar lines. There are the state-issued drivers licenses and there is the nationally-issued social security ID number. Both are used extensively in identification, neither really work well. Drivers licenses aren't really meant to prove beyond doubt an identity, can be forged, and differ from state-to-state. Social security IDs are treated by some places as private and others as public and they don't have an actual photo identification card to tie a face to a name and a name to a number. We all resist national IDs here at Slashdot, but they're inevitable. In the information age it is imperative for the streamlining of governments that every citizen end up with their own database row somewhere. Now whether governments should be streamlined or not is an entirely different question. There is some protection to crippling beaurocracy.
The difference here may be in the federalist form of government that the US supposedly has. I don't know if Slovakia has a similar governmental model, but in the US, there are some matters were state/municipal governments are meant to have powers over citizens that the federal government is not.
In the view of some Americans, it's okay (or at least tolerable) to have state-issued ID cards but not okay for the federal government to do the same. Sadly, the feds catalog us already through the Social Security Administration and the Internal Revenue Service, so it would appear to be a moot point.
GO EFF YOURSELF
Had a discussion at work about this over lunch yesterday, as I work in Sydney. Ironically out of a group of 10 people, the only two people who disagreed with it gave their individual reasons as (1) habitual tax fraud and (2) habitual welfare fraud. They were afraid of the system because they're taking part in illegal activites which they know they would have an increased chance of getting caught under a national ID system. Continuing this discussion today with other colleageus the same pattern continues to be evident.
Here in Australia, we have not seen much evidence that we have to be afraid of our government unless we're committing crimes. I've already seen two complainants going on about "freedoms". We dont' even have a nationally established "freedom of speech". In fact, as covered previously on Slashdot, we have rather strict dissention laws. However, nobody who isn't taking part in illegal activity has ever been quashed or locked up under these laws.
Personally, I'd love a national ID card. When so many places insist on a simple "Your mother's maiden name" as a form of identification outside of a non-photo/biometric ID, identity fraud is all too easy here. A simple google will elicit most information on myself such as "place of birth", "mothers maiden name" and in my case, even "first pet's name".
I challenge anyone to find proof of the government using their databases they already have established here in Australia, of ever pursuing someone who was not suspected of committing a crime in the first place.
I'm in favor of a unified "ID Card" Format. I've never seen an ID from Dellaware, or Virginia, or many others of the 50 different ID formats that exist in the US. How am I supposed to know if those IDs are valid or not? I could easily print and laminate something from a different state and "pretend" it's an ID.
It's just an ID Card. The amount of Info in the "ID Card", that's another question.
In my country we had IDs per state and it was a mess. Some 20 years ago they unified the format and now it's better.
---
Wearing new glasses so I can C#
I guess that phrase will have new meaning...
MmmmKayyy!
Always value the individual over the system. --Bruce Lee "I don't need a Sig - I have a custom 191" - me
assumes that all of your worst fears about how national IDs could be used isn't already happening. it is already happening
so i think an overlooked plus of national IDs is that the system could be made transparent (not that it will be, but that it could). that is, that the government could be forced to supply to you how and when your ID's info is being used and by whom. in the US they have a freedom of information act. with lots of little overlapping IDs: state drivers license, social security #, credit cards, etc., everything is shady and hard to pin down and enforce the foi. but with one centralized system, those who fight for privacy rights can attack that and stay focused on that one system and open it up for all
the problem now is, the national ID system just serves as a fearful symbol to privacy rights activists. ok, fine. but move beyond the FUD in your mind and see that there may be subtle benefits to a national ID system for the good cause. one stop shopping. a focus for your attack
and the subtle benefits of a national ID card for the cause of privacy rights is not least of which indicated by, as i already said, anything you are afraid they would do with a national ID they are already doing anyways
so there is nothing to lose, and maybe something to gain
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
The way I see it is this: A national ID card has several uses. One of them is to see which state you're from and what your citizenship is. Since this ID card will probably databased, faking a national ID card will be extremely difficult (I would go as far to say that it is virtually impossible). It will involve hacking into the main database, assuming that you find it, gaining authority to create new entries, and covering your tracks. By that time, admins and whatnot will be on to you, since government officials at few locations can actually do this, and having your IP address come from a remote location is suspicious enough. The second purpose is to be a substitute for your driver's license (potentially), your social security card, and a laundry list of other cards that clutters up wherever you keep your stuff. The most important potential of ID cards is to identify criminals and illegal aliens. If you carded someone in Texas and it says he's from California, and on America's Most Wanted there is reported to be a fugitive from California that escaped and travelled east, you just busted his chops. All in all, I express my support for a national ID card, particularly one that has universal usage, and allows us to quickly recover from stolen cards (such as online de-activation). I see how some people fear that it may intrude our privacy, but as long as you're not doing anything illegal like the good citizen you're supposed to be, I don't see what you have to worry about.
The parent post is quite right. The Third Reich was as successful as it was at rounding up Jews throughout Europe because it was the largest and most advanced user of Herman Hollerith Tabulating Machines in the 1930s and 1940s.
First in their own country, then branching out to their annexed and occupied lands, the Germans took accurate censuses of all the people they ruled. Then, with the aid of tabulators and sorters, they printed out alphabetized lists of those people they wanted to deport to concentration camps.
The countries with the best data (such as Holland) had the most Jewish deaths per capital during the Second World War. Those countries with worse data (such as France) suffered far fewer deaths.
Remember, these were all mechanical machines, requiring a huge, toiling staff to run and maintain them. With the digital computers of today, keeping tabs on the entire population would be a trivial exercise in comparison.
And you'll have a false sense of security, too -- most people aren't going to have the tools to reliably recognize most half-decent forgeries, so all you'll need is a half-decent fake, but -- because most people will know them as 'secure' IDs, they'll just be accepted at face value.
Most importantly, however: Being able to positively identify someone after they blow themselves up doesn't do much to stop terrorism.
Even after he was arrested, Mousaui is still trying to get himself killed.
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
... let's get id checks to vote.
Here's how to block national ID cards:
Get the Republicans to add a rider requiring the cards and their associated I.D. numbers be used to insure that only qualified voters (citizens, non-felons in jurisdictions where that matters) vote in federal elections and that no individual votes more than once in a given election.
The Democrats (the major beneficiaries of voting by illegals, felons, multiple voters, dead voters, and motor-voter + permanent absentee ballot virtual voters), will then be 100% against it. Even including a rider requiring audit trails on voting machine systems won't swing enough of them to matter.
Meanwhile some of the Republicans will oppose it because of the big-brother invasiveness.
And that's the necessary majority to kill it.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Speaking about identification.... U.S. even demands our grandmother's maiden name to be on the papers for visiting U.S., then we pay about 10000k of our undervalued currency (about a month of hard work) for examination for entering the holy U.S. soil, and then you got turned down for no reason given by U.S. embassy. As a result you receive something like this: Mr. we exemined you request for U.S. visa and we found you not worthy entering continental U.S. :'( Yes, it is a bold offtopic, yo.
Most countries place the ID information on the card. This is foolish as any physical or digital representation can be duplicated with relative ease. This makes the good guys work for naught to stop the bad guys who don't have to worry (as they have proper ID). I propose that all the ID information should be server side (picts etc - presented to a terminal). The only thing on the card should be a Name, Number and Bar Code. The information shown could be location specific - to enhance privacy rights (the reader only sees information germain to their function).
Imagine how many dead-beat dads would be forced to pay. Imagine how many jobs would would newly occupied by legal workers. Imagine how much nicer getting on a commercial airplane would be. Imagine if the person reading the card knew that the ID information they were seeing was coming from an encrypted database in some locked room, as opposed to being produced in the back of a van somewhere.
Other nations have much less of a problem with illegal workers or identity theft.
Americans support National ID card : http://www.time.com/time/columnist/stengel/article /0,9565,180144,00.html
... but guess what, check your junk mail. Check out your RICO score. Check out your entry in the voter database. Law abiding tax paying Americans are already compromised and nothing can undo it.
It's a good idea.
1) We won't have to build a Maginot Line on the Mexican border.
2) We can enforce our immigration laws better and more cheaply.
3) We can cut down on fraud.
4) We can catch criminals more easily.
I know that some are scared of it but the benefits outweigh the minor costs.
Some might complain about privacy
Only criminals fear the National ID card.
Some may argue that the Police State is not simply in the process of arriving, but that it has already been with us for some time. Certainly the events of September 11, 2001 have done nothing to retard the process. There are many small developments, each one seemingly innocuous in itself, which are helping the police forces of the world to increase their grip on the activities of people.The introduction of identity cards has been the subject of much recent discussion but so far many of the various governments involved appear to have shelved the matter. Temporarily shelved at least, or until the various propaganda machines have had time to do their work. The introduction of driver's licences bearing the owner's photograph has provided the state with a perfectly acceptable substitute for a temporary form of ID card. Nobody is making much fuss about a photo on their driving permit, having long become accustomed to requiring a licence to drive. The original purpose of the driving licence was to ensure that the applicant had the mental and physical competence to drive a vehicle. All states rapidly turning this into a method of controlling a part of their population, and soon we began to hear the government refrain that "driving is a privilege and not a right." A refrain which has been unquestioningly accepted by the majority of the population. This underlying theory is present in states as varied in their political philosophies as the USA, Canada, England and China. The use of face-recognition technology though has shed new light on one police practice, a practice which most likely has surprised many people. With digital photographs in common use, it is very easy for the forces of law and order to scan, on a routine basis, the databank containing the province or state's drivers' license photographs to find look-alikes for criminal photo lineups. Whatever your description, if it matches the facial characteristics - or even a composite - of a suspect, your photograph could be among those laid out alongside the photo of an alleged armed robber or murderer for a witness or victim to identify. Ever wonder how many police line-ups you may have been in? I'll bet you thought too that the new provincial health cards and driver's licences, with their nice coloured photographs, were in colour because they look less like the old grainy black and white ones that made us all look like shifty criminals. All this occurred to me recently, when I had my photo taken for my latest driver's licence. Being a wearer of orthochromic lenses, which turn dark when exposed to light of any kind, I was asked to remove them before my photo was taken. When I asked why, I was informed that the police don't like photos of individuals with dark glasses! So now my health card and driver's licence each bear a photograph of an old white haired individual blinking at the camera. Of course, in real life I do not look like that because I wear my glasses continuously. But this isn't a problem for the police because their photo recognition equipment is much more interested in the shape of my face than its adornments. The polls taken following the WTC incident showed that there is considerable public support for many of these so-called anti-terrorism measures, support accompanied by cries from many for even harsher measures to restrain liberty; including, unthinkingly, their own. Even in the USA, well known people, notably Oracle's Larry Ellison and Harvard's Allen Dershowitz, have proposed a US national ID card. Ellison having even offered to manufacture them himself, presumably as an act of charity and patriotism. Closer to home, Quebec's Minister of Health, under the cover of wanting to reduce fraud, has been again touting a health card with a chip, to counter so-called violations of his system. Since they introduced photographs on the Health card a few years ago, some reduction of fraud has taken place, but it has not been eliminated as reports in the French press showed recently. The Police Federation in the UK says
Shneier starts with a bunch of wrong assumptions: he assumes that national ID cards are needed for fighting terrorism and he assumes that they require a central database. Both of those are bogus assumptions.
The purpose of national ID cards is so that you can identify yourself reliably to other people if the transaction requires it. National ID cards make it hard for people to impersonate you, and that's a good thing. They are much less useful in identifying people who don't want to be identified (e.g., terrorists).
National ID cards also don't require a centralized database. Such databases are often incorporated into national ID card proposals, but they are not an intrinsic part of a national ID card system and are probably a bad idea.
The fact is that the US already has a national ID card system in place, it just happens to be poorly designed and permits rampant identity theft. That ought to be fixed by creating an ID card system. If done correctly, everybody ends up with more protection against identity theft and with more control over their personal information than they now have.
The solution is a strong identity system. The system should be based on something similar if not directly on the pkcs 11 tokens. People should be allowed to opt into the be card holders but once you are a card holder the only valid form of identification should be the card/token that you are carrying. Further the system should be privatized with allowing several card vendors to compete such that people willing to pay /put up with extra security features can have them if they like. In the simplest form the card may look like credit card with a mag stripe. Other vendors may offer people cards that are biometricly locked. With being an opt in system it would be legal for things like banks and other industries to charge people lower or fewer fees for participating in the system. Since these users will offer lower rates to insure then its only fair to pass those costs along to the end users. Since it has been proven time and time again that people will give up their passwords and identity for things such as Tshirts and chocolate bars we can be sure that unwashed masses will fall into line when they get a few extra bucks a month for taking part. Then in time, just as with the credit reports it will be so costly not to be apart of the system that everyone will just do it. Further once a real identity system is in place forcing people to sign emails to spam prevention will be a real possibility.
For all of the comments that say that identity cards are a 'bad idea(tm)' no one has been able to say what this will enable the government to do that they can't do today.
Here in Australia, we have not seen much evidence that we have to be afraid of our government unless we're committing crimes.
Here in the good ol' US of A, it will soon be a big-time major crime to own software that can copy movies and music. What happens when it's a crime to use Linux? What happens when it's a crime to post something offensive on the fucking internet? What happens when that self-satisfied mother fucker who calls himself our President decides that calling our President a self-satisfied mother fucker is a crime? What happens when owning a copy of Brokeback Mountain is a crime?
We used to make fun of the USSR for requiring papers at all times. That was a common device in many of our spy movies-- "Your papers are not in order." That's exactly what a national ID card is: your papers, all bundled up in a single device. It's easy to abuse, and I believe it *will* be abused. And, ultimately, it is antithetical to liberty.
What happens when it is a crime to not have your national ID on you while walking down the street?
"Ver are your papers, Comrade?"
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
National ID cards are a bad idea in the United States, for a few reasons. First, this country is supposed to be a confederation of states (hence, we are the United States of America; not "America" like many people say); the federal government should be strictly bound to the Constitution. (This is different from most European nations; they are nation-states, not confederacies. Federalism doesn't exist in those nations, whereas federalism is what makes the United States different). National ID cards trample over the states' sovereignity. Ideally, I should report to the state of California, not to the feds. According to the Constitution, what function does the National ID card would have? I'm pretty sure the Consitution doesn't allow for this. However, the Constitution and the concept of federalism has been spat at and vilified since 1933 (with how the Supreme Court has acted since FDR, you would have sworn that the 10th Amendment was repealed along with the 18th in 1933), so they'll probably use the "commerce clause" or some other excuse to implement it.
National ID cards aren't the cause of totalitarian regimes, but if the United States were taken over by totalitarians, access to data would be much easier with a centralized database somewhere in Washington, DC vs. individual state records. Besides, terrorists, phishers, con artists, and other crooks would have an easier time stealing somebody's "American Freedom ID Card" and have access to all of their personal information, than if they just stole a California ID card, for example.
My objection to a national ID card in the United States is based on four reasons; it defies federalism, may give the federal government too much information (which may be very bad if our government gets worse), could make identity theft much easier and centralized, and civil liberties issues (why should I have to carry my papers around to walk down the street?). The United States needs to return to its Constitutional roots based on federalism, instead of implementing some big government program to fix all of the problems that it allegedly has.
We have a mandatory id card in Hungary, and our biggest concern is that policemen are always have the right to ask You to show Your id.
Why?
Nobody knows.
In Hungary, sometimes a policemen comes into the bar and checks the id card of everybody, without any reason.
In contrast to the U.S., nobody checks age limit at the doors, but policemen can ask you every time to show your pass.
Back in the 50's if somebody did not have the id card nearby (e.g. riding a bike), they arrested You for a night. Nowtimes other parties might
identify You for the policemen and the driving licence is also o.k. for that.
What an advance - You can say. But: If I go into my bank, they still ask for my id card at every transaction and they don't trust the driving licence. Therfore everybody takes all his neccessary cards in their pockets, because it is a daily, regular use for EACH of them:
-ID card
-card officially stating your home address (this data is no more on the ID card)
-Tax card
-Driving licence (card)
-Health card (for any health issue)
-EU health card (If you leave the border...)
-Credit/Debit cards
-Paper based traffic card
-Card for the ownership/traffic eligibility of your car
-Parking card (in the city)
-Dicount cards and entry cards for specific stores (e.g. Shell Smart card, Supershop discount card, etc.)
-Parking card or remote for your office
-Cards stating the id number for your company at a store to get company receipt in a "fast" way - minutes with a card... You should get paper receipt for the name of the company every time...
And almast every place in my country is in 50 mile reach of some country border, if You leave the country and it's not in the Eu., You'll have to use passport, international driving licence,...
Yes I know You have a lots of cards too, but mainly for the same reason, as membership and discount cards, or bank cards, but such a mess of cards is simply frustrating. What do You do if somebody steals your cards? It takes monthes to get new ones. Besides You will be the owner of some fake companies etc.
My baby is only some weeks old. He already has
-official paper about his birth
-health card
-eu health card
-card stating his home address
-passport
-tax card
Good, eh? It took days to get those, with queues of 50.
How do You get all these cards? All at a different office, and they have introduced internet based check-in (date reservation) lately in the last year... For some cards you bring your photo. For some other they make it personally. For some cards, you have to go to the post office to pay for it, for some you don't have to.
So - the mandatory id card is just a piece of dust, nobody cares.
....then it's a duck, no matter how many times you call it a "flat-billed water fowl." When every business that needs to verify my identity asks me for my driver's license, and when the federal government expects that I have a driver's license when I conduct business with their agencies, then the state-issued driver's license is the national identification card. No matter how much we like it or dislike it.
of knowing if it was intercepted by a van in the parking lot.
The way it to strngly encrypt the info on the card, and make a finger print part of the key.
Now everyone controls their information.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
The GP obviously does NOT understand what a "national" ID is.
In California there are lots and lots of illegal immigrants who seem to have no problem getting a job, living quarters and such despite the fact that they shouldn't be able to get a CA drivers license.
So, having one item that can be used for identification purposes is not the same as having one item that DOES identify you.
I'm Australian, and this comes as no surprise. Since 9/11, despite the fact that we have had NO terrorism within our borders and we're a strategically and numerically insignificant country (20 million residents) our government has taken the latest excuse and really run with it, creating an entirely legally different Australia. Our government (who we've had for the last 10 years because we don't seem to care when they're caught lying to us) has, apart from the usual ridiculously long held-without-charge times, made it illegal to speak about ASIO (Australian Security/Intelligence Organization) arrests, changed sentences for people already in jail without judicial intervention, reintroduced sedition laws et al. Now this. Frankly, I'm just waiting till I've got enough money to move overseas. Last time I checked, "left" still wasn't an obscenity in some Northern European countries.
We've been getting by for thousands of years without them.
Frankly, it comes down to a decision between making your life easier or freer.
On one hand, you have much easier access to basic services and financial transactions become quite simple. However, fraud can become even more devestating than it could be previously. It isn't just your credit card anymore, it's your whole life.
Another thing to think about is that the statute of limitations ceases to exist (and has for some time, but that's another issue) and any anonymity or freedom you may have had is wiped out. Do you really want the police officer who pulled you over for a broken tail-light to know that you have high cholesterol, just went through a messy divorce and take anti-anxiety medication? That gives them power over you, and if you don't know any aphorisms regarding power, you're an idiot.
Frankly, people need to start realising that our very existence is over-controlled, over-legislated and overrulled by a government so large that the people within it can push the agenda of the week (to the detriment of the whole) and remain entirely faceless.
In Soviet Russia we used to have National ID cards (with an indication of party membership) and it worked out just fine ...
Now, some random details. ID cards here only gives a little more certainty over someone's identity, since it's an offical (think notarized) document with a photograph. It's legal for anyone to ask for the ID card on a commercial transaction, for instance, and that makes ID verification processes go much more smoother (due to the non-repudiation.) There's a lot of other numbers we have to deal with on our daily life: social security, financial operation and tax ID, voter ID, passport, driver's license number, work permit number, professional syndicate ID. Therefore, the ID number by itself is the least of our problems.
OTOH the number hell is our final line of defense. It raises the cost of a successful ID theft or a welfare fraud. But the same mess make it easy to fraud as well, since some numbers do not have standard formats across city or state borders.
I conclude that, while the national ID thing is not a bad thing by and on itself, the concentration of many different government services on a single point of failure can have catastrophic results.
National ID cards promoted by a competant government are a great idea. It's a matter of trust and I don't trust my government to make informed and responsible decisions regarding the wellfare of its people. I don't trust that they can ever streamline or make much of anything efficient. The DMV, IRS, and public education come to mind. Even the voting machines they contract Diebold to build can't do basic counting correctly. Does anybody really trust them to handle the personal information of everybody?
No exaggeration: Today, you can purchase private information on anybody... courtesy of the DMV, law enforcement, and gross mismanagement by federal agencies. If it's not sold, it's handled so sloppily that it's practically free. I'd much rather these practices stopped now, instead of the empty promises that it won't persist with new cards... as if the physical ID is the problem and not the incompetance of these agencies.
They've thrown everything they can at persuading the public to accept ID cards. It'll help anti-terrorism efforts and somehow track sex offenders. It'll prevent identity theft and end illegal imigration. And don't forget... it's patriotic. I'm sure the twin towers will be printed somewhere on the card... as if that makes the whole thing a good idea.
There are no good justifications in my opinion... not until a rational long-term plan is proposed that takes ALL issues under consideration.
Do we really want the same mandated personal identity requirements that the Russians had under Stalin?
Raise the speed limits 5 mph and have computers enforce them rigorously? Sounds like driving heaven to me. As long as my driving history cannot be accessed without a warrant, I really don't care about this information being recorded. You know what? We can use this information to do other wonderful things too, like pay-per-use roads. We can charge more for rush hour driving, for example, reducing congestion.
Now what was the downside again? That a cop with a warrant may be able to snoop where I have been driving? I am not too worried about that.
A unique ID by itself has little value. When every system out there starts using a consistent GUID scheme to identify an individual, then suddenly it becomes very easy to cross-reference things that many of us don't want being cross-referenced. Of course it's possible to commit all sorts of mischief without a National ID using SSNs and other things, but it's harder. That's the reason they want the damn thing in the first place. By opposing it we make the bureaucrats' and snoopers' jobs harder.
I'm not on the dole, so I won't need one for that. I have private medical insurance and am quite happy to pay $45 instead of $20 to vist my local GP for the privacy it affords. So I don't need one for that.
But what happens when a police officer asks me for my 'ID' card and I say "I don't have one."?
How many trips to the watchhouse to 'confirm my identity' will I put up with until I finally get one of these 'non compulsary' cards?
I wish I could think of a witty Sig. Sigh!
In Mexico all citizens needs an ID card to be able to vote. This ID has some personal information like your full name, address, date of birth, photograph, fingerprint, and signature. The Mexican government puts a lot of effort to make sure that the data is correct and accurate. The census is so accurate that right now it is the only valid ID to cash a check or as a proof of age. Before this accurate census was made the official party at that time made huge election fraud election after election. To fight this problem the opposition (left and right parties) pushed to this schema to have fair elections. In the particular case of Mexico, having a national wide ID program give Mexico a more fair democratic system. On the dark side this census was bought by an American company giving a large identity theft
Well, no one has mentioned the fact that the card is an RFID card. You do not have to "give" the card to anyone for information to be gathered.
I might suggest you keep the picture, to know if the person experiencing the epileptic seizure on the sidewalk has the name given in the wallet beside them, so the hospital will be able to call up the correct record in transit. Of course, it might be easier to just read the GUIDs out over the phone instead, but the human mind can visually index through multiple separate records much more quickly than it can numerically/logically index, so you'll know right away whether to discard that card and keep looking.
The article goes on to say that about 100 nations have some form of ID card.
<mom>
If your friends went and jumped off a cliff, would you do it too?
<mom/>
I would like to see citizen oversight over police databases and data displays. Plus clear rules for when the police can request ID. IOW, retain probable cause.
The day we have national ID cards in Canada is the day I change my name to Adolph Hitler or Ted Kacyzinksi or Bender. Thomas not a fucking chance in hell Davie
This is Slashdot!
All systems will be imperfect. By having different ones, we limit the total damage that any single-point failure causes. What we ought to do is assign more liability for identity theft issues to custodians like credit rating firms and card issuers, not to mention merchants. Make them liable for the things they do that make identity theft easier and they will work harder to prevent it.
That is not the only instance.
Go ahead and try to buy a house without providing all kinds of details about yourself. Even if you are NOT going through a bank for a loan.
Or to travel. Even if you drive yourself.
Sure, it is possible in theory to travel without involving the government. But in the Real World, it just doesn't happen.If the government makes demands of me
The fact that this is even under discussion shows how many of our Rights we've given up and how we've accepted the "protection" of the Government.
Fuck that.
The government can issue 1 card that can be used whenever I apply for any government hand-out and most of the sheep will accept that and even DEFEND it.
But it's one step from issuing that 1 card to requiring that you have it and present it for upon demand.
As long as there isn't a single card, there's no chance that the government will require everyone to have a medi-care card and to present it upon demand by the police.
There's no need from a Civil Rights standpoint to demand a single card. So all of you defending it can go fuck yourselves.
Can't understand anyone that can agree with such an idea! Talking about are civil rights, with such a card nowadays for you you will have a tracking device in order to follow it. With this you can make a patern of your citizens journey and worry if he's turning left when he normally goes right. This world is really going non-sense
What everyone seems to be forgetting is that everyone involved HAD VALID ID! All this will do is add another hoop for someone to jump through. A determined person/group will be able to attain valid ID's that are needed, be they foreign passports, visa's, green cards, US citizen ID's, Yo-JimBo Squeegy Card, etc... It won't matter. The only thing ID's will do is more easily allow people to gather data about you and or steal your identity.
We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
Our drivers licenses are about the only photo ID that any of our people have. Some have passports, but not many people carry them day to day.
If you're cashing a check or using a credit card, you are sometimes asked for photo ID. So we show our drivers license.
But our employment laws specifically state what types of ID are needed for employment and a drivers license is just one option.
And I'm okay with that.
I have never lived in a country without a national ID card so I'm not sure what are the advantages of having or not having such a document. In Spain, we've had national ID cards since before I was born, and I have one, of course.
My general feeling is that they're a good idea if used right, which I think is the situation now. National ID cards are used mostly in situations when they want to establish exactly who is going to participate in a given event. The national ID number is a private data, like your phone number. Nobody knows which is your national ID number and when you're requested to give it, you have the impression you are going to establish a formal and serious relationship/business with something or somebody.
For example, it's usually requested in contracts. Let's suppose you buy a house. Your contract says the amount you are going to pay, the conditions, etc, *and* your national ID. So it is *you* who is buying the house and not somebody else. And the house will belong to *you* and not somebody else. And it's also requested for the company to have a similar number that will be in the contract. So it's *that* company. But, for example, you are not requested to give your national ID when you buy a PC.
I was requested to give my national ID number (and show the card, of course) when I started my studies at the university. While not a common practice, some teachers requested the cards at the final exams. They have a list of people who has paid to assist their classes and go to the exams, they bring that list to the exam and ask people for the card to enter the exam room. That way, they make sure it's really *you* who is doing the exam and not somebody else in your behalf.
Another usual situation in which you are requested to show your ID card is when paying with a credit card at some supermarket or shop in general. Instead of checking that your signature matches the one in the credit card, which is a loose relationship IMHO (and easy to fake), you show your credit card and your ID card. The shop assistant holds both cards in their hands and checks that you are the one in the ID card by looking at the picture and that the name in the credit card matches the name in the ID card. This way you couldn't use a stolen card unless your name and the owner's name match. Note that in Spain you have one name and two surnames (one from each parent), making coincidences slightly more unusual.
And a final word about the cards themselves: they have the typical security measures used for bills and other "official" documents (probably on a higher paranoid level I'd say). Of course, they can be faked, like everything, but it's not easy at all for a common individual to do it. Currently it's made of plastic, with special ink and your picture, of course, it not attached to it, it's printed on the card itself.
Without addressing the issue of "Your papers, please!" which others here have done very well, I would like to point out that smart cards suck. They ought to be called stupid cards. Ohio used to employ smart cards for their electronic benefits transfer/food stamps program, the Ohio Direction Card. This required retailers who accepted it to have special equipment that cost a lot, cluttered up their checkout lines and frequently broke down. It led to angry customers abusing the retailers and abusing the equipment, causing it to fail even more. Last month, they abandoned the smart card system and went to a magnetic strip card that almost any retailed equipped to take credit and debit cards can accept without extra hardware. This cost me a job, since I maintained the old system and was no longer needed, but will probably save the state millions of dollars per year and eliminate the problem of hackers reprogramming the cards. Before letting salesmen pitch smart cards to them, Australia should talk to Ohio.
The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
The abuses that could stem from a centralized system of identification are absolutely mind-boggling. Before we launch into that however, we ought to take a second and consider exactly what it is that we're in jeopardy of losing, don't you think?
The fourth amendment says:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
What this effectively creates is a system of enforcement which makes the law enforcement play at a disadvantage. This was created because our founding fathers did not trust government not to oppress its citizens.
One of the biggest points that most people don't get about the constitution and the bill of rights is that it provides allowances for people to get away with crimes. This is a necessary step because 100% enforcement of all laws is both the natural goal of any government AND the very definition of the most orwellian of hells. The founding fathers decided to draw the line somewhere to even the playing field between citizen and government. If you break copyright laws within your home or among your friends, smoke some pot in your basement, or anonymously leak some piece of government information to the press, THE LEVEL OF INVASION REQUIRED TO CONVICT THOSE CRIMES OUTWEIGHS THE EVIL OF THOSE CRIMES GOING UNPUNISHED.
Furthermore, this relies on eyewhitnesses, regular people, to report crimes and turn people in. This is precisely in step with the principle of the jury trial: all power is mitigated by the complicity of the populace and the human error and decentralization of the enforcement. Yes, that means that there are situations where murderers and rapists and all manner of other evil people are going to get away with things. This is the price we must pay to maintain a sane government.
With that said, here's why the mandatory ID is a horrendous idea: by creating these IDs we are taking the first step into the machine. We will all be inventoried in an absolutely literal way. Once this happens at a national level, it becomes possible for diverse sources of information to be correlated with unprecedented precision. As soon as this becomes possible, the government will necessarily, naturally, perhaps gradually begin to use it to fight drugs, or crime, or terrorism, or whatever evil they're spouting about at the moment.
Just consider it. A single database with an ID number for every citizen in the united states. At that point it is so, SO very easy to start associating things:
* Library Records
* Internet History
* Criminal Records
* Taxes
* Credit Card Purchases
* Driving Records
But that's not even the beginning. What happens when we start using this thing on a day-to-day convenience level?
* Swipe it at the metro
* Swipe it at the grocery store
* Wave it through the toll booths
Or, hell, just put a RFID chip into the thing. Imagine: you'd be able to just walk into a library, pick up some books, and walk out...the books are automatically checked out via RFID. You could fill your cart up at the supermarket and just walk out the door. Instantly, the balance is deducted from your credit card. The police could fire up a scanner at a football game and get a list of every person who's been to the middle east in the last year. They could just deduct all of your taxes as you go; what would there be to report come April?
On some level, we're all guilty of something. Some of us like weird porn. Some of us lie about things. Some of us hate people and wish them dead. Some of us hate people because of the color of their skin. Some of us are friends with drug dealers and terrorists. Some of us are Communists. Some of us break encryption.
If you add up enough information about anyone, they're guilty of w
Some of those hijackers had LEGITIMATE ID with their REAL NAMES and paid for the tickets with credit cards issued to those names.
We can't even stop known bad guys using ID we've issued in their real names.
There is no way we can stop bad guys from getting fake ID's and using that. And the more "national" an ID card is, the LESS it will be questioned.
The ENTIRE system hinges on the worst idiot working in the issuing office being 100% resistant to bribes and threats.
the feds are so far up our colon these days that to qualify for gov't service, you have to be a certified proctologist. Police can already detain you "to establish identification" for failure to show an ID.
Like it or not, Americans are goose-stepping into the future.
A police state is one which actively controls dissent through active and open repression of civil rights. Last I heard, Noam Chomsky's still running about, as are folks like you. If this were a police state, do you think you could even post that diatribe in English?
Or a military dictatorship! Y'know, a country whose government has been taken over by a coup and has a military officer, rather than a civilian, in charge, who is actively seeking to stay in power over the rule of law, i.e., those made before he came into power.
And us Californians? We made were the ones that passed a law that directly contradicted the federal law, which the state did agree subordinate itself to when it joined the union. Part of being in a club is following the rules, and any federal prosecution that comes from the DoJ is legit. That's not to say, of course, that California shouldn't necessarily be able to make its own drug laws in contradiction to the federal ones, only that at the moment, it frankly can't within boundaries of the Constitution.
Calling the US to a military dictatorial police state is to have about as clear a picture of the rest of the world as a hick that thinks British Columbia is in South America.
What's this? Another weblog? On transit?
I know you asked for people who lived in places where this has been implemented but I took the liberty to put in my 2 cents too.
In Brazil we do not have a national ID. We have one document called R.G. (Registro Geral) but despite the name it is a regional controlled ID and it is not guaranteed to be unique nationally.
Pros:
P1. Unique ID has its advantages.
I recently worked on a national children oncology system and uniquely identifying a patient was and is a problem. It is very cumbersome to guarantee uniqueness, safety, precision and portability and a unique identifier provided by a national ID card would be very nice. And we all REALLY want to be sure the right treatment is being provided to a child with cancer.
P2. Less bureaucracy.
Less documents to be issued, less fields to fill in forms, less redundancy.
P3. Less mistakes.
Identity theft apart we have still honest mistakes. What a pain in the neck was to prove that my dishonest homonym (I meant to say a person with the same name as mine, I am not sure if that's the right word) was not me when I was buying my first apartment.
P4. Easier to track the bad guys.
The good side of the big brother / privacy issue.
Cons:
C1. Easier to track the good guys too.
Privacy, civil liberties, etc may suffer abuses having an instrument that would make it easier to track everyone.
Did you watch "V" ? I liked it.
Any other cons ?
Considering these points I would say YES, let's go for it.
Best regards to all,
mau.
"Think globally, act locally".
I suspect the main difference between Switzerland and the US, beside size, obviously, is social. Switzerland is a settled country, where the government has a pretty good idea where its citizens are: people have ID cards, and are supposed to register in the place they live - most men also have to register with the army. All in all, people don't seem to worried about the government, but then again, Switzerland has a weak executive and direct democracy.
The funny thing for me is, the prospect of national ID cards raises such a ruckus, but nobody talks a lot about the requirements the US imposes on foreigner's passports. First the US required machine readable passports, and now it wants biometric information. Basically, the Swiss government will collect biometric information about me not because it wants to, but because of the US.
I fail to see your point. I have ended up with multiple identity cards (driver's licenses) in the US with different addresses under the current system (I invalidated all but one). So, this is an issue that exists under the current system as well, and introducing a national ID card system without a database doesn't make it any worse. Whether we would decide to address this issue as part of a move to a national ID card system is an orthogonal question. In fact, for many purposes, multiple identities are not a problem.
In fact, there doesn't have to be a single national ID; we might well have a national ID card for which multiple identities are easy to obtain, and another one that is guaranteed in some way to be issued only once per person. That's effectively the situation we already have, with driver's licenses and similar documents fulfilling the first function, and birth certificates and passports the latter.
Ok one thing we need to makes sure we all understand is that we have three branches of government in the US. No these are not George Bush, Dick Cheney and Karl Rove. They are the Executive branch, Legislative branch, and the Judiciary. Officially these three branches (plus the Media as the virtual fourth branch, according to the framers) are supposed to serve as a system of checks and balances for each other.
With that out of the way, a lot of Americans are currently beginning to realize that to the Bush administration seperation of powers means isolation of powers.
This is especially so with the war on terror, where the executive branch oversees every step of the process. It starts with the president and his advisors that set the policy as to what the indicia for terrorists and enemy combatants are supposed to be (executive branch). Then the intelligence agencies get involved to do the investigation (executive branch). The information is reviewed by the NSA (executive branch). The information is then reported back to the president, his advisors, or a military tribunal (executive branch). The trial is conducted by the tribunal (executive branch) and the punishment is doled out by the military prison, with civilian interrogation by the CIA or other equivalent group (also executive branch). See a trend?
I just don't like the judge, jury and executioner having access to all that information, so that they may try to squeeze someone if they don't like their stance on policy (and yes this has happened to people, such as social networking and community groups, even senior citizen societies).
Anyway.. just sayin...
National IDs give me the heebeejeebees
It's population control, everything governments do is all about population control. And money/power also, which is the reason for population control anyway.
There are plenty of people who trust the government about everything they do, or just flat out don't care about anything, and just go on about life not giving a fuck as long as they're making money.
I could go on, but this is my question:
WTF is in the water these days?
And yes smartass, I know there is H20 in it.
Are National ID Cards a Good Idea?
No.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
If the ID is neutral and uniquely identifies the person carring it and each living person has a right to one without any discriminatory markings on them ... so if the card is _really_ only a peronal ID, then it could be a good idea. Identity theft and other things would become much more difficult.
The bureau handing out the cards should be directly controlled by the people and be law required to be neutral. The cards could have SSN and other info on them and be used as a transport medium for own usage like bank account access or medical data if one whishes.
If all that would be than they'd be an advantage and would make life easyer imho. We've got compulsory IDs here in germany. The most bugging thing about them is that they are to big to fit into a wallet without folding and that they can't be used for usefull stuff.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
The right to keep activities conducted in one area of life from being correlated and limited by activities conducted in another area of life.
Germany is a federation aswell. Where do you draw the line?
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Before a National ID is issued the person should be verified to be a US Citizen or registered Visa holder with no ties to terrorist networks (background check is needed). Instead of using a SSN, a National ID number should be used very much like using a Driver's License Number instead of the SSN, to prevent fraud of SSNs. There needs to be a holigram on the National ID card, to foil counterfets. It needs to be required for holding jobs to show a National ID card, in case of a Visa holder it should show the expiration date of the Visa on it. It should double as a driver's license and allow the smart chip part to store the driver's license number on it, along with proof of insurance. The National ID card can be keyed with credit card numbers so you can shop with it and provide biometric info (thumbprint) that you are the holder of the card, and it allows you to choose what bank account or credit card or debit card to charge for payments. Libraries should be able to use it for a library card. You can swipe it into a computer to verify your identity after a biometic scan of your thumb. There needs to be many uses for the National ID card to get people to carry it on them at all times.
Right now in the USA we have Driver's Licenses and State IDs which vary by the state. The 911 hijackers were able to use Driver's Licenses and one of them was caught by the Police for a traffic violation, but he was let go. Somehow he had a driver's license from a state that did not require checking and even gave them to illegal aliens, which causes problems in our system.
National ID cards I am for, putting a mark or chip on my forehead or hand or arm, I am not for. I don't want a mark of the beast to be used for ID.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
Since, as the question states, there are other countries doing this we should have some recent historical data to back up such claims.
Each country's experience with photo ID cards is indeed different from every other country (not to mention, the experiences are evolving--the photo ID in the US for the first 10-20 years they were omnipresent (1970s and 1980s) was heavily rooted in financial transactions (everybody and their grandmother paid for their groceries with checks when I was a kid.) Today, financial transactions are becoming far less dependent on ID, and if you open an account online or via mail, you don't even have to show ID once.) What's funny to me is that IDs are, in my mind, an old-fashioned solution to the issues of verifying identity, when better, less centralized solutions already exist. Alas, governments like the cult of the ID.
Quite a lot of Europeans and Asians might be defending ID cards...their experience with ID cards tend to be very bureaucratic in nature--though a lot of those bureaucratic transactions are performed in less ID centric countries with other identification processes which are just as viable/effective/fraud-free (and sometimes, cheaper, since ID cards and the infrastructure required for them are expensive.) Since bureaucratic processes are just not targets for fraud, to imply that the cards don't invite fraud is fatuous, because other countries can do the same processes without the fraud. It's when the card is burdened with transactions that could invite fraud (such as granting of immediate credit) is where ID fraud begins.
There is something I call the "photo ID culture" which sets in...it's the idea that people expect certain types of transactions to require/demand photo ID because similar transactions are done with ID, when in reality the ID may add nothing to the security of the transaction. The recent push in the US for ID for voting is an example of this. In a lot of instances, people coming from National ID countries are advocates of the photo ID culture of that country and therefore can't really imagine it any other way.) Since the acquisition of ID in each country is typically accompanied by a milestone (age in National ID countries, driving rights in the US) then the initial acquisition of the ID is looked at in a positive light (the idea that the ID is liberating.) I think the average slashdotter realizes that this is a farce, in that the ID enrollment process is highly intrusive, and the burden of carrying around the card involves a burden of proof that falls on the citizen, and not one that falls onto the state.
The summary of the above is that the ID experience in a lot of nations is not, strictly speaking, malcious, it's just not particularly useful or justifiable. (Keep in mind, I find there is a malice involved in requiring that someone be photographed and enrolled in a computer system they don't want to be in. If it's so nice and unobtrusive to have an ID card, why should a citizen be forced to have one?)
Modern day (non-nazi) examples of ID abuse come from Israel and South Africa. Israel has used its ID cards (which do indicate the religion of the card holder) as a way of controlling movements of its population within particular areas, and, frankly, as a way of hassling Palestinians (which became so severe a few years ago that it earned a rebuke from the UN.) Though here's a recent example.
I think the Israeli examples are ideal, because they show how individuals can be effectively castrated by the government if their ID card is removed. More than just the metric "can the police ask for ID card simply by walking down the street" the metric "am I human/citizen and can I survive uninhibited?" is a great way of testing the negative effects of an ID card.
South Africa, of course, used ID cards similarly, and they were key in maintaining Apartheid (their ID cards did in
I am a middle school student in the states, and I see a national ID card as idiotic, except it is a good powerful tool to hold down the weak. I feel the same way about how the social security card and state driver's licenses have been turned into a de facto national id to a point in the states. You can get a fake driver's license, social security cards, cash, and so on. Such fake documents which are undetectable for the most part, if you pay the right amount of money. Not talking cheap IDs that kids my age use to get into bars, or buy alcohol. Illegal immigrants use fake social security cards right now to gain government resources, a national id card won't fix that, they'll just buy fake national id cards. Same can be said about terrorists. And a national ID card won't stop fraud or terrorism, but will hurt the privacy of an individual. Also, it'll pump more money into terrorism, and the underground buisness of making fake documents. Same goes for the idea of a cashless society, it will all be exploited in the end. Only people all this will hurt are the people that actually obey the laws, and the weak/poor.
Like an old saying from my dead WWII vet grandfather, "Locks on doors are just there to keep honest people out."
Commerce isnt the problem, its the right to be free of government interference that troubles people.
"Show Your Papers" has been upheld by the supreme court, we already lost the right to protest, the right to defend yourself, and the soon right to vote. Almost every law is a class felony, good way to rid the citizens of their votes.
America, EU, WTO are perfect examples of corruption. Peaceful protests = mass arrests. Mass murder by police forces, mass prison population.
The government should be afraid of you, not the other way around.
Why do you think this is a Republican issue? There are plenty of statist scum in both parties who support internal passports.
All this national-ID shit started under Clinton, and Hillary still wants a national ID card encoded with biometric data.
You owe freedom-loving Republicans like Rep. Ron Paul an apology.
-ccm
Too much Law; not enough Order.
From my perspective it's 20 less numbers the government needs to worry about if they want to correlate people's data to determine whether the government sees them as a threat to said government.
"Every citizen of Annexia was required to apply for and carry on his person at all times a whole portfolio of documents. Citizens were subject to be stopped in the street at any time; and the Examiner, who might be in plain clothes, in various uniforms, often in bathing suit or pyjamas, sometimes stark naked except for a badge pinned to his left nipple, after checking each paper, would stamp it. On subsequent inspection the citizen was required to show the properly entered stamps of the last inspection. The Examiner, when he stopped a large group, would only examine and stamp the cards of a few. The others were then subject to arrest because their cards were not properly stamped. Arrest meant "provisional detention"; that is, the prisoner would be released if and when his Affidavit of Explanation, properly signed and stamped, was approved by the Assistant Arbiter of Explanations. Since this official hardly ever came to his office, and the Affidavit of Explanation had to be presented in person, the explainers spent weeks and months waiting around in unheated offices with no chairs and no toiled facilities.
Documents issued in vanishing ink faded into old pawn tickets. New documents were constantly required. The citizens rushed from one bureau to another in a frenzied attempted to meet impossible deadlines."
William S. Burroughs, the routine Benway from "Naked Lunch" Copyright 1959.
Remember, folks, we have to stop those illegal immigrants.
Spoon not. Fork, or fork not. There is no spoon.
this would be insane!!! INSANE!!! Don't make me come down there!
As a security geek, and an aussie, they are, as can be expected barking up the wrong tree. The issue is not whether we have identity cards, or how they are tracked in government databases, but are.
a) are they of benefit to the general population. i.e. will it be possible to include say, bank account, or medical details onto the card.
b) does the government protect us, from abuse internal to the government in relation to them. Trust me, it happens, The TAX Office (aka IRS) has had several instances of employees doing the "wrong thing" with peoples tax records. I personally was working in a government department (not even the police) who looked after police records - They were kept in boxes stacked in a spare office. I have also worked in the State Health System - there is ZERO security within their systems.
While the Govt geeks get excited about smart cards, the real solution is a) governance within the government (there is a strange concept), and b) not storing "data" on the smart cards, but simply storing a range (hierarchical or other wise) of access keys... i.e. Medical Records - the information that a paramedic needs, versus a GP (MD) versus a Health Fund (HMO) are different, and access to one's "data" should be very specific to the requirements at hand.
Personally, I think that this is just a step along the way. If some of the above could be guaranteed, then I would gladly have a subcutaneous ID implant, to replace all of my credit cards, driver's license, passport etc.
Given the popularity of tattoos nowadays, maybe we should consider tattooing barcodes on the back of our necks instead...
q
might erupt because of some random, improbable chain of events. I wouldn't care if I get questioned one per lifetime because the computer said I happened to be near the scene of a crime. Any inconvience that this would cause would be greatly offset by the decrease in the crime rate. So yes, maybe once in a hundred lifetimes, I would be questioned about an innocent-but-embarrassing situation as you described, and once in million lifetimes questioned by her little brother. That is a risk I am willing to take.
Since I am unlikely to call Pakistan and say "nuclear" in Farsi anytime soon, I am not too worried about terrorist investigations. As for corrupt cops, the system is likely to protect me from them as let them accuse me of a crime of which I am innocent, as the system is likely to give good alibis.
Thanks for pointing out another great benefit of the National Car Tracking system (the great reduction in crime rate!). This alone probably offsets the bizarre, low-probability problems you bring up.
These things do almost nothing but enable the governement to trample individual rights.
Please tell me you have concrete examples of this, and aren't just talking out your ass.
1. Tracking your reading habits at the library. (Why are you reading the Koran, you a terrorist?)
2. Tracking your movements. (You shouldnt be in the neighborhood at this time, you going to rob it?)
3. Putting you on political lists. (Why are you protesting against the nice republicans? Please step over here.)
4. We see you belong to the political group "blah", Sorry you are banned from flying this airline.
If you think none of these havnt happend, you havn't been following the news or watching any history channels.
Fucking stupid kids. Doesnt concern them until it happens to them.
Why isnt there any married men in divorced dads groups.
Why isnt there any support groups for men falsly accused of rape.
Perhaps you could discuss how the California State Driver's License, which doubles as a state ID, does "almost nothing but enable the [state] government to trample individual rights".
California is a great state to bring up, it's usually the state I cite in making the case against ID cards.
California began issuing photo driver's licenses in 1957 (it and Colorado were the first states, and were doing so in black and white, and I presume the photograph was not taken by the DMV, but was brought in. In this regard, CA and CO were exceptions, because no other state started until 1967, and were doing so with office taken color instant photographs.) When I was in Sacramento in 2004, I attempted to research the reasoning for the law, but was unsuccesful. (No state I've researched added photos to driver's licenses for reasons related to driving or fraud. They were heavily lobbied by film and camera makers for the photo licenses for the contracts, so a bunch of BS reasonings were made up, such as "better identification.")
At any rate, California was therefore the first state to feel the effects of driving license fraud, and they felt it hard. California began optional DL fingerprinting in 1978 and made it mandatory in 1982. This was argued as a method of preventing fraud, but California license fraud went up by 50x time between 1982 and 2000, according to the DMV, in spite of fingerprinting, electronic fingerprinting, and nearly 5 changes in the DL document to prevent counterfeiting. (The DMV, incidentally, didn't like people refusing to be fingerprinted between 1978 and 1982, and dusted for fingerprints on those individuals' DL application documents. This earned a strong rebuke from the California Supreme Court in a 1986 case, and I think is a great way of showing how CA DMV officials perceived their own power, and I think that dusting for fingerprints (which they weren't entitled to) by a state government is an example of a state trampling on civil rights.
I also believe that the mandatory photographing of each citizen is a state trampling on civil rights (curiously, CA recently terminated a law allowing individuals with religious objections to skip being photographed.) You might disagree. I also feel that the mandatory photographing and archival of those photographs is not a proper function of a state in a free society. (California has a database with the photograph and fingerprint of basically every Californian above the age of 16. Ironically, the justification for this database is to prevent the fraud problems that were caused by the morons introducing photo based licenses in the first place. (However, if that were the justification for the database, then law enforcement would need a warrant to access it, but they have free access.
I don't need to tell you that there've been plenty of stories of police in uppity California towns demanding ID of individuals in order to hassle them (for reasons unknown to me, Hollywood typically portrays Santa Monica as the instigator of this.)
When I visited the state library in Sacramento, in order to do my research, the guard demanded my ID to enter. When I presented it, she glanced at it for a second and gave it back to me.
What could she have been looking for? The ID simply confirmed that I have a picture of my own damn self in my pocket, and that I have a name and birthdate, though, since she wasn't comparing it to a list or anything, the name and DOB on the card was irrelevant.
It could be a silly security measure put in place by either morons, or people who wanted to make it look like something productive was being done. Either way, the implication was that an individual was not permitted to examine the state library without a state issued document that was irrelevant. I think that's an example of the state trampling on civil rights. (You could also say that that action was a good, example of the police simply reaffirming that it had the power to demand things from me, and irrelevant police actions whose purpose are not justifiable except from the point of police power are indeed examples of the state trampling on civil rights.)
I know this may sound absurd, but everyone's all like "OMG Governments want to spy on us".
Anyone ever notice other forms of government identification they already use? think.. SIN number/Social Security Number? They track your employment, how much you make, everything about your employment.
For Canadian provinces with health care, there's a health card with, amazingly enough, a number.
We're already numbers, face it.
Just consider it. A single database with an ID number for every citizen in the united states. At that point it is so, SO very easy to start associating things:
* Library Records
* Internet History
* Criminal Records
* Taxes
* Credit Card Purchases
* Driving Records
But that's not even the beginning. What happens when we start using this thing on a day-to-day convenience level?
* Swipe it at the metro
* Swipe it at the grocery store
* Wave it through the toll booths
This is kinda silly. When's the last time you showed your driver's license to your ISP? Or used it at the metro? Or in the grocery store (unless you're one of those freaks that still uses checks?) Or at a toll booth.
We don't show ID in those cases now and there's no reason to think we'll have to with a national ID (and this proposal certainly doesn't call for it, so you'll have a chance to dissent if/when that is proposed.)
You "associations" FUD loses a lot of it's oomph when you take those out of the mix.
everything in moderation
Frustratingly, the Oz PM John Howard continues to say that the card is "not compulsory", just that you won't be able to access many government services without the card.
I think this is a somewhat vague post to begin with. What exactly are they calling a national ID card? In a sense our country already has one, it's called a social security number. And by having a national ID card what do they mean? Is this a mandatory card? If it's manadatory then no, I think it's a bad idea. If it's optional and makes life easier then I think the majority of the population will get one. I think we also need to think about the national buget before we start making new laws and issusing 300 Million plastic cards. Bush recently raised the nation debt maxumum from $5,000,000,000,000 to $9,000,000,000,000 that means we are going to be spending alot more money on the newly dubed "Long War" This new card would also make life harder for people whom (qoute from bush) "illegaly cross the border and break the law" Those people are really just coming here for a better life they arn't bad, or vile. They just don't understand how the system works. And no one is making an effort to make the system easier for them. Actully there have been rougly about 23 new national laws in the past 6 years making life harder for illegals. The other issue at hand is having "big brother" look up on you. It brings personal insucurity to be watched all the time. My personal opionon is No. It's a bad idea. I also think this post was a form of a publicity stunt. FYI FOR SLASHDOT: THIS WAS ON THE DAILY SHOW WITH JON STEWART IN MAY OF 2005
It's not -1 Flamebait! It's +5 Funny. You just didn't get the joke...
Every technology can be exploited. There will just be someone there to make fake national id cards, just like people are making fake driver's licenses and social security cards in the states. Criminal organizations and foreign governments will have the money and technology to do this.
But, anyway, I plan to work for the world government when I grow up so could you save me time and give me the following info:
Your Full name
Your mate's full name and maiden name
Your childrens's full name
Your Home address, Home phone, Cell phone
Credit card numbers
SSN (for you americans)
DNA sample (blood and hair)
Iris/Retinal sample
Fingerprints
Criminal record
Work history
Medical history
Travel history
Internet history
Computer IP(s) and MACID(s)
Store purchases (Grocery, eletronics, gardening, etc.)
And anything else I missed. This will all be applied to our 100% secure national, I mean world id card database. All this will for sure make you safe from idenity theft, and you can sleep better at night. You will be safer this way, no one will every abuse this information, not the criminals, not your own government agents, not corporations, or foreign governments/corporations. Don't worry about it! It's all good!
Also, if you don't mind, install a chip on your person, and your car, so we'll know where you will be 24 hrs a day for the rest of your life. And free of charge we'll throw in a video camera with audio capture in every room of your house, including the bathroom, and in your car. It's for your own safety.
Thanks in advance! You won't be sorry. =)
1) Australia has more Medicare numbers incirculation than there are legitimate benefit holders.
2) Australia has more Tax file numbers in circulation than there are taxpayers
The card as proposed will hold the data in an encrypted form - so how do people independantly verify that the details held are correct (haven't they heard of PKI digital signatures ?).
The card as proposed will have your photo printed on it - but there will not be a digital copy on the card (can I change your card's photo to match mine ?).
One of the excuses is that it will help fight terrorism. Now Australia has no problem with terrorism, and the London Tube bombers were legitimate UK citizens with valid paperwork so 'having a card' != 'terrorist'.
They have also mentioned that the details (including photos) will also be made available to law enforcement.
This is the beginning of a Police State - started by incompetant politicians, for the abuse by unaccounatble bureaucrats.
I live in DC, you insensitive clod.
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
Where does the reliability come from without a database to back it up? What's to keep someone from getting a card with my name and making transactions against it?
It's a very dark ride.
This is a pretty common argument. However, I always see a common trend. "I was doing something wrong (in this case adultery) and I got caught because of some entirely unrelated event." As often as not, it's an entirely related event. If you hadn't been doing that in the first place, if you had been at home with your family where you belong(in this example), then this would not be an issue. I would like to hear an example that doesn't put down this idea based on your ability to break the law, or do something wrong, and get away with it.
I hear a lot of people that don't like Automatic tolling systems, in large part because it give the man ability to track them, but also because it could be easily used to catch them for speeding. Half of their concern is their freedom.... to get away with breaking the law.
(insert attempt to be witty here)
Its called a passport... A national id card is the same general concept.
Where does the reliability come from without a database to back it up? What's to keep someone from getting a card with my name and making transactions against it?
People probably will be able to get cards with your name and make transactions against it. That's because "your name" isn't a unique identifier and there are already many people that share names, and in some cases even all their names and even their birthday.
What they can't do is get another ID card with a numerical identifier on it that already exists on your card. That can be achieved without any central database.
Why is that useful? It's useful because services registered under that card can only be accessed by that card. So, if you give that card and id to your employer and to your health insurance company, they both use that id as a key in their records.
It's, in fact, the same way we are using SSN# and driver's license nubmers right now, only that it improves the security of the identification, eliminates duplications, and standardizes the format.
First we had slashvertisements, and now we have commentvertisements! Amazing, truly amazing.
:)
This post brought to you by jrockway widgets inc. The finest supplier of imagniary objects this side of http://amazon.com/.
My other car is first.
I don't quite understand why the perception of personal freedom is so high that it should override the ability to garauntee personal identification. Nor do I understand why having seperate or no forms of identification somehow means a person cannot be traced/tracked by centralized forms of government.
As a canadian citizen I currently carry the following information attached to my name (not all of these things are on me at all times)
(Fed)Social insurance #
(Prov)Drivers License
(Fed)Possession and Acquision License
(Prov)Health Card
(Municipal)Library card
(Educational/Prov)University/College ID
(International)Credit Cards
(Municipal/Prov)Bus Pass
(Gov)Birth Certificate
Now at any one time I carry identification from 3 seperate forms of legislative bodies, one of whom does not report anywhere in my governmental system. Each one of these items can be used to track my day to day movements in and out of various areas, using public transit, recieve pay cheques, and purchase items. Now why do I believe that having a centralized form of ID would remove another layer of privacy, when in reality it just confirms the fact that the government can already track ALL of my daily activities if they wanted to and already have FULL information on my persons. Hell, they know when I was born, and assuming I die in canada they will know when I died. So why would I want to slow down the process of almagamting these forms of identificaiton into a singular organized, tracked, punishable entity which could more acurately protect my information.
But maybe I just don't understand. PS for those of you keeping tabs there is one piece of info I didn't mention (International)IP Address.
I'm amazed the Americans made this about them so quickly. All the Oz govement want to do is know who they are giving tax payer's money to. If you don't want to the card, don't get one and don't put your hand out for free money. Simple.
Some of us on BOTH the right and left are inherently suspicious of the state and want it to have as little power and control as possible. For example the U.S. government killed at least 2 million people in Vietnam during the Vietnam, and at least 30,000 people during the current conflict with Iraq. If any other organization that committed MASS MURDER wanted ongoing pervasive information about you, you'd be shocked and appalled but because the state has indoctrinated us from an early age with public education that it is good and "legitimate" we give it a pass for it's appalling crimes. Some of us say FUCK that, and want the state to have as little information about us as possible.
Tired of all the isms, don't exploit people as an employer, or a government, mmmmK?
The Pew Research Center poll found 53 percent saying illegal immigrants should go home.
The majority of our Democracy wants tight borders. Only the elite that reads Burroughs (on the left) and employers of cheap labor (on the right) support illegal immigration.
The sensible center wants a sane policy.
What the heck is wrong with Driver's Licenses and Passports?
I'd rather use the billions it would cost to produce ID cards for everyone in America for getting to the moon quicker.
It's true that in Australia we do have a Medicare card that contains all of our claimable medical history and that we have driver's licences that are commonly used as proof of ID (though we can survive without a driver's licence - I did for a good 15 years as an adult).
h tm
However, these are currently separate. The only thing that my Medicare card is used for is medical claims (doctors, hospitals, prescriptions, rebates). It is not *ever* used as proof of ID in a non-medical situation. No one who just needs to know who I am needs to have access to my medical history (legitimately or not) and, up until now, no one would have had that access.
The 'smart card' would change all of that. All my medical history, any social security payments I've recieved, all of my personal information would be lumped into a card that I would be expected to show to people that only need to know who I am. The local Video Retail outlet does not need this information. If I were collecting unemployment benefits, the lovely government people in charge of this do not also need a card that has my medical history. It's not relevant and I don't want any piece of technology available to make this accidentally, criminally or legally available to these people.
It's not just about an identity card - it's about a card for everything.
Our Prime Minister has been quoted as saying "it will not be compulsory to have the card" which is possibly vaguely true. Just so long as you don't get sick, become unemployed or disabled, or anything else that you may need to live in extenuating circumstances. Aside from that, sure, it's not compulsory. Just don't get up in the morning and you'll be fine.
http://abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200604/s1624397.
So you want to know what it's like in a country with National IDs? Well, the issue is, as already suggested, not the card itself, but the possible matching of your various personal data when there's a common key to register them to.
I was born in Sweden and therefore recieved a personal identity number and was instantly registered in the Swedish Population Register. Later my parents submitted a name to go with that number. My PIdN is my identity, everything else can be changed.
I wasn't required to carry a ID as a child, but as soon as I wanted to do business on my own, I had to get an ID-card to prove that the guy standing in front of them really was Mr. 790812-9012. When i got my driver's license, it was awarded to 790812-9012 (and also carried my pronouncable name for convenience), so I could scrap my old ID-card.
The PIdN is fairly public, it's not listed in the telephone directories, but any cashier who ever have recieved a card payment from me has seen mine. Any video renter who as ever made business with me... and so on. I've memorized the PIdN of my family and some close friends for convenience. The PIdN is also the first thing out of my mouth after "Hello" when dealing with health care, banks, authorities, etc. Since Sweden's passport registry is public, anyone can order a photograph of me from the police (even without knowing my PIdN).
Sound scary? I'm fine with this. In fact I prefer it over the UKs ID practices, which i feel is neither secure or convenient ("What's your mother's maiden name?"). As you probably know, security by obscurity really isn't.
"select * from citizens where id_number = '790812-9012'" makes your skin crawl? How about "select * from citizens where name = 'Douglas Douglasson'"? I am scared of RFIDs, fingerprint registrys and such, but not of disambiguating your name.
On the other hand, Sweden does not have a DHS, so maybe IDs aren't for the US.
You are right about the arguments connecting to the Nazis being ad hominem arguments and thus largely useless to this discussion. However, I think that you too make the same mistake of assuming that we see things through this sort of ad hominem filter, and hence you make a similar mistake.
To me, the issue boils down to a definition of American Liberty. What is American Liberty? I think in most cases, most of us will agree that it is the right to live our lives subject to the least amount of government intrusion possible. So the next question becomes whether the National ID card plans would create less or more government intrusion.
On the surface the plan seems to create less-- rather than having a large number of government cards for this or that (medicare, drivers license, voter registration card, social security card, etc) you just have one. Fewer cards, less intrusion, right?
I am not so sure. The problem is that, in order to make this system manageable, one would need to have the capability to connect all this information together efficiently. In essence, a national id card system would simplify the government's work in tracking information on you. This means that resources currently used to simply correlate any data they want could then be used to look for "suspicious activities." It means easy tracking of everything from your last Sudafed(tm) purchase to your bank account transactions. It could even mean easy tracking of what you check out at the library, etc.
The capacity of abuse for such a program, i.e. to intimidate certain groups of political opponents is quite troubling. But we live in a country that doesn't trust the government. Yes, police must carry guns to do their jobs, and yes, this has a potential to be a problem but as governments become more local, such problems become less likely.
American liberty has more or less steadily eroded since WWII (with the notable exception of free speech law but that is under attack today too). The question is really how much or how fast we want to let this erosion continue.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
... we have had ID cards forever. One consequence is that I didn't even know what "Identity theft" meant until I cam in this country. And even now, I have to explain what it is to my French friends.
The National Crime Information Center (NCIC) is a US-wide database which local authorities can check for whether a suspect is wanted elsewhere. (Also other interesting things like missing persons and stolen property). This solution did not require a national ID card.
Well, i did not bother to read all comments but in case it has not yet been mentioned: we here in Estonia have an ID-card, it really rocks. Its basically everything You need, starting from a passport (we can travel in the EU with this) to a monthly self-renewing bus ticket. It is really small (compared to a drivers license or passport), looks good and contains a chip so it is really secure too. If i remember correctly, it was launched last year and some 900000 people of our 1450000 people have it already. Strongly recommended.
Since being anonymous is so important, I chose to write this as an Anonymous Coward.
IMO a national ID card will benefit the country by allowing the government to data-mine large amounts of data resulting in models that propose more efficient allocation of government resources. With the government using its resources more efficiently and better addressing and identifying issues, implementing the national ID card will improve the quality of life for millions of Americans.
Yes, a national ID captures your actions, traits, etc., in a database. Big Deal. The only reason I come up with why people are against a national ID card is because they are embarrassed of what they do/did or they are attempting to mislead or flat out lie to others. - Seems that unscrupulous people are the ones fighting against a National ID Card.
Here's the thing that gets me about people paranoid of national ID cards...
THE GOV'T/LARGE CORPS. PROBABLY ALREADY HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION ABOUT YOU! Chances are, they already know where you live, how much you make, who you associate with, what you like, where you've been, what places you frequent, and on and on.
Do you pay taxes? Have a SS number? The gov't knows who you work for, where you live. If you have a small business, they know people of which you've dealt with.
Worse yet, do you use a CREDIT OR DEBIT CARD??? Most people I know do. If so, you have ZERO, I REPEAT ZERO privacy! They know what you buy, where you buy it, when you've bought it, how often you buy it, what you like/don't like. They can figure out patterns in your behavior and trace where you've been in the past. Worst of all, these records are kept by PRIVATE CORPORATIONS which may or may not give a rats ass about your privacy. They will especially cough up your records upon demand by authorities... Hell, probably to any shmoe who has the money...
I'm not even going to get into other types of ID, such as drivers licenses, you should get the point by now.
If you don't have any ID, then I apologize. Otherwise... you're worried about a national ID card?!??!!??!?! Let me clue you in, Big Brother has already moved in a long, long time ago and has eaten everything in the fridge...
An ID card will not add anything to the equation, unless they possibly start gathering biometric information for an ID card, but not for the passport or driver's license. A "mandatory" ID card will also not mean that everybody would have carry one around, lest they be denied of whatever services or god forbid arrested because they don't have one or don't want to show one; "mandatory" simply means that every citizen is expected to own one and keep it somewhere, so that service providers can make services and be sure that their clientele is able use them. Whatever real world event or location, such as dinner with the President, would require your authentication, any form of ID would do, just like it works today. It's just another, convenient form of ID that everybody already has, but which also enables neat, strongly authenticated electronic services.
BTW, the existing US system with the only half-heartedly secret SSN looks simply woefully ripe for identity theft.
This is why national ID cards are scary (no matter what Newspeak euphemism it is called.) The government has a database of every citizen. Initially the database contains just basic details, such as name, date of birth, address, etc and maybe tax information. Over time more and more pieces of information become linked with this database, for example passports, travel history, perhaps even police records, medical records and transaction history.
This gives extreme power to the government in two ways. Firstly, whenever you present your ID card to a governemnt official, he/she can instantly bring up an incredible amount of personal information about you. i.e. The government now knows more about you than many of your friends. Secondly, the government security agencies (i.e. the secret police) can now easily generate lists of people that match any given profile. For example I've noticed that a lot of the recent terrorist bombings were carried out by engineers. Bring up the complete list of all single male engineers aged 18-35 with an ethnic background. Bam! I've got a list of 50,000 potential terrorists, better keep a closer eye on those guys.
My grandparents lived in Holland during the second world war. Holland had a very detailed and complete national registry of its citizens, which included personal details such as religion. The Dutch government had used this registry to assist in social planning, etc. However, when the Nazis took power, they of course used it to identify all the Jews to be rounded up and killed. Dutch Jews had the lowest survival rate of any occupied country, and this was because the national registry provided them with the complete list of Jews.
This piece of history illustrates that a national registry containing personal details is a very powerful and dangerous tool. While it can of course be used to benefit the population, it fundamentally entrusts the government with a lot of power over its citizens. The citizens must trust not only the current governemnt, but also all future governments, (and we don't know who they will be) to never abuse that power.
Disclaimer: A Bulgarian here. You have been warned.
Where I live people have always had some form of personal ID cards. Just little pieces of some strange material, with your photo on it, reinforced with anti-copying methods (i.e. small color threads, etc). It has my names in Bulgarian and English, my personal ID number, and some encoded information about me, which is illegible. So, in theory, this card is impossible to replicate, and serves as the only means of legal identification (some say even passports are not a legal ID here, only the ID card). If you lose your ID card, you go to a police station with your birth certificate and a photo (the birth certificate has your personal ID number on it), fill out a form, pay a small fee (which rises quite a bit when you start losing your ID too often) or don't pay anything (if you report the card as 'stolen' - that's what most people do to avoid complications) - and in a few days to a week you get your shiny new ID card.
Basically, ID cards are OK for me - I havn't heard of any identity theft cases here. And, if you happen to be without an ID card, you can always get your parents to do something for you.
We've had "analog" ID cards forever, so there was no great controverse when the gov decided to switch to eID. We were used to carrying some form of ID all the time anyway. It is in countries where the carrying of IDs is new that the people feel watched all of a sudden, I think. Only advantages here: harder to forge, simple way of logging in to gov sites (secured email by our post office, fill out tax forms, request official paperwork from your home-town, etc...), oh yeah, and they are smaller then the old ones -> bank card sized
-> More Tolerance Is Less Extremism <-
I live in Portugal. There were ID cards before I was born. Identity thefth is virtually unheard-of. And it's illegal to employ it as a data-crossing number between organizations.
There is a huge and important difference between unofficial ID cards such as driving licenses and real ID cards....
:-))
Nobody knocks on your door at 4AM to arrest you when you cutup and throw away your driving license (assuming your are not so stupid as to continue driving
I would be interested in what you would consider proof. I cannot understand why you do not think it is obvious that the police being able to check if a suspect's car was in the area of a crime would be a huge boost to crime-fighting.
Hell, National Car Tracking would almost eliminate hit and run accidents!
On the other hand, it won't be long before cars are driven by the CPUs anyway.
being tossed in the slammer, I will start to worry. Until then, I am not going to give up convenience to hide from bogeymen.
It sounds like a good idea to me. I'm always getting confused between Sweden and Switzerland, New Guinea and Guyana, that kind of thing. If every nation had to carry its own identity card at all times it would be much easier to tell them apart.
Machines ultimately had little effect on the outcome of Holocaust. Don't forget, even with all the gas chambers, the furnaces, the mass graves, the intentional stavation and allowing disease to spread; the Nazis still failed to execute millions of others that they simply had sitting in the concentration camps. The Nazis weren't above using Jews as slave labor either so one way or another, they would have gotten the job done at least quickly enough to bottleneck their killing.
In country ID cards are mandatory for anybody over 18 years of age and optional for people over 16 years. And really, I don't see the big deal. On my card, it says my name, my signature, contains my picture, information about where I live, height, eye colour, birthdate, unique ID number, telephone and date of expiry of the card. In short, everything I need to prove that I am me and not some little furry green alien from Alpha Centauri in disguise.
I live in Belgium and we have ID cards, the only thing about it is that it is a pain to have to go to the city administration to renew it from time to time.
... : it is far less easier to pretend you're someone else.
;)
Beside of that you always have it with you, it's mandatory since the age of 16 and you just don't ask yourself if it's good or bad.
Seriously, I was amazed when I realized some countries were not having ID cards when I discovered it some years ago.
I think it has some real good points: first of all we don't need passport to travel in a lot of countries that just accept our ID card. There is no question to know if we have anything with us to act as ID card as we always have one. Id cards are used to retrieve packages at post office, make changes at your bank account etc
I know it might sound weird to people like US citizen (I already discussed this with US folks) but ID cards are more a protection of your identity than a way to trace you.
We're now getting some new cards more like a credit card with a chip where can be stored some health information like your blood type, etc the idea being to use it more and more as a "universal card" for lots of services.
And just for the joke, teenagers love to take it out in bars to prove they're 16 and are therefore allowed to drink beer
No. The difference is that Slovakia is a former communist state. Here in Poland nodody ever made a fuss about having to register your address with the government to get an ID card in order to do anything, because it was that way for a long time. People have to finally learn that this is an artifact from past totalitarian governments, and that it is not normal!
I live in Denmark and we do have a national identity. Everyone has a CPR number (a person number) and everyone has a healtinsurance card that specifies where you live, municipal, what physician you have etc. The CPR number is a unique number and was first introduced in 1968 and is issued at birth or if you move to Denmark. The CPR is your ID number to all public services, tax, health services, banks and so forth - without it, you cant do much.
/. - but it is by no means an issue today - i believe people see it more as a daily help when you need to identify yourself in order to recieve wellfare, healt treatment etc. In Denmark we pay huge taxes, in return all have access to healtinsurance, libraries, schools, universities etc. The CPR number is your id to get that - as well as paying yout tax :-)
Mikkel, Copenhagen
But that is not a bad thing at all. You can walk in at every public office, townhall, tax office - anything that offers a public service of some form - and you are immediately identified and have access to healttreatment at your physician, at the taxoffice they have (almost) all of your info, so you dont have know it all.
Government misuse? Not to my knowledge. Its illegal in Denmark for any public or private institution to crossreference databases that holds person sensitive or person private information, which prevents any kind of single point of entry to persons data.
Identity fraud? Not really - not because of the CPR number anyway.
Unhappy people? I believe their was some discussion back in the 60's like the on on
yes, you are required to show "proper" identification in california when stoped by a police officer. And although you can object, you can and will be taken down to the local police station until you are identified. and btw, if you are stoped and searched and found to have both a california ID AND a california driver's liscense, you can be arrested or fined.
You forget that each individual state is essentially its own country. And now most people don't think of it like that, but crossing a state line is really like going into another country. Europeans do it all the time on a very similar but different scale.
Therefore, if someone violated NY law, then why should PA care? Even if they flee to PA? It doesn't matter because the person did not violate PA law. Now the states often have reciprocal agreements in order to assist with this type of activity, which often leads to extradition.
If it is federal law however that was broken, that is an entirely different situation because then the feds have jurisdiction.
If you break US law and go to Costa Rica, do you think the Costa Rican's will care? NO! Vice versa. It's the same with the states.
And having a government issued ID from ANY level of government isn't part of a libertarian philosophy.
Perhaps you had better study libertarianism a bit more by reading these two pages first:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism
http://www.lp.org/issues/issues.shtml
Libertas in infinitum
What they can't do is get another ID card with a numerical identifier on it that already exists on your card.
Is that achievable?
If so, how?
One of the most resented and hated aspects of Grand Apartheid was the dompas, the pass book. It was an internal passport that had to be carried by all non-white people in South Africa. An early version affecting South Africans of Indian origin was the centre of early civil disobedience campaigns conducted by Mohandas Gandhi in Durban and Johannesburg. Later, the African National Congress and its allies organised the Defiance Campaign opposing the Apartheid government over the dompas and other laws. The Pan-Africanist Congress's organising motive for their fatal march on Sharpeville in 1960 was also a protest against the pass.
Today carrying the National ID book is not compulsory; and the same ID book is issued to all South Africans regardless of race. But even until quite recently the ID book indicated its owner's race.
If I decided not to carry my ID book, most useful services would be denied me. I could barely interact with state services. I could not vote. Most trade service providers, including banks, car hire, air carriers, so on, require my ID document. The government maintains a database of all ID books, of all the registrants, of all those people's physical addresses, and publishes this regularly in the national voters' roll, where anyone can find it.
It consistently amazes me that we South Africans don't learn any lesson from our history. Citizens of no country, besides perhaps those in Europe who have been oppressed by the Nazis, have a better idea than South Africans of the harm caused by state control of identity. Yet there is no protest or opposition to the National ID card. And now there is a plan to upgrade these to smart cards...
Erm... A European Union ID card is valid in all member states. The same goes for an EU driving license. You can hardly claim that the EU is more centralized that the USA, I believe.
In Sweden an ID card is use by people who don't have a driving license. They are reasonably hard to fake, with various security details and with photo and details melted into the card. It would be easier to fake a euro bill I think. You don't have to get one, but for things like banking services you are required to identify yourself with a valid photo ID (such as a passport, driving licence or ID card).
The difference, and this is key, is that the convoluted approach would be under the states' control, NOT the federal government. The Founders were very wary of a powerful federal government (although they were a little TOO wary with USA version1: the Articles of Confederation), and you should be, too. The federal government has ballooned exponentially since the early 1900s, far beyond what its designers' intended.
Also, if a state's citizens didn't want all their information in a gargantuan government database, it could opt out. See New Hampshire and the "Real ID" business.
Being born in Belgium, I always had my ID card (without chip).
It provides following information: first name, name, full address, date and location of birth, picture, ID card number, national number, and gender.
Slowly, these cards are replaced with a new version containing a chip. This chip will contain all the information above in a non-encrypted way. Other information will be encrypted: the keys and certificates for the digital signing of documents. These will be accessed by using a PIN.
The Belgian government states there will be no other information stored on this card.
If you ever needed paperwork in Belgium, you know how long it can take to get the right papers, fill them in and return them. This new ID-card will let enable us to do everything on the internet.
To be honest, there isn't anything one can do about this change. It's part of the digital evolution I guess.
I do have more trust in my government when it comes to my privacy than I would have in others. The bigger questions for Belgians is how secure the new system is going to be once installed.
42 + 1 = 42
Initially there was a big announcement that this would be an ID card. Part way through Tuesday there was another article saying that the card would *not* be an ID card and that it would not be compulsory to carry it. The card will now only be used to identify people for medical and social security purposes.
As others have said before, an ID card is no use against terrorism. This is one of the big reasons the government keeps pushing ideas like this and increasing phone tapping powers.
I'd be more than willing to accept that as long as (a) I could run the same query on any other citizen, too, and (b) any and all queries made by anyone were also logged in a publicly queryable database. Total freedom of information.
In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
Here in the UK we have an ID card on the way. Despite massive objections from the public and misgivings from all concerned, it is going ahead.
The biggest issues are:
1. It will be a single point of failure. Instead of needing 3 or more forms of ID to get a bank account etc, you'll need one. Once you have a fake one, the world is your oyster.
2. Behind the card will be a massive database that ties you to social security, police records, medical records etc. It allows the government a hugely intrusive window in to your life.
3. The UK govt (all govts?) have a terrible track record for large IT projects. Always late, buggy, hugely expensive.
4. The citizens will have to pay for it and it's not going to be cheap. No final cost has been mooted but estimated are between $150-$800 per person and it's compulsory.
5. All the reasons given for it don't hold water. We are told it will reduce crime (how exactly?), terrorism (ooh, that always works, waving that card) and reduce identity theft. So far the government have been totally unable to explain how any of these will be reduced whilst people involved in the ID field have almost unanimously said it will make each area *worse*.
I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
... Yes, you were joking, but passports / ID cards can get mistakingly thrown away / lost / destroyed. In France when that happens, you just go to a local police station, tell them you lost your wallet (or whatever) and they make you fill in a form saying "I [insert ANY NAME YOU WANT] have lost my ID. I declare that I live [INSERT ANY ADDRESS]" it's officialy stamped and you get to keep a copy, it's valid 3 months or so but isn't considered official in any way of course. It just means that you declared you lost your stuff and that's why you don't have ID on you. For example I used this when I signed up late for university. I didn't have an excuse so quickly went and got one of these forms and managed to enroll.
Still, it's best to go and get another ID card done if you have lot it because they are handy to have for a lot of reasons stated above in this thread
and maybe in some other more backwards countries it is a civil right too.
At least you understand the intention that originally was the reason to include ownership of firearms, but you are delusional to think that it really will protect you from an oppressive gouvernment. It only means that the police will have better arms when they raid you. Is it legal (and affordable) to privately own the same arms and hardware the army,navy&airforce have? If not, then your point as private arms being a protection against oppressive gouvernment is moot.
The point of protection against criminals with guns is moot too: they will just make sure they either have the advantage in arms or agression. You owning a gun is not going to make any criminal decide to stay clean instead.
Another problem you are facing is not only widespread gun ownership, but that combined with a cultural tendency to settle disputes with guns(going back to the days of the wild west?). The chance of a dispute settled with guns ending with death is much greater than say a dispute settled by beating someone up.
This space is intentionally staring blankly at you
This comment is what is deeply wrong with the prevalent American ideas about gun control. Is there a lamer anwer possible. So you really have that little faith in your elected representatives that you need to have a gun at the ready just in case? What a load of crap. Nowhere in the civilized world are there more shootings between citizens then in the US but they still persist in claiming that guns are there for safety purposes. Incredible to any European. An identity card does take away much of your basic rights to privacy but that concept was a myth anyway. When you drive around you already needed to have an ID. This only makes it a bit worse. In Holland we need to have an ID from 14 years up with us all the time. I can't say I follow this law nor do any of my friends. So a law without enforcement doesn't do all that much then...
I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with your general argument, but on a point of information, the speed limit was brought in at 55, and later, states were allowed to relax it a little on rural highways. It was brought in to reduce consumption of (particularly foreign) oil when the global market price of crude rocketed all the way from $3 a barrel to the dizzying heights of $11/barrel.
Checked it lately?
I'd say those controls were more needed now (for the original purpose) than ever.
The only thing you can accurately describe as "Scotch" is a sticky tape made by 3M. And it's
There will also be an audit trail (for our benefit of course) that will allow us to check whether anyone has been checking our ID without authorisation from us. Which means of course that the usage will be recorded. Access to 'public services' is to be determined on the basis of whether or not you have a verified ID - for the moment that doesn't have to be the Official ID card.
So a minor alteration to the query mentioned above:
> select * from card_audit_log where id_number = '54392303122'
will pull up a nice 'audit trail' listing all cases where you had to have your ID checked, which of course would include age checks for buying e.g. alcohol, and access to public services, e.g. the local library. Also any financial transactions requiring your ID, application forms where you need to prove residence in a particular area, the list goes on.
As from some time in 2008, being added to the database ceases to be optional, and as from 2010 if you apply for a passport you will be issued with (and have to pay extra for) an ID card whether you want one or not.
I'm one of many who are renewing our passports early - before any of this gets under way - to ensure that we have more time to throw out this system before we get added - not least because registering will require a visit to a 'processing centre' (I kid you not).
I live in Belgium and I have my personal id ever since I was twelve. I remember I was proud going to city hall to get my first ID card. Although we are obliged to carry our id-card all the time, I have never felt oppressed or restricted by having it and I have also never experienced any problem at all with my id card. In 2003 our government introduced electronic ID-cards and decided to replace all id-cards with those new e-id's. I have mine since last year and am very pleased with it. The best thing about these cards is that I can attach a card-reader to my pc and fill in all kinds of forms online and sign them electronically.
People really should stop and think about this. They should stop comparing these cards (UK/US/AU) with other countries ones, since these aren't just paper cards with nothing more than some details printed on them, but electronic cards linked to an all powerful central management database that encompasses everything about our lives to which every major organisation and business will have access to.
In the UK they're not mandatory, but you WILL need one to buy or sell anything, to use Govt services, to use the bank, to use public transport, so in effect it's completely necessary. These cards are basically a licence to exist. The card is the identity itself: lose it and lose your identity. Also, the card can be revoked by the Govt at anytime: they can make you non-people at a whim.
Suddenly having lived in a free society all my life, I'm not threatened with jail if I don't sign up for one. Why? Am I a criminal? No, so why should my existence be subject to the full force of the state? Seems to me the Establishments of the West have become scared of their own people and wanna make it easier to track and criminalise them lest they lose control. What better way to do it than to tag and herd everyone like criminals.
I live in a country with a national ID card. Our cards are nothing more than a piece of paper issued by the police. Although I use the card for everyday jobs (bank jobs, medical jobs etc), my country is the top country in Europe in corruption and fraud. The reason is that while an ID card is useful for good purposes, it can be easily copied, and thus easily be used in frauds.
Digital cards are more secure, but they can be copied too. There is not a single electronic product that has not been copied yet; even encrypted products are finally copied.
The only real ID card that can exist is DNA. Unfortunately real-time DNA recognition is not yet possible.
All of these things - cars, Oyster cards, internet connections, mobile phones - either require some form of identity check to own, or soon will. When (if they ever manage to get it to work) the ID card system comes on line, that ID check will be the biometric ID card.
So, every car journey, every tube trip, every phone call, email you send or receive, and web site you visit as a UK citizen or as a visitor to the country will soon be linked to your ID, along with your fingerprints, iris scan, photo, and if you ever get arrested (not charged, or found guilty, but arrested), your DNA.
Of course, the cards won't be mandatory, you just won't be able to use a bank, or get a passport, or drivers licence, or visit your doctor, or get on a plane, or get a job, or collect social security, or vote, without one.
So far the government has found so little support for all of these things, that they've had to publish statistics which aren't merely misleading, but are direct outright lies. So what one has to ask oneself is: why? Why, if it's not popular, and is very expensive, does the government want the ID database and card? And the you might think to yourself, "this is a state that recently locked up a dozen people without trial because it didn't have enough evidence to prosecute them, and also arrested someone under the anti-terrorism laws for heckling a politician..."
The funny thing is, we used to say the UK was like the US, only 10 years behind...
It's been billed as the answer to terrorism/benefit fraud/identity theft/god knows what else at various points in its life, and at one point was even called an 'Entitlement Card'. They've more or less admitted that it won't make a blind bit of difference to any of those, but have still decided to press on.
They plan to start shortly by issuing identity cards to people who apply for a passport, at a combined (planned) cost of £93. The Government claimed that the scheme was voluntary, because, hey, you don't *need* to get a passport. Eventually they climbed down somewhat, and now you don't have to get an ID card with a passport. But - and it's a big but - you still get entered on the NIR and you still pay £93. So you're essentially paying for something and then not getting it.
Eventually the scheme will become compulsory, at which point a whole lot of fun ensues. The Government plans to summon every adult to a processing centre to they can be fingerprinted, photographed and iris scanned. Oh, and interviewed. Don't turn up? That's a £1,000 fine for you. For *every time* you don't turn up. Need to amend your details on your nice shiny new card? You pay the Government. Lose your card? You pay the Government. The list goes on.
Coupled with the fact that the UK Government never seems to get its IT systems quite right, we're heading for a nightmare. I certainly don't want somebody, possibly with a grudge or who could be bribed to have access to a multitude of information on me. There's no security from the perspective of the card either - the possibility of them cards using some sort of PKI certificates or such was ignored.
The UK Government constantly tries to remind us that the majority of the countries in the EU have an identity card scheme, but what they fail to mention is that most of these are just that - an identity card, in many cases without a central database. Indeed, the UK scheme would be illegal in Germany.
There's a non-partisan pressure group that was set up in the UK called No2ID (disclaimer: I'm a local co-ordinator). If you're in the UK, no matter what your views are on ID cards, I urge you to check them out and see what the scheme really means for you.
I'm also spanish
:)
You are a liar. You can't be spanish. Spanish don't buy a house but a 50m2 flat. It's called "ladrillo" economy.
The most bad would be a widely deployed biometric system, which seems to be attractive to a lot of people who are anti-ID card.
Consider: a biometric ID system implies a network. A network implies tracking capabilities.
Imagine a biometric system that includes face recognition, which would be the worst case in my opinion. The government could put you on the watch list, and get photos of you (or people who look like you) as you get on an off airplanes, go into public areas, shop etc.
If we're going to try to track some people, an ID card is the least intrusive on the rest of the people. (1) They are self-contained. Suppose we use fingerprint scanners; the scan must be sent to some central fingerprint database, and that query can be logged.(2) You know when your ID is being checked. You might not even know when your ID is being checked with face recognition.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
In Belgium we've always had them, and to me this discussion is weird. You should think about the consequences of not having them, too. For instance, this procedure to sign your creditcard : very convenient for those that 'acquire' them somehow. I never do, but then: I can always prove what my signature looks like : it is on my ID-card.
I live in the Czech Republic, and of course we have national ID cards as well. My objections to them go along different lines than those of most posters here:
ID cards create a false sense of security and confidence
For example, when you are buying a house, the owner can -- and must -- prove his identity with the national ID card. There are no other checks on his identity. So if you steal and ID card of somebody who is going for a longer vacation (and has a reasonable likeness to you or one of your accomplices], gain entry into his house, change locks, and then sell his house -- this actually happened to an acquintance of mine a few years back.
It can be argued that some biometric elements will make identification more secure. I think it is doubtful, it will only make the process described above more elaborate, but without doubt it will make the ID cards more costly.
Here in the UK we have credit card sized driving licences. It's a form of ID but we have the bizarre situation where it's not sufficient to hire a rental car. To do this you need your paper licence too or have the office call the DVLC and have you authorise them to confirm your identity. This is nothing to do with anything but is irritating. (Especially as this telephone confirmation incurs a charge). Cynically, it might be this awkward to make ID cards look attractive.
The proposed UK ID card will contain biometric data and fight terrorism.
Presumably the application process will be flawless and it will be impossible to obtain multiple cards to support different identities. Presumably the IT systems supporting it will be delivered on time and to budget.
There are objections to this because it's thought that it will be personally expensive and ineffectual. It may also be mandatory - there's been some to-ing and fro-ing between our elected House Of Commons and the unelected House Of Lords (which continues to resist its implementation) - when applying for, or renewing a passport.
There are other, liberty based, objections. The counter-argument is often that the government is at some level basically trustable. It wouldn't do anything nefarious with its information, after all. We're a civilised country that's benefited from a fairly turbulent history and respects the individual. Against this it's argued that civil liberties do not disappear overnight but are eroded, gradually, day by day.
So although in the UK we live a top-five economy in a free democracy over recent years the following have occured:
Before the allied invasion of Iraq >1 million people took to the streets of London (as elsewhere around the world) to protest: the "not in my name" demo. The week before this a government minister suggested it shouldn't go ahead on public safety grounds. Nothing to do with reducing the right to protect, obviously.
The current government introducde tough new laws to control demonstrations and protests. Again, if public safety is a concern, what to complain above. However, they then tried to retrospectively apply this to a longer running protest in Parliament Square. Sense prevailed and the legal system rejected this, which is reasonable given it's one man and some banners.
At the party conference for the current government an elderly gentleman takes issue with the Home Secretary's speech. He mumbles - unheard by the speaker - that the justification being given for the invasion of Iraq is nonsense. He's immediately bundled out of the conference by security. There's an apology later for this - overkeen stewards, etc. However, the chap was detailed under the prevention of terrorism legislation by police for a few hours and barred from reentering the conference. The apology doesn't excuse the fact that this happened in the first place: a quiet heckle by an elderly - and lifelong party member - is a threat to national security?
And there's more: an increasing number of cameras monitoring traffic flows, with no real indication how vehicle movements are monitored or how long data is kept; fingerprints being kept by police where no charge or caution is issued.
On paper, a single unified ID has benefits. But under some circumstances it's seen as the no longer thin edge of the wedge. We may have no privacy because many busy streets are camera monitored but this doesn't mean everything else should be tacitly surrendered.
very close to Germany, small and higly developped, have nothing to do with the survival rate of Jews, the only reason is the pre-war registration of their religion.
Nice story, the reality is a little more complexe than that.
is at the mercy of criminals, elected and self-appointed.
It is just more deadly.
The US military has been doing this for years. It IDs us well, as we've got all sorts of scanners that can access the plethora of information on our cards. Eventually this is going to happen, so we may as well do it sooner in order to work out the bugs more quickly.
What else can happen when an unstoppable force collides with an immovable object?
I have currently two ID cards: a French one and a Czech one. Whenever I'm in one of these two countries I systematically use the other ID for identification, age proof etc... Of course this works only because in neither country you really need the national ID to access health care, public services etc.
The problem isn't that in the US you use your SSN as your identity, a unique number, its good for that. The problem is that it seems to be used as authentication too. And it simply isn't sufficiently secret or strong enough for authentication.
is dicredited in cryptography, why use it in in real life?
"In short, once an accusation is made it is up to you to rebut it or it stands as fact."
This is wrong. In fact, it is up to the accuser to justify the viability of their accusation. That is why, in many cases, defenses can successfully move to have a case dismissed if the prosecution hasn't sufficiently proven their case.
If what you said were true, that wouldn't be possible because the accusation would "stand as fact".
"The government grants you rights, not the other way around."-- beav007. Yes, these people really exist...
replace word "Government" in all posts here, with "Society". The point of those posts becomes very clear.
If throw away "hate they know all my dirty little secrets" reason, here rises a topic of people feeling that social integration can threat their individual freedoms. Can it be a sign that individual freedoms in US decline?
Sweden has a pretty nice and wellused system of identification - the holy personnummer.http://www.tfh-berlin.de/~weberwu/wri tings/HOLY.htm
The system is really easy yymmdd-nnn(checksumdigit) and works very very well. Identity theft is really uncommon (never heard about one, except minors forging a ID to get into a bar). The "personnummer" is used everywhere, it is looked to you medical record, tax record, employment, bankaccount and a lot more. It's follows you from birth (you get one 3-10 days after birth) until you dies.
The ID-cards has to follow the swedish standard assocations rules to be valid. A card with there hologram is accepted everywhere and it's not uncommon that companys has there own ID card with there logotype as a way to tell that the person really comes from that company.
Most card allso has a barcode imprinted on the back to allow shops to easily enter you 'personnummer' when you use a creditcard.
I'm also swiss, that's why I addd this here.
.. Tadaaa!
The point ist what is stopping identity-theft isn't that ID-Cards. It is
Strong privacy protection laws
Which, by the way, the president of the country with the biggest identify-theft problem in the world does not like to have enacted; he'd rather does not want to interfere with companies selling and doing otherwise bollocks with your personal data. We say "sälber gschuld" to something like that here in switzerland.
"The more prohibitions there are, The poorer the people will be" -- Lao Tse
I talk about the totalitarian authority.
And If It is necessary, when in power, they will force you to register or die. And if you resist, you will probably be turned out by your neighbourg who support the government, not by your name in the DB.
People have this strange idea that dictators have no followers that are happy they are in power and want to help them.
Finland doesn't have a so called ID Card but like our neighbor Sweden we have a social security number which identifies you and makes you different from all the other people with the same name. We've had the system for over 60 years now I think, and there haven't been any major abusies. You use the number when you make any kinds of contracts and because of this you can access and modify your data easily. This is also the reason the number is secret and nobody will tell you theirs if you don't have a good reason to ask it. We actually had a lawsuit regarding whether video rentals can ask you your number. They were given the permission assuming they do like everyone else asking it: report to the government that they are keeping a register. Thus it follows that if you start collecting these numbers without a good reason and an announcement, it's a crime as itself. You don't even have to use them. And furthermore you can ask anyone collecting this information what they have on you and they are obliged to give it to you. If they don't, it's a Serious Thing(tm).
This all may sound scary but I actually think the number is a good thing. And don't get me wrong, I like secrecy and hate government snooping and am a bit paranoid too like every slashdotter. But in any case I think the benefits this system has easily outweight it's negative aspects. You can't get a job, rent a house, get a driver's license, get social welfare, go to the hospital etc. without having this number. This means that living in Finland without social security number is basically impossible for periods longer than few weeks. That's why it's extremely difficult to be an illegal immigrant in Finland, or to avoid taxes. The government knows you exist and how much your employer paid you. You don't actually have to make a tax report, it's made for you! You only have to do something if you think it's missing some info (usually deductibles). Even foreigners living in Finland get this number so they can actually live here (and pay taxes =D). But I especially like the immigrant thing, if you wan't to live here, you have play by our rules. You wan't social welfare, you also have to pay taxes. Combining the registers I mentioned before is illegal except for the government, which checks every year if you were eligible for the benefits you took, so misusing the system is pretty hard.
Keeping track of criminals is also easier when you can differentiate every person is the country. It's so much simpler following people and keeping track of their actions. While the number won't help solve assaults and stuff like that (we have cameras for that), it makes white collar crime so much harder. Actually I think the thing saves my time and money as well as the governments. The system is convenient (a thing everyone american I know appreciates) and it doesn't invade my privacy unless I'm suspected of a crime and even in that case the government needs permissions to use the data. All in all, I have a hard time being annoyed by our system. And no, you don't have to carry a card with you all the time, only if you need it to do something personal, like drive a car. Even in that case you don't need your drivers license, only one of our many official cards which has your picture and number in it. The police can check their records with that number to see if you actually have a license.
You cannot hide from your society. If one can make healthy living illegally for decades without trouble, that does not mean that one can walk naked or praise Ben Laden on a street without getting in trouble in 20 minutes. Because one's way of thinking generally must be socially accepted.
National-wide IDs have not much to do with privacy. They are just a step in an automation process.
Implementing National-wide IDs in a free society would never destroy neither privacy, nor fraud.
If someone knows everything about everyone, that does not mean he knows something special, because people differ not so much. Whatever you've done, they will have to close their eyes if they have analogous records for many others of respected society members.
Besides, until society remains free, there will always be possibilities circumventing any technological measures of control. Just because governments can not invent technologies. Governments can only use technologies, invented by people.
But nothing helps if society turns paranoid. Nazis killed millions of Jews in Germany and in invaded countries, and felt no lack of computation power.
Stalin had managed to kill millions for no obvious reason, and people had no practical possibilities to hide.
Not that he had a perfect people tracking system. Social paranoia sufficed.
"If what you said were true, that wouldn't be possible because the accusation would "stand as fact"."
It is true. What do you think a plead is? It is an answer to an accusation (charge). In civil cases if you leave any line of the complaint unanswered it is held as admitted. Same thing.
B.
This is a sig. This is only a sig. Had this been an actual sig you would have been informed where to tune for more sigs.
They stated that the SSN was NOT to be used for identification. Also common contract law states that a fraudulant contract is null and void. Yet everyone is paranoid about identity theft. The problem with a national ID card is what is to say it would not be bastardized into something else . . . .
select * from citizens where id_number = '54392303122';
It makes my skin crawl, too. Storing the id as a character string? That's just vile.
Thank the gods that amendment number two ranks higher than amendment number 4.
"Thoughts are more powerful than any weapon, and I don't even let my people own guns." --Joseph Stalin
... seeing as you posted as AC? :-)
The problem is that, to get the benefits you claim, people will have to get their IDs checked very frequently. Perhaps daily to catch illegal immigrants who are trying to hide. Enough people will refuse to co-operate that this will be very expensive.
Currently, if you pay by cash and don't fly, you can live almost your entire life anonymously. Nobody checks your identity, and and nothing gets recorded on any database. This is a good way to protect yourself against fraud and also (seeing as you mentioned it) means you get *NO* junk mail.
Reduce, reuse, cycle
Every time you apply for credit card, a job, a bank account in the U.S. you give out your SSN. So, all that is needed is your SSN to track:
As for you little SQL query, this can be done today:
I had to right a small (pseudo-code) shell script to do what you did with one SQL query. Yep, THAT is a huge step. I am sure the government couldn't do that.
What makes my skin crawl is the way you use FUD and "just the mere thought, the possibility" of something occuring to support your argument. Let's apply it to some other things.
For a white male, there is "the mere thought, the possiblity" that he will become a serial killer, should we lock up them all up? By your argument, yes.
How about black males? There is the possiblity they will be come murderous gang members and drug dealers. We have to lock them up too.
Oh, and muslims. There is "the mere thought, the possiblity" one might be a terrorist, so we had better lock them up too.
The "mere thought, the possiblity" of something is not justification for anything.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
People who oppose the cards seem to frequently be afraid that some type of shameful behavior will be revealed. That is not a compelling argument to people who don't engage in shameful behavior. In the US the potential benefits of ID cards clearly outweigh the detriments put forth by overwrought opponents.
before commenting on the "national ID card" that is really just a wefare/medicare card or "Health and social services access card" (hmmm... i have a Bank Access Card... OH NO! it just an attempt at a national id card... the governments keeping tabs on me!!!!!!! the post office wanted to see it the other day and my drivers licence to pick up and pay for a package! AAHHHHH! the humanity!!!) how about you check out the facts at the DHS home page - http://www.humanservices.gov.au/idc.htm
Harro3800
I live in Czech Republic and we have had IDs ever since. I realy don't understand why are so many people complaining. In my country it is only a piece of plastic with photo, name, adress etc. I doesn't have a radio beacon that signals my position to the government. Neither it is used to gain acces to public places or to upload any data. It is used only for identification, probably in the same way as US citizens use their driving license. And of course by the police when they want to know to whom they are talking to. Where is the big deal then?
The second I am required to carry internal identification papers to walk down a public street in this country is the last time i ever carry them on my person. Fuck it. My grandpa and most of his generation almost got themselves killed trying to stop this 60 years ago, and I'll be damned if ill put up with it now.
All Troll + "offtopic" mods are meta moderated as "Unfair", because you abused the system.
His solution for the American Healthcare crisis: Fake Canadian ID cards for every American...if you have a problem, go on up there and get yourself checked out.
Here's the part YOU ARE INTENTIONALLY LEAVING OUT.
u ideme/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.dsp_content&conten tid=7126 /04/how-riaa-litigation-process-works.html
The prosecution (or plaintiff) must MAKE THEIR CASE. Without doing so, the defendant wins.
"What do you think a plead is?"
Apparently you don't know, because it's a "plea" and you're wrong about
"In civil cases if you leave any line of the complaint unanswered it is held as admitted."
You must still justify your complaint. Usually an unanswered complaint is admitted, but IT IS NOT an automatic admission as you claim. YOU ARE WRONG.
You give ONE very specific example and extrapolate that to mean that accusations are "taken as fact". That is completely wrong, and you know it.
More importantly, you completely failed to address my example, because it destroys your point.
The plaintiff (or prosecution) must ALWAYS justify their accusation, even if unanswered. If it is unanswered that is USUALLY a rubber stamp process, but that is not always the case, as you imply.
You need to improve your knowledge of the legal system before you toss about incorrect, inflammatory statements. Especially when you are obviously, demonstrably wrong.
http://www.illinoislegalaid.com/index.cfm/staticg
http://www.lewis-attorneys.com/faq.html
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/200
That was three examples out of dozens. Stop spreading wrong information.
"The government grants you rights, not the other way around."-- beav007. Yes, these people really exist...
In Sweden we've had one for or another of a national ID card for over 100 years, so it is not a controversial issue here. It's not mandatory to carry it and basically contains one relevant piece of information: your personal ID number. While this number is used as a key in virtually every government database available we generally don't have any identity theft problems.
The ID cards themselves are pretty well made and their authenticity can be verified in a number of ways (ranging from features that appear under UV light to the ability to check the validity of the serial number of the card both electronically (stored on the chip) or simply by calling a number. The main part of the security comes from the fact that everything is centralized and few businesses are not hooked up to the verification servers. Next year they'll be uploading fingerprints and possibly some more biometric data on the chip. I have not heard of a single case of counterfeit ID cards (at least not the current generation).
The ID card is valid throughout the rest of the EU as well.
As for privacy implications, well we have constitutional protection against aggregating databases. In general one government agency can't access the databases of another. For companies the restrictions are pretty severe - they are for instance not allowed to store personal information about you, unless you give them explicit permission to do so. (with personal information they mean information that can be used to individually identify you - for instance storing IP numbers is generally not allowed). In many cases even a permission is not enough - for instance the rules for storing the personal ID number are very restrictive.
So, if you trust the system then you can assume that your privacy is well-protected. Of course the centralized infrastructure makes it easy for all privacy to go away should the laws change.
Incidentally, that has been partially happening in the last year, since the London tube attacks.
Basically, national IDs and other such centralized data control/gathering schemes are based on the assumption that you can trust your government. In Sweden people do that - to a fault. But that's the consequence of having 200 years of not-terrible governments. Since we have not been seriously screwed over by a government in modern history, people become complacent.
So for now it's just very convenient. Centralization allows me to use the same national digital ID to declare my taxes, pay my bills and buy stuff. E-government is a breeze and the bureaucracy is basically non-existent. However, should we one day get a terrible government, then we're thoroughly screwed.
In California there are lots and lots of illegal immigrants who seem to have no problem getting a job, living quarters and such despite the fact that they shouldn't be able to get a CA drivers license.
... and from the most powerful nation in the world. ... now thats the kind of system that would really worry me because it will be deemed to carry authority, weight and consequences when in fact such a system is flawed at its core and trivial to subvert.
The US government cannot afford to destroy their low paid labour market so there has to be cracks in the "system".
Exploitation of illegal aliens is the American way. Most U.S. citizens condone the practice because it personally benefits them in cheaper goods and services. People may claim otherwise, but the reality is no-one wants their effective pay packet to be reduced by 25% or more to pay people a decent wage. The government doesn't want it either, since its has a major impact on the USA being competitive globally and keeping inflation down.
Here in Australia people in the similar jobs do get paid a fair wage and live at a reasonable standard, have health-care, but we all pay more in the cost of goods and services and taxes because of it.. but to me thats better than the shameful exploitation of illegal immigrants. Because the Australian economy is not predicated on such exploitation, there is not the need to keep the cracks in the identity system.
As a consequence identity theft in Australia is much harder to accomplish because the system is much more rigorous. ie a drivers license and credit card IS worth something. My wife just had her US passport renewed and a US drivers license was not acceptable documentational evidence of having lived in the US, but surprisingly a faxed note on high school letter head carried more weight!
Having lived in a totalitarian state, namely Sweden, I am not a big fan of ID cards. It got to a point were I could not use my Visa card issued in Iceland because I did not have a Swedish ID card. They did not care that Icelandic Visa cards have a picture of you on the back which seemed to match the picture on my passport. Nope. Only Swedish ID cards.
The Swedes have an answer against fraud. No one will get their brilliant ID cards if they don't deserve it because they require you to bring one or two Swedish citizens with their authentic ID cards to vouch for your identity when you apply! You don't know anyone? So sorry, but I'm sure Achmed and Zladkov will go with you if you pay them 300SEK.
Ok. Time for your final exams, this will be your last feat of beurocratic provess before you can leave back home. Just tell them your swedish social security number and show them your Icelandic password. The numbers don't fit for the 500th time you take exams. The examinor, having seen you every other week for 3 years get's suspicious. Time for a discussion (the Swedish equivalance of breathing). They decide it's probably because you are a foreigner. They are so cute those foreigners with their accents and silly passports.
Sweden being the "United States of Northern Europe" in terms of patriotism and their own view of themselves, it is hard to see how things would be any different in the United States of America. Some people in the USA (who probably work at places were I would use my credit card) do not know there exist an outside world, let alone a remote island called Iceland. They know that Iraq, Iran and North-Korea are bad, but are not sure if they are in Idaho or Alaska. They will be scared of anyone who doesn't have an ID card.
We don't use ID cards in Iceland but we do use our social security number quite alot. But like in a science fiction movie I had a problem yesterday. I did not exist anymore. I was dead or something because the librarian told me that neither my Social Security Number nor my name existed in the database. There an ID card would have come in handy you might think, I simply showed him both my driver's license and my bank card which both have my picture and what not. This being Iceland and everything, the librarian simply used his own library card and asked me please to return the book. He would probably get imprisoned in the States for aiding a terrorist who obviously was going to use a book about Tax Law to kill, rape and plunder! So what happens if you loose your ID card and a computer glitch triggers at the same time?
What other things will you have to use your ID card for? Obviously for buying tickets for public transportation. For buying bomb ingredients such as fertilizer. At least there must be a line somewhere for the usage of those cards. I can't imagine the Austrian Empire having been efficient, neither will the USA.
...I personally don't see what's the big fuss about. Back in Slovakia, we've got national ID cards (called "Citizen's Card").
Then you're obviously a very young Slovakian who doesn't remember when the Communists used the ID card to keep Slovaks in line. What's the equivilant to "Your papers please" in Slovak, and are they still asking it?
You owe the people who stood up for their freedom a little more than the level of apathy you're currently advocating.
May the Maths Be with you!
Why yes of course, here in Belgium as in France, Slovakia, Switzerland and all other Nation-ID-card-toting countries, we have a special police force going through everyone's trash at 4am just in case someone cut up their ID and threw it away... in which case you're thrown straight into jail! No questions asked! Yes-siree
But in the UK at least, this will be a crime, punishable by up to 51 weeks in prison. This is a fact, not some paranoid fear. Yes, they may not find out by going through your trash, but if they find out you are or were without ID (e.g., they ask for it, or you decide to get some new ID in future), then you are guilty.
Yes, you were joking, but passports / ID cards can get mistakingly thrown away / lost / destroyed. In France when that happens, you just go to a local police station, tell them you lost your wallet (or whatever) and they make you fill in a form saying "I [insert ANY NAME YOU WANT] have lost my ID. I declare that I live [INSERT ANY ADDRESS]" it's officialy stamped and you get to keep a copy, it's valid 3 months or so but isn't considered official in any way of course. It just means that you declared you lost your stuff and that's why you don't have ID on you. For example I used this when I signed up late for university. I didn't have an excuse so quickly went and got one of these forms and managed to enroll.
How easy is it to get the proper replacement ID, if that's only temporary?
In the UK, getting a replacement passport is a huge hassle, requiring people to declare who you are, and an additional cost. The ID card is tied to the passport, but will be even more of a hassle, requiring biometrics and interviews, and even more cost (£90+). There will be no simple form to fill out at your local police station - having a card lost or damaged will involve significant personal time and cost.
The problem here is that not all ID card schemes are the same. Few people have a problem with "card with your name and photo on that you are given, and you can throw away if you like" - the objections are to all the other things being proposed with them. But people hear "ID card" and mistakenly just think it's a piece of plastic with your name on it.
False positives will exist, but so what? Like I said, giving up concrete benefits to avoid problems that will crop up with extremely low frequency is silly. You don't stay inside all of the time to avoid lightning strikes, now do you?
Getting questioned a couple of times in your life by the cops because some clue wrongly pointed in your direction is not a big deal. In any case, the more information the cops have, one could argue they are LESS likely to make false positives, not more. The cruder the information you make them work with, the more mistakes they will make. The cops aren't going to question everyone whose car was within a mile of the hypothetical murder. They are going to question everyone whose car was within a mile of the murder AND some other tidbit or three of information connects them to the crime. The only way to insure no false positives is to have no crime investigation at all, which would be absurd. Assuming you agree, why do you think having the cops work with as little information as possible will make the situation any better?
"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest."
-- Mahatma Ghandi, "Gandhi, An Autobiography", page 446
Seems to be what 99.9% of those against national ID are expecting to hear in the US. Seems kind of silly, honestly, even to an American.
The holes in the argument are pretty obvious:
(1) Social Security numbers: Even today, the lunatic fringe considers this to be a "mark of the beast". You cannot apply for benefits, pay your taxes, or for that matter, obtain a job without presenting this old fashioned, still printed on paper card stock, document. Interestingly, you cannot get more than 10 duplicate copies issued within your entire lifetime, which means if you're in a disaster prone region or high crime area where such documents could go missing at any given time, you're no longer allowed to replace your card after that point.
Because of existing US laws, no employer can give you a job legally, without seeing (and often obtaining a hard copy of, which of course leaves a ton of fraud possibilities) your social security card, but that won't stop anyone who has access to a semidecent printer. If sufficient security for a NID is implemented, you can avoid this hassle right off the bat (unless, of course, the limit that exists for a SS card applies to the NID as well).
(2) Photo ID/Drivers licenses: Similarly, you cannot obtain a bank account, job, purchase cigarettes or alcohol without a state issued ID. Sometimes you can't even get the above without switching your ID over from whatever state it was issued in. Bar codes? Those are ignored for the most part. All it takes is a thin holographic film laminate to convince the untrained eye that the ID is in fact legit. Interestingly, said bar code will most likely be incorporated into a NID card, with (more than likely) the exact same information.
Before 9/11, anyone with a state issued ID could cross the border to and from Canada and Mexico, but now you have to bring a birth certificate and/or passport to boot. Hypothetically, it would take very little for someone to pilfer a state issued ID and make a fake, anyone who is already a criminal with enough to hide could do this, so if your card could report itself as a forgery, it would be easier to protect your identity.
Now as for birth certificates themselves, there's still absolutely no protection against fraud. Any sufficiently skilled counterfeiter can make an authentic looking certificate with watermarking and a nice little notary seal. And guess what document will allow you to obtain both a state issued ID and a NID without any fuss?
So in essense, both forms of ID are insufficient at preventing identity theft, because anyone with enough incentive won't *need* to copy your ID, either physically, or via RFID sniffing.
(3) Compulsive ID: It's unlikely that people will be forced to have a card with them, just like now. There's a couple million gutterpunks, rainbow hippies, homeless guys, anarchists, etc, who don't bother with ID today. What happens to them when they're detained without said ID? They're held a few hours or days longer until their ID is verified and their names are checked against existing arrest warrants. What'll happen with a NID? Same thing.
End result? Secret agent man, secret agent man, they've given you a number and taken away your name. It's the same way now that it's been 10-30 years ago. I remember how everyone was freaking out about bar codes way back when, that these exact same potential abuses were used as an argument against their use.
Almost makes you wish psychic paper existed, eh?
Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
The first card issued to the first person has the number '1' on it.
The second card issued to the second person has the number '2'.
Unfortunately, without a central database, they also can't issue you a copy of your card.
For the stupid:
The fact that no two people are identical doesn't mean there are not broader categories of identity.
See "Removing Lewontin's Fallacy from Hamilton's Rule".
For the dim:
Of course this doesn't work for all national identities but it does for people who believe that nations are extended families.
Seastead this.
By that logic, anything that makes the government more efficient is a tool of oppression.
And by your logic, invading Iraq was a good idea becuase it killed a few terrorists.
There is little evidence that ID cards make the government more efficient at anything other than genocide.
"Liberty has never come from Government. Liberty has always come from the subjects of it The history of liberty is a history of limitations of governmental power, not the increase of it." - Woodrow Wilson
My earlier post on this thread.
select * from citizens where id_number = '54392303122';
makes my fucking skin crawl. Where they go from, what the next step is, there I leave up to your imagination, but I can tell you that it's not a future I could ever live in.
select * from citizens where SSN = 'xxx-xx-xxxx';
We already have the numbers, mate.
select * from state_citizens where license_number = '1234567';
We already carry ID cards.
The only change? My license number would be my social security number.
Or did you not realize your skin should have been crawling decades ago?
The national ID number is a private data, like your phone number. Nobody knows which is your national ID number
Not really. Go check the census data before next election and you can read the DNI and birth date of your neighbours.
Of course, they can be faked, like everything, but it's not easy at all for a common individual to do it.
Do you know that many ETA members caught on the road have fake police badges?
Hi there!
h p
I wonder which country you're referring to (with such stringent punishment for possessing a lethal weapon).
An interesting (but tangential) thought is the frequent conflation in government-run schools in the U.S. of "weapon" with "anything that can be used as a weapon." (Not that this is confined to schools, of course.)
I certainly wouldn't want to be sent to jail for 25 years for possessing a nail clipper on government property (or my own); see
http://www.nospank.net/n-e64.htm and
http://www.zerointelligence.net/archives/000654.p
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
I used to have one of those. It wasn't an ID card; it was an entire booklet (pink in color; we used to make a lot of jokes about it), and it was handled pretty much like an internal passport. It included employment information (which looked more like a visa), and other stamps. One of the most common abuses of the ID card then was for the military police to check the IDs of all people of enlistment age, to see whether they had a record of them being in the army. If they did, and they were caught not wearing a uniform, they were arrested.
However, that doesn't change my opinion about national ID cards. Having lived in the US for the past 12 years, I learned that I needed either my passport or a driver's license to function normally. And unlike communist Czechoslovakia, where abuses of IDs were state-mandated, I've experienced enough ID-related abuses in the US on the local level. In addition, once communism fell and the country split, and we got issued our new ID cards, the government was really good at not abusing them at all. As such, I really see no difference in having one or not.
By Jonathan Marino
April 25, 2006
The head of the Homeland Security Department's visitor tracking program on Tuesday called for the creation of a "global ID management system" to make travel easier while enhancing security...
[Jim] Williams said he wants to join forces with several DHS agencies to develop a global identification system that would cut wait times, reduce government fees for travelers, fight illegal immigration and, perhaps paramount, better defend nations from terrorists.
The US VISIT chief, who already oversees identity inquiries for nearly every visitor who enters the United States, said a worldwide identification system will better link nations in the fight against terrorism. In his speech, he likened al Qaeda operatives and sleeper cells - including the ones that attacked on 9/11 - to "submarines" that must surface to kill.
My earlier post on this thread.
While the original poster may have been overstating things a little, you're talking about individual citizens who have the right and the need to be innocent until proven guilty. The government does not have that right, nor should it. Citizens should assume the government will do whatever it can with whatever power you give it, as our founding fathers did.
Pennies? What are Pennies?
Think about the common attitude of Americans towards the penny and think about illegal immigrant criminals that don't speak English. You start to find lots of things in common with the most disregarded and worthless piece of currency ever.
Audit social security numbers, issue Federal ID cards and State ID cards as mandatory for *any* program even remotely are touched or associated with tax payer money or the public in general. Harshly punish those with severe penalties that cannot be lessened for anybody invovled with identity theft or fraud that steals tax payer money or resources meant for citizens. Sure, as anything they could be used for evil. However at this point with English becoming the rarely spoken language of America and rarely written I would rather take that step towards a more powerful and active police state, at least I would be able to communicate and have public resources available when needed or commanded by Fuhrer Bush. Accountability should be paramount when operating anything on behalf of the public.
Alternatively, don't tax citizens into complete poverty (You work from Jan to June just to *pay* taxes)and there might not be such a massive base to support this push. Cutting off the freebees might also curb the ongoing invasion seeking to exploit that which they do not pay for or even remotely support in the slightest way aside from cashing in and over-breeding. Rigid and strict enforcement at the workplace level with hourly running audits of all social security numbers along with not taxing people into poverty would cut my support of the ID cards. Until then however, if I have to get fucked over by the system as a reward for being a hard working law abiding citizen then why hell should foreign illegal criminals have things made easier for them to leech and exploit systems??
Fuck that.
Until America can move back to Libertrian principles again, I support any action that makes the field level and does not punish those who are citizens and/or obey the laws while paying extreme taxes for bloated services.
Several years ago I worked at an airline, and they did what was supposed to be comprehensive background checks. One employee, who seemed like a decent guy, was involved with teaching some other employees' kids to ski. Turns out he was sexually abusing them. Further investigation found that he was a convicted pedophile in another state, a place he never reported living. It was also in a very small town. Had there been a national database, he would have never been hired, and those kids would have never been in that position.
Requiring fingerprints or DNA samples to get identification papers means (to me) that they assume I'm already a criminal and wish to have me booked without me ever commiting a crime. So far the US does not have a national ID, but it's likely. I just hope (and have written my representivies) that the national ID is not some massive biometric database used to monitor the countries vast majority of law abiding citizens. Bush and others have been pushing for full biometric identification, and the next president, whoever that may be, will continue that push I'm sure.
Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women. When it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it. -- Judge Learned Hand, 1944
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
This does not stop terrorism, so take it off the list of benefits.
I [may] disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
This is kinda silly. When's the last time you showed your driver's license to your ISP? Or used it at the metro? Or in the grocery store (unless you're one of those freaks that still uses checks?) Or at a toll booth.
Unless you only use cash, the first three are already tied together through your debit/credit card. The last one has your plate number. The GP is saying that with a national ID card that is tied to these, suddenly everything is connected in very few places. At worst, the query becomes (pseudo sql):
select * from citizen,plate,bank join on id=plate.citizen_id, id=bank.citizen_id;
I [may] disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
Unfortunately, without a central database, they also can't issue you a copy of your card.
Sure they can. They can keep local databases with minimal biometric information, and only the originally issuing location re-issues your card. Or they can give you a backup card containing biometric identifiers and used only for reissuing the original card, only in person, and with other precautions. In fact, that's the way things already work and that's the way things should continue to work.
The only thing a national ID card should do (and needs to do) is to standardize the format of ID cards and improve the security of the ID number and the biometric identifiers. That would be a big win.
So, Shneier is right in that the things he opposes ought to be opposed. He is wrong, however, in implying that those things are intrinsically a part of a national ID system; they are not.
In Mexico the national photo ID card is issued by the 'Instituto Federal Electoral' (the federal branch that organize elections) and it's required not only for voting but for almost every other governmental or commercial transaction: cashing a check, opening a bank account, obtaining other ID from Passports to blockbuster cards, etc. It has been enormously costly but it has bring many benefits, these are a few that come to my mind ( in no particular order): Improved physical security - In some security sensitive buildings, government and private, you're required to leave your ID in access points so is very unlikely that you just leave out through the window with other person's laptop. Easier corpse identification on car crashes - Since all people above 18 are supposed to carry their ID for access to night clubs (for filtering minors). It's cheaper to create controls for low teach Identity Thief,. The ID it's very hard and very expensive to counterfeit and a fingerprint check is required for getting a replacement. Mexico's electoral system became, from being almost a laughingstock, one of the most respected in the world.
16,777,216 comments ought to be enough for any forum!
This is based upon the UK version of id cards:
I don't mind the idea of id cards, or even the centralized database...the problem is that I don't trust the government to do this a) properly, honestly and within budget and b) with my best interests at heart.
If there was a centralized database then:
I should have 365/24/7 access (via web, phone and wap) to it, and maintenance of it (like my current address).
I should be able to see all details that the government has about me on it.
I should also be able to block everyone from accessing it without my express permission(only a minority of the police and security services should be exempt from this).
I should be able to see a record of everyone who's looked at or altered my details (again certain security services would be exempt).
Any updates by government agencies should also be strictly controlled - I should be told before the update is about to happen and what changes it contains (so that I can inform them of any fuck ups that they often make)
It is MY data, not the government's. Obviously when companies compile these databases it is their data, but the government works FOR me not the other way around.
Obviously this is never going to happen not while they insist on trying to nanny me and waste my taxes fighting terrorism, and letting in foreigners.
----- I refuse to have an argument with an unarmed person
Ah. Thanks for making that abuntantly more clear. Well put.
But that is one more hoop such an evil cop would have to leap through, and since it would be stored by a different agency, would require yet another member of the conspiracy.
/. posters and wing-nut black helicopter fantasies?
What is it with
'Is it fakable? Of course.'
That is the problem right there. All it does is provides absolute power to whoever is in charge of this system and to the government. Said something the government doesn't like? All they have to do is change this system and they've got evidence that no judge or jury in the country is going to disagree with showing you did something illegal.
Call me paranoid if you like. Somedays I make myself wonder, but even if you're not paranoid, this sounds like a pretty bad idea to me...
ND
This statement is forty-five characters long.
that would be a country mile short of anything required for a conviction. Twenty other cops would have to fake various physical evidence. ADDING people to your ridiculous fantasy conspiracy makes it less plausible, not more.
Yes, agreed!
;)
The idea that a place like Liberia (characterized by unrest, lawlessness, etc) would represent a libertarian ideal is of course one advanced only as a pejorative -- a sort of parallel to Godwin's law
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
Interesting... I did not know that was there. Thank you for imparting that knowledge on me.
Libertas in infinitum
In particular, you might have noticed that the Income Tax was rescinded in 1872. Contrary to your implication that it was continually around since the Civil War. It wasn't.
Here's this quote if you are still confused:
"a federal income tax was impractical from the time of the Pollock decision until the time of ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment"
And yes, the primary purpose of the 16th amendment was to fund WWI.
For kicks, you might want to look up how the 16th amendment was actually passed. But I suspect you won't get that far.
What's the equivilant to "Your papers please" in Slovak, and are they still asking it?
I have no idea, but isn't the american equiv "Can I see your driver's license/some identification?". And what happens when you can't ID yourself? My brother jumped a gate in the NYC subway and was taken back to his rented room in handcuffs, where he was able to produce proof of ID. We have a very similar system as Slovakia (including a document number and a social-security-style number), and the only two places I show my ID are at the bank and at the border, when going to another EU country. The police has no more right to randomly stop me and demand identification than it does in the United States, and the use of identification cards hasn't changed that at all.
It might be you who actually needs to stand up for your freedoms, and understand what kind of reality you're living in before talking down to others.
In theory, this could work with CCTV cameras, at least in the UK. IIRC if you request footage they filmed of you they not only have to provide it but also blur out everyone else in the footage to protect their identity.
The UK has the most CCTV cameras per head of the population in the world. It would be pretty cool if Britons co-ordinated this kind of peaceful revolt, but I think there's a catch that you have to pay for the tapes or a surcharge.
But even if everyone in the UK did this, I wouldn't be surprised if Nu 'Labour' just changed the laws with an overnight amendment rushed through under some obscure backdoor in one of the behemoth-like Terrorism Acts.
AFAIK, in Canadadian democracy, Seals and Trees don't get to vote. Just the Canadian people, IIRC.
(Anymore abbreviations I can squeeze in? Oh yeah, IANAC. Heh.)
And what is a driver's license? a State ID card that covers the bulk of the population of a state already (not counting undocumented workers), leaving only about 10% of the 18 - 60 not accounted for (varies by state). So, that kills the cost argument to deploy since (if done on the cheap, no smart chips) there is new major equipment purchases and no new major staff increases at the state level
SO, if identity verification stays at the state level such a thing will be easy.
There are already interstate data exchange and protection laws that prohibit sharing of info - of course this varies state by state.
So... what is the problem with this again? It's not like we are storing peoples life history on smartchips- hell some people tell all thier business online!
Name, Address, stateID num that is all that is needed, wait that is on my driviers license already
BEGIN RANT
I find it interesting that some nations of the world (some south of the border I will not name) can do voting Id and get election results the same day of the election because their non-sheep population actually participates in the democratic process and have nation wide fiber linking gov voting locations. And some of these said nations have nation/province Id cards.
non-sheep as in Iraqi's voted with 70% voting rate at risk of death, you can't get americans to vote with a %30 chance of rain...
People walk 2 days in some parts of the world wait in line for a day in a election that might be rigged...
OK I have gone off topic I'll stop now!
END RANT
Secondly, I have a seen a lot of discussion of federalism and state's rights. I truly understand and support this concept, but we have to understand the way the concept needs to change with modern times. When the founders originally developed this idea, it took several days to travel between New York and Boston. Now we can make it from New York to LA in a couple of hours. While there is still a great reason to leave much responsibility and decision-making in the hands of the local state governments, it is unreasonable to suggest that the ability to verify someone's identity from outside the state is not an important issue from a national security perspective, a commerce perspective, or even a local security perspective as people move between states an into our communities.
It surprises me that for a group so in touch with the capabilities of technology, Slashdot users have missed the boat on the ease with which the collection of data could already be accomplished; and why they have no faith in the potential of well-implemented technology to allow for a National ID card that takes into account and protects the privacy at stake.
"Is it a miracle that curiousity survives formal education." - Albert Einstein