Slashdot Mirror
Some States Say National ID Cards 'Make Life Easier'
VE3OGG writes "Some places, like Maine, have outright rejected the idea of a nationally mandated ID card amid privacy, legal and security concerns. On the other side of the fence some states, such as California and New Jersey, have said that they welcome the National ID card and that it will make 'life easier'. One New Jersey official said 'All you are getting in e-government for the most part are things that don't require strong two-factor identification,' the official said referring to security that requires something beyond a user name and password. 'But as we move forward and start to deliver more and more complicated services, I think that people for the most part will want to know their government has implemented strong measures [with National ID cards]'."
Modern politics is just too bizarre. The Republicans used to be the ones who were for less government involvement in an individuals life, then the Democrats appeared to have taken up that flag, but now with the National ID card (papers please), both parties seem to be endorsing this movement.
.50 cal rifles illegal, they will be able to track purchases of ammunition and deliver jack-booted thugs to your door to take you away, or at the very least, prohibit you from doing any business across state lines or within states that ban those rifles if politicians decide to play that game against individuals. You can also kiss any anonymity away when dealing with private corporations as the National ID card will enable any and all transactions through banks, individuals and more to be closely monitored.
For all you extreme left wing whakos start hollering, think about this: How much longer will it be until we have to present a National ID card to take out a loan, open a bank account, cross state lines, and more? Already it is being proposed that you will not be able to board a plane unless you have a National ID card. So, what about those who can afford their own planes? Will they be allowed more anonymity than those with fewer resources? What about purchasing items like automobiles? Those who can afford to pay cash for an automobile in its entirety would be able to do so while those who have to take out a loan are again restricted to using a bank and thus the National ID card again. How about healthcare? Those that can afford to pay for services completely will not have to worry about health care insurance and therefore will not be tracked.
Before any of you ultra-right wing neocon folks start bashing me for this, how about realizing that a National ID card will essentially enable all sorts of purchase related tracking to take place. You can now welcome federally mandated and controlled tracking and access to guns. For example, when other states decide to buy into the fear and make
What happened to common sense and the political middle road?
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
I have no problem with a centralized two-factor authentication card.
I have SERIOUS problems with the "use your SSN for everything" society we have now.
Give me a card that I have the ability to password/passcode protect, with a physical chip in it.
Oh, and make sure it requires a friggin warrant to get the "logs" of its use. Warrantless searches make me sad.
And the USA is fast becoming a Police State:
l
http://home.comcast.net/~plutarch/PoliceState.htm
... to at least include a picture.
What was that? You managed to get some service(s) without giving out your Social Security number?
Well, that was just plain UnAmerican!
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
--"But as we move forward and start to deliver more and more complicated services, I think that people for the most
part will want to know their government has implemented strong measures [with National ID cards]'."
I don't think we want more and more complicated services nor do we need them. We don't want to be tracked,
x-rayed, data-mined or subpoenaed by email. Actually we want less interference in our lives.
34 States have turned down a national ID card.
If you were to dig down, I think you'd find that the level of resistance to the initiative is directly proportional to the cost of complying. Those states that have more modernized digital systems that they could more easily adapt to comply are going to be the ones that resist least.
There is an element of states' rights here, and the federal government has become larger and more intrusive into the afairs of the states than the original framers of the Constitution intended. The original colonies, when they formed a federal republic, were very conscious of reigning in the power of the national government and how much influence it could exert over the states. Over time, the independence and self-determination of the states has been constricted. So for some states, this could be a line in the sand over principle. But for most, I suspect, the real issue is expense.
- Greg
Start a happiness pandemic
Seems like the answer to getting something through Government bureaucracies is play on the fears of others. Don't worry about your privacy rights we are careful not to trample on them (I'll believe it when I see it as a law). But if you don't let us do this national card with 'strong' security we can't ensure you identity won't be stolen. Your choice. I'm pretty sure the states can implement the same security measures as this card can implement. Not to mention two factor authentication is the end all of security counter measures. All you are really doing unless you get into biometrics (which only work in person biometric devices over a network are just as easy to send false data as a password or whatnot) is adding a second password, if they can get around the first they can get around the second. Ma'am enter your password, ma'am insert your usb token which can be captured just like any other password. Etc... This isn't the best explanation of two factor problems but you get the picture. BTW, the two factor solution will be a proprietary one from Diebold which will be used to secure your vote placed at Diebold e-voting paperless voting machines in 2010
http://www.schneier.com/essay-034.html
They've now started adding biometrics to the physical ID card. Fingerprint instead of pin code. The idea is to use it when boarding an aircraft or buying groceries etc with essentially no need for human involvement.
The question however isn't if it makes life easier or not. The relevant question is if the cost associated with it is worth it. Having a permanent unique identifier attached that can be traced, well, anywhere is not a good thing if governments or corporations abuse it. It requires privacy laws and trust that the privacy laws will be respected. Ultimately it boils down to the question: do you trust the government not to screw you over and to protect you from corporate interests? My own answers are perhaps and probably. Right now there are some worrying ideas being floated by the politicians about wiretapping and Internet traffic sniffing so my first answer might change.
Still, at this point they haven't dramatically screwed up - I mean like a patriot act level of breach of trust. So right now I'm agnostic about how good this system is.
It is in fact convenient and efficient with an axiomatic foundation of trust that can be used for communication and exchange of services at many levels of society. One just has to hope that the foundation isn't rotten.