Slashdot Mirror


Mexican Government To Document Cell Phone Use

Alyssey writes "The Mexican government wants to have a database to track every cellphone number in the country (in Spanish, Google translation) and whom it belongs to. They want to tie in the CURP (Unique Registration Population Code in Spanish, like the Social Security Number in the US) with cellphone numbers. If Mexicans don't send in their number and CURP via SMS before April 10, 2010, their cellphone number will be blocked. The new law was published back in February and is going into effect now."

232 comments

  1. Attention citizen by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Respond via SMS?

    Sounds Phishy

    1. Re:Attention citizen by bensafrickingenius · · Score: 1

      My company-supplied phone does not support SMS. Is it possible that our plan is shittier than the shittiest plan in Mexico? On second thought, that wouldn't surprise me.

      --
      I am not left-handed, either!
    2. Re:Attention citizen by CommanderIsm · · Score: 1

      nothing different there then. - along with unreliable pc's outdated before their 6 months old running crap software needing updates - new hardware unused by new software - so called elected governments using the internet to spy on us - cos' they are shit scared of us killing them time for a change your answers on postcards - so that the thug's in charge can read it

    3. Re:Attention citizen by CommanderIsm · · Score: 1

      well said sir time for some common sense could not count on those windoze users to come out their daze and answer sensibly computers are crap - they truly are they are backward - slow and incomprehensible to many users - and the slow users are told to train up on the latest offerings - only for the latest to do something different - update xyz don't you know? linux - windoze both are crap - apple you don't count on account from copying other crap ideas - just like everything else done by apple time for something new - please what we have is crap

  2. Prepaid phones. by palegray.net · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I don't have any information on prepaid phone providers in Mexico; if they're as prevalent as they are here in the States, how will this affect those users? Can you just register the phone as belonging to Inigo Montoya and be done with it?

    1. Re:Prepaid phones. by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 5, Funny

      I don't have any information on prepaid phone providers in Mexico; if they're as prevalent as they are here in the States, how will this affect those users? Can you just register the phone as belonging to Inigo Montoya and be done with it?

      Worst case, you need a fake id. Surely those are impossible to get in Mexico.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    2. Re:Prepaid phones. by snowtigger · · Score: 4, Informative

      When I bought a prepaid sim card in Switzerland last year, they wouldn't give it to me unless they got my passport information etc.

      In Australia, you need to call to activate your prepaid sim card. When you do, they ask for your name and address under the pretext that they need it for emergency services.

      I can't be bothered making up any in Soviet Russia jokes, but I'm sure someone else will :)

    3. Re:Prepaid phones. by photomonkey · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, they'll be fingerprinting people.

      --
      Message contains 1 attachment: spam.gif
    4. Re:Prepaid phones. by houstonbofh · · Score: 5, Funny

      Lucky Mexican dead folks. They will have cell phones and everything. Here, all they can do is vote.

    5. Re:Prepaid phones. by KamuZ · · Score: 1

      All mobile companies in Mexico offer pre-paid phones. I know more people with pre-paid phones than in a monthly plan, i believe that's why they want to do this as many calls for extorsion or kidnapping are from unregistered phones. From what i have read, they are linking the info with the real CURP database, so info needs to match, but then it is not really hard to get this info. I mean, if you have like birthday and names form a person, you can look up on the internet (government site) the CURP or even legally generate it (no joking).

    6. Re:Prepaid phones. by snl2587 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Good thing I burned all mine off a few years ago, eh?

    7. Re:Prepaid phones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, as in any other Latin American country, even when you buy a prepaid cell phone you need to show a government issued ID, and the clerk at the phone store will check your ID against the government database to make sure that you are who you saying you are.
      All government issued IDs in Latin America, have at least one type of biometrics, usually fingerprints. IDs are indexed to a database where the other government agencies can trace you, like the Income tax offices, election registration offices, and such.
      For example, in Brazil, you need your CPF (the Tax ID number) for pretty much anything, even to open a free e-mail account online.
      Any police officer in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Uruguay, Paraguay and Venezuela (the Mercosul countries) can pull your personal info by entering just ONE of your many national ID numbers on their patrol car computers. And the IDs are many for real: National ID, State ID, Driver's License, Passport, Voter Registration card, Tax ID card, National Health Insurance card, Workers Permit card, and many, many others.
      If you are a legal foreign resident (as myself), you need a special resident alien ID card (similar to a greencard in the US), and to get all the other documents the locals have, except the Voter's registration and a passport.
      There is no expectation of privacy in Latin America. But one simple solution to not have your calls tracked and eavesdropped by the law enforcement agencies is to use VoIP with US DIDs, so your friends and family can call you from another VoIP enabled phone and if you don't belong to the same carrier, calls will go through the US Bell system, where they can get eavesdropped by the US government, but, as people here don't speak English often, they will probably sound as gibberish to the NSA, FBI and CIA agents...
      So, Latin Americans, if you want to keep your privacy just use VoIP.

    8. Re:Prepaid phones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Australia, you need to call to activate your prepaid sim card. When you do, they ask for your name and address under the pretext that they need it for emergency services.

      They don't take this very seriously, though. I have a mate who has, over the years, claimed Admiralty House (the Governor-General's house) and the then-Foreign Secretary's mansion as his address, and has given several deceased famous names as his own. They obviously do not check teh details very well.

    9. Re:Prepaid phones. by bensafrickingenius · · Score: 5, Funny

      My name is Inigo Montoya. You blocked my cellphone. Prepare to die.



      (My sig has been waiting YEARS for me to make a post like this!)

      --
      I am not left-handed, either!
    10. Re:Prepaid phones. by Maelwryth · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't think that will work.
      1) Use the phones of illegal immigrants crossing to America under the pretext of America tracking them.
      2) Use the kidnapped persons phone.
      3) Mug foreigners, and use their phone.
      4) Make other people buy the phones.
      5) Start own phone shop.

      I don't understand why you would use a device that can track your position anyway to communicate a kidnapping/etc.... and those are just a few suggestions off the top of my head to circumvent the law. I would suggest that the police force in Mexico is undermanned and that is the real problem, not the cellphone usage.

      --
      I reserve the write to mangle english.
    11. Re:Prepaid phones. by Reziac · · Score: 2, Informative

      So what happens if you buy and activate a prepaid cellphone in the US or Guatemala, then use it in Mexico??

      Yeah, this will stop crime, all right.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    12. Re:Prepaid phones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't have any information on prepaid phone providers in Mexico; if they're as prevalent as they are here in the States, how will this affect those users? Can you just register the phone as belonging to Inigo Montoya and be done with it?

      I don't have any information on prepaid phone providers in Mexico; if they're as prevalent as they are here in the States, how will this affect those users? Can you just register the phone as belonging to Inigo Montoya and be done with it?

      I don't have any information on prepaid phone providers in Mexico; if they're as prevalent as they are here in the States, how will this affect those users? Can you just register the phone as belonging to Inigo Montoya and be done with it?

      .tel domain names could solve this problem.

      issue everyone their name and it could be tracked .tel domain names are goin on myspace now.

    13. Re:Prepaid phones. by Allicorn · · Score: 1

      A Telegraph.co.uk article on this story suggests that this is specifically about prepaid phones. It appears that nearly all Mexican mobiles are prepaid.

      --
      OMG!!! Ponies!!!
    14. Re:Prepaid phones. by BrokenHalo · · Score: 2, Funny

      I used to give the address of the local Police HQ.... :-)

    15. Re:Prepaid phones. by ppanon · · Score: 4, Funny

      That could turn into a self-fulfilling prophecy someday.

      --
      Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
    16. Re:Prepaid phones. by ppanon · · Score: 1

      A lot of pre-paid phone plans are not covered for cross-border travel and coverage with partner telcos. My wife has a telus pre-paid phone setup but it doesn't work outside Canada.

      --
      Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
    17. Re:Prepaid phones. by photomonkey · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Undermanned?

      I'm a photojournalist who works in the borderlands quite frequently.

      Law enforcement in Mexico is an entrepreneurial exercise. They could have an order of magnitude more cops than they do, and it wouldn't make any difference in the world.

      The present prohibition is making a class of narcolords who make Al Capone look like a big pussy.

      These narcos have more money, more power and more influence than basically any other crime syndicate presently in existence. And it's moving north. Home invasions, kidnappings and drug rips are becoming the norm in suburbia anywhere within a few hundred miles of the border.

      Legalizing marijuana (and possibly cocaine) would solve 96% of the problem overnight. Not to mention creating new revenue streams for the government, and maybe allowing the US to once again step behind Russia in the running to imprison the largest percentage of the population.

      To the crowd: Face it. It's illegal. But your kids smoke it, your co-workers smoke it and you/your spouse smokes it. Its illegal status is not a deterrent. Wouldn't you rather know where it's coming from and that people aren't dying over it?

      Legalize marijuana.

      --
      Message contains 1 attachment: spam.gif
    18. Re:Prepaid phones. by iamacat · · Score: 1

      1) Criminals are dumb. Otherwise they would have figured out how to get rich legally, or at least on crimes less risky than a kidnapping
      2) Even if 10% of them slip up and use their own phone in an incriminating way, its better than nothing and saves some work for the understaffed police force
      3) Getting caught with a mugged foreigners' (let alone kidnapped person's) cell phone on your person doesn't help one's case
      4) If your girlfriend made a call to any cell phone triangulated to be around the crime's location around the time the crime took place, it's one good piece of circumstantial evidence.

    19. Re:Prepaid phones. by xtracto · · Score: 5, Informative

      If I recall correctly you do not need any type of identification to get a prepaid telephone in Mexico. It is just a matter of going to your Telcel shop at the corner of the street (there are more of those than there are cantinas) and buy a chip with "100 pesos tiempo aire".

      Funny that they provide a link to the Milenio paper... I believe that "El Universal" ( which has the article here) is better.

      Now, for those very paranoid slashdotters, note that one of the reasons they are doing this is because given the lack of such identification records, mobile phones are heavily used in blackmailing.

      That happened to my brother once, he was studying in Mexico City and he got a call which went like this:
      After the phone rang and he answered a shouting voice said:

      "Hey we got your brother, and we will kill him unless you comply with our desires"

      After that, a voice in the background of the telephone shouted as if he was the "captured" brother "please please, help me, please don't leave me"

      In the "heat" of the moment, my brother shout my name "Pedro, are you ok?" [not my real name of course].

      Of course with that information the criminals continued with their tale, telling him that yes they had "Pedro" and they were going to hurt him blah blah...

      My brother just hung up the telephone and called my mother (who lives in another state)... Fortunately for us, I have been living *outside* Mexico for the last 5 years... therefore I could not have been trapped in Mexico City...

      My brother wrote me an email telling me to ask me to mail back just to be shure I was OK, I called him that afternoon from the UK where I was living then.

      There are countless of similar stories with such kind of social engineering. Of course not all the people are as "wise" as us, or they get blackmailed in the middle of some kind of crisis (money, family, etc) where the scenario of a kidnapped relative is very possible.

      The issue until now (that the database is started) is that even if you had a caller-id and a number, you could not do anything with it because it would not be registered, or it will be faked. The current registry will require both an valid id (Mexican voting credential which is the national id) and a fingerprint.

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    20. Re:Prepaid phones. by palegray.net · · Score: 1

      My sig has been waiting YEARS for me to make a post like this!

      When you wish upon a star
      Makes no difference who you are
      Anything your heart desires
      Will come to you

      If your heart is in your dream
      No request is too extreme
      When you wish upon a star
      As dreamers do

      Fate is kind
      She brings to those who love
      The sweet fulfillment of
      Their secret longing

      Like a bolt out of the blue
      Fate steps in and sees you through
      When you wish upon a star
      Your dreams come true

    21. Re:Prepaid phones. by gd2shoe · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You're applying what you know about US crime to Mexico. Our war on drugs is figurative. Their war on drugs has become quite literal. Some have suggested that the Mexican government may soon be co-opted or overthrown by the drug cartels. Politicians and law enforcement alike are legitimately scared for their lives and the protection of their families. Kidnapping isn't like robing a bank in that social environment. It's a form of blackmail. It's not a get-rich-quick scheme by any stretch of the imagination.

      --
      I won't join Slashcott. OTOH, If Beta goes live, I just won't be back until it's fixed. Sorry Dice.
    22. Re:Prepaid phones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    23. Re:Prepaid phones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      >Their war on drugs has become quite literal

      And this has happened in large part *because* of *our* war on drugs.

    24. Re:Prepaid phones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Legalizing marijuana (and possibly cocaine) would solve 96% of the problem overnight. Not to mention creating new revenue streams for the government, and maybe allowing the US to once again step behind Russia in the running to imprison the largest percentage of the population.

      Have you watched ANY mob movie in your life? Do you think those underground mercenary corps will just disband and they'll all get themselves decent legit jobs? There will always be some drug that is too dangerous for health to be legalized, and they will push it to kids. Or, they'll just run extortion/protection racket. Or, they will contraband untaxed marijuana and cocaine, even if those were legal to posses. Their business is not drugs, their business is fear and violence. Addictions (narcotics, gambling, prostitution) just help to lure their victims to come to them.

      Oh, and ... once a drug is not illegal any more, it loses much of its appeal, nobody is a hotshot for using it, so cool kids, daring kids will move on to dangerous "real stuff" and keep "sticking it to the MAN".

      Never (completely) legalize marijuana, it would ruin it for everybody!

    25. Re:Prepaid phones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      So what happens if you buy and activate a prepaid cellphone in the US or Guatemala, then use it in Mexico??

      They will block it.

    26. Re:Prepaid phones. by TapeCutter · · Score: 2, Insightful

      1) Crime, wealth, intelligence, are independent variables.
      2) Only small fry with zero political influence will be caught.
      3) See #2
      4) See #2

      Remove prohibition and even the most powerfull and influential drug lords will disappear into the dustbin of history.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    27. Re:Prepaid phones. by jcr · · Score: 4, Informative

      Do you think those underground mercenary corps will just disband and they'll all get themselves decent legit jobs?

      Nope, but their income will be sharply reduced. It happened to the mafia in the USA when prohibition ended.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    28. Re:Prepaid phones. by Chrisje · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Which is why in the Netherlands, Prostitution is legal while Pimping isn't, Marijuana is CONDONED and not 100% legalized, and the focus for users of cocaine, E, Amphetamines and even heavier stuff like heroin is to Inform & Help them rather than to lock 'm up and throw away the key.

      Do we have problems? Sure we do. Do we have a violent crime rate as in the US and certain other countries? No we don't. As a matter of fact, it's quite boring here. And we like it that way. Well. Some of us do at any rate.

      Lastly I have to point out that the workings of Life, The Universe and Everything Else *cannot* be deduced by watching Mob movies.

    29. Re:Prepaid phones. by EdIII · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But your kids smoke it, your co-workers smoke it and you/your spouse smokes it.

      I know more people that don't smoke it, then smoke it. That's false. I know a lot of different people too from different walks of life. I don't think they are hiding it either, since I am quite vocal about my positions on a great many things. I have always argued for legalization. So to say everyone is doing it, is quite a stretch for me.

      Wouldn't you rather know where it's coming from and that people aren't dying over it?

      I always demanded it. I knew *exactly* where mine was coming from. As in, I could touch the plants, when I went to go pick some up. I find your comment hilarious in a way too. It reminds me of blood diamonds. It would be pretty difficult to put together a certification program for people to *know* their weed comes from honest law-abiding Americans, and not the evil Mexican "narcolords".

      Its illegal status is not a deterrent.

      Of course not. It was never designed to be a deterrent. That's like saying speed limits were truly designed to keep people safe.

      It was truly designed as a way to control people and seize assets. Just like federal income taxes, your Social Security number, and the IRS were designed as a methodology to control people, control information, and to be used as leverage by the state. The money is incidental. It's use as an information gathering tool and a way to destroy people was deliberate.

      You use Al Capone as an example which is downright fucking *hilarious* since he was ultimately taken down by the IRS.

      No offense, but you annoy the shit out of me. Or more specifically, your "it's not a deterrent" and the "it would be cleaner and less risky for me to consume it" speech just rubs me the wrong way. You will never be effective in communicating the "why" when you argue for legalization when you talk about deterrents, actual usage rates, "we all use it man", etc. The people that don't smoke it, don't care. Their choice to alter their state is alcohol or prescription drugs. Your effectively arguing for something they don't understand, don't choose personally, and have no emotional or intellectual investment in protecting *for you*.

      When people are opposed to something, or even indifferent, stating they are *not winning* is NEVER a productive path to get them to change their mind. That's just psychology. They have made themselves part of a group, and to say their group is losing (and them as well) can just make them stubborn, emotional, and irrational. Then they have to win to become right. Sounds insane, but then most of our behavior as a whole really is.

      You need to explain to them how Pot being illegal actually affects them *very* negatively, even though they never smoked it or even hate it. I know people that outright hate it, hate the idea of getting high, and would otherwise wholeheartedly support sending your pot-smoking-hippie-ass to jail.

      When I explain to them how the government actually uses it to populate prisons, seize property, control soceity, and in general have an excuse to perform actions against citizens that would otherwise be impossible in a truly free society, they become more open to the idea that it needs to be free. That, even though they hate it, other Americans should have the rights to be left in peace and make their own choices.

      Truly man, change your tactics in how you go about pushing your views of legalization for pot. I agree with what you want to do, but think about it from a purely "debate team" point of view on how you can more effectively win the argument and win over your audience. Just some positive criticism (really, its intended to be positive) on how you argue for legalization.

    30. Re:Prepaid phones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Switzerland used to have anonymous prepaid SIM cards. There was a huge international outcry over it after some people linked to 9/11 used Swisscom SIM cards. So nowadays instead of buying a SIM card, you simply pay somebody else to buy a bunch for you.

    31. Re:Prepaid phones. by Velska1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Some very good points... even if I don't completely agree with them all. The main argument is, that you still suppose, in the end, that people function logically. So many of our important decisions are gut reactions, and education only goes so far in a generation.

      --
      Every problem has a solution that is simple, easy and wrong. Selling our Liberty for a little Security is a much too de
    32. Re:Prepaid phones. by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Their war on drugs is powered by our war on drugs. In fact, it is our war on drugs, only exported across the border. During prohibition of alcohol we had an elevated level of violence in this country -- the current system is much more efficient, at least if you live in the USA. If you live in Mexico... not so much.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    33. Re:Prepaid phones. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      No good. I've known too many Spaniards.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    34. Re:Prepaid phones. by digitalchinky · · Score: 1

      Equally as absurd. Here in the Philippines the police were so vexed with crimes committed by Motorbike riders that they briefly implemented a new law (it was shot down) mandating riders and passengers actually stencil their Name and Plate number to either side of their helmet as a way to curb crime. And when I say passengers, I mean all 13 of them on a slow day. At a random police checkpoint in the palm tree infested rolling provincial countryside: "You're carrying livestock today sir? I see your bovine friends here are not helmeted, and their currently absent helmet is also lacking the aforementioned plate number, that's a double fine for you."

    35. Re:Prepaid phones. by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > When I bought a prepaid sim card in Switzerland last year, they wouldn't give it to me
      > unless they got my passport information etc.

      Whereas here in the horrible, oppressive USA I can buy a Tracfone and card for cash in most any store with no id required.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    36. Re:Prepaid phones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To the crowd: Face it. It's illegal. But your kids smoke it, your co-workers smoke it and you/your spouse smokes it. Its illegal status is not a deterrent. Wouldn't you rather know where it's coming from and that people aren't dying over it?

      Legalize marijuana.

      Yeah but woudn't the narcolords protect their business by more murders, that is threaten the politicians that might remotely imply to legalize any drug. The police could come into their homes and tell them that they're not offering any protection (as if they were doing their jobs anyway) as long as drugs are legals (by threats but mostly by corruption, they're like ATMs or Starbucks cafe in Mexico).

      Narcolords seem to be just one problem. Home invasions, kidnappings, etc targets the poors as well. I know some people who had new borns murdered because they coudn't afford the ransom. 15-20 years later the threat came back to haunt the whole family, they still wan't more money, they still can't afford it. They moved 3 times and are still living in fear.

      I don't think peace will ever happen in Mexico (or South America for that matter). It's another kind of tyrany in Mexico. I sincerely wish em the best of luck.

      Prepaid cell phones, y'eah right.

    37. Re:Prepaid phones. by dfiguero · · Score: 1

      Yes, prepaid or "as you go" service is the most popular kind of cellphone service in Mexico. I read some time ago that it was even bigger than land lines. I can't find the link where I read that but this says something similar.

      From the article you need to provide name, date of birth and CURP if you are registering via SMS (you might be asked to provide gender and state of residence). However, to get a new cellphone number you would also need to provide a fingerprint, proof of address (like a hydro bill) and a valid id (I'm guessing voting card or passport).

      --
      My penguin ate my sig
    38. Re:Prepaid phones. by shoemilk · · Score: 1

      He was actually talking about legalizing it in the US, where most of the drug lords' money is made.

    39. Re:Prepaid phones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I confirm and add:

      The voter registration ID will have biometrics. Brazil is going to have the largest biometrics database in the world.

    40. Re:Prepaid phones. by stoned_hamster · · Score: 1

      When you wish upon a star Makes no difference who you are Anything your heart desires Will come to you If your heart is in your dream No request is too extreme When you wish upon a star As dreamers do Fate is kind She brings to those who love The sweet fulfillment of Their secret longing Like a bolt out of the blue Fate steps in and sees you through When you wish upon a star Your dreams come true

      I wish on stars for some things, and I still havent gotten my rifle. Granted, I live near the capitol, and unlike AZ, TX, and other border states, we need a LOT of ID in order to get a gun.

      --
      Smoking cures cancer. Smoking also cures stupidity. check darwinawards . com for some stupid stuff
    41. Re:Prepaid phones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bad grammar and spelling, whiny, airing personal beefs . . . welcome to slashdot.

    42. Re:Prepaid phones. by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "I wish on stars for some things, and I still havent gotten my rifle. Granted, I live near the capitol, and unlike AZ, TX, and other border states, we need a LOT of ID in order to get a gun."

      NOt if you just buy it with cash from a private individual.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    43. Re:Prepaid phones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know more people that don't smoke it, then smoke it. That's false.

      Then you shouldn't say it. (Or, at least, you should spell it correctly &hdots.)

    44. Re:Prepaid phones. by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      Their business is not drugs, their business is fear and violence.

      And here I thought their business was making piles of cash for reasonably little effort. Gambling: people throw money at you for no good reason. Note that gambling is legal in Nevada, but there are still indications that organized crime is involved. Drugs: people pay a premium for 'fun' stuff that happens to be expensive because it's illegal. Organs (and I have heard stories of bootleg organs, in person): Illegal, very expensive, pretty much guaranteed to involve violence.
      Organized crime got out of the alcohol business (in the U.S.) because there wasn't as much money to be made there. And don't think drugs weren't happening then, either. Cocaine, etc. was legal in the U.S. in the last century (Coca-Cola, Beeman's gum, Pepsi-Cola). I doubt Coke the beverage was being pushed much by the mob - not enough profit.
      Organized crime goes where the (big, easy) money is. Violence is more about protecting their interests (this is probably not true for the thugs who do the enforcing). Petty crime would be more likely to be interested in violence for the sake of violence. Petty criminals don't have the business sense or the inclination to figure out where the big money is and how to effectively get a slice of that pie. Otherwise they wouldn't be petty thugs...

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    45. Re:Prepaid phones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think that will work.

      1) Use the phones of illegal immigrants crossing to America under the pretext of America tracking them.

      2) Use the kidnapped persons phone.

      3) Mug foreigners, and use their phone.

      4) Make other people buy the phones.

      5) Start own phone shop.

      I don't understand why you would use a device that can track your position anyway to communicate a kidnapping/etc.... and those are just a few suggestions off the top of my head to circumvent the law. I would suggest that the police force in Mexico is undermanned and that is the real problem, not the cellphone usage.

      The same reason people say "Why, yes officer, you can search my car," when there are drugs in the car. People just aren't that smart. :)

    46. Re:Prepaid phones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Our war on drugs is figurative.

      Let's see... highest incarceration rate in the entire world, incredible expansion of government power and revenue, no-knock raids which regularly harm (and sometimes kill) innocents, non-stop propaganda designed to fuel the culture of prohibition, skyrocketing corruption from law enforcement to the top of the power pyramid... yes sir, the war on drugs is nothing but words here in the US.

    47. Re:Prepaid phones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would suggest that the police force in Mexico is undermanned and that is the real problem, not the cellphone usage.

      Yes and no... For those who never lived in Mexico, here is a little info:

      I used to live in Mexico, Yes the police are undermanned but they are also underpaid and under trained which leads them to be at best apathetic and worst corrupt. (not all of course, but many) Nepotism is rampant and very few are really qualified for the job. The years I lived there, it was normal to offer a small bribe to a traffic cop or customs official so they would not impound your car for some minor infraction (eg. failure to signal a turn). They ALWAYS took it and sent you on your way.

      This attitude goes for those at the top as well. The bribes just get bigger.

    48. Re:Prepaid phones. by pauljlucas · · Score: 1

      ... federal income taxes ... were designed [emphasis added] as a methodology to control people, control information, and to be used as leverage by the state.

      From the U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8:

      The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States ...

      While the collection of federal income taxes may have become what you suggest, I doubt the founding fathers designed them for that. Also note that the constitution makes no mention of "income tax" specifically.

      --
      If you reply, do so only to what I explicitly wrote. If I didn't write it, don't assume or infer it.
    49. Re:Prepaid phones. by Cruciform · · Score: 1

      If you're going to wish on stars, I'd go with (Wolf-Rayet) WR104.
      Who needs a rifle when you can wield the power of cosmic radiation.

    50. Re:Prepaid phones. by icebrain · · Score: 2, Informative

      Maryland, I take it? Move to the other side of the Potomac; Virginia's a lot friendlier about that.

      Per federal law, a resident buying a gun from, or transferring one through, a dealer requires a government-issued photo ID (driver's license, military ID, etc), an instant background check, and (I think) some proof of residency (usually satisfied by item 1). Non-residents are subject are also subject to the laws of their state of residence and to some additional federal requirements. If you posess a valid state-issued firearms license or carry permit meeting the background check requirements for a normal purchase, or you have a federal firearms license (FFL) as a dealer or collector, you are exempt from the instant check.

      Federal law does not prohibit the private sale of firearms between two residents of the same state, obstinately because that is not "interstate commerce" and therefore not subject to the federal background check requirement. Provided that both people are citizens of the same state and neither has reason to believe that the gun is stolen, that the other person is prohibited from owning guns, or that the gun is intended for use in a crime, it is legal under federal law. Individual states may also have their own restrictions; relatively free states (ie, the majority) do not, but others like California, Illinois, and several New England states require additional licensing and other restrictions.

      This, in a nutshell, is the origin of the media's so-called "gun show loophole". There is no clause or omission that says "you don't need to do background checks at gun shows"--the same law applies to sales there as anywhere else. Licensed dealers must perform background checks, whether at gun shows or their own shop. Private individuals or collectors do not, but they may only sell to residents of their own state (otherwise, the transfer must go through a dealer, and would be subject to the restrictions on dealers).

      Note that none of these requirements, even the super-strict laws of Chicago and DC, have ever stopped violent criminals from stealing a gun or buying one off the black market. These and other gun laws are simply inconveniences--mere words that the criminal violates as casually as he does those against murder, assault, rape, and drugs; they cause no more obstacle to his behavior than speed limits, age restrictions, and copyright laws do to drivers, college students, and music downloaders.

      Note also that the above does not apply to sales of NFA firearms--that is, machine guns, suppressors, and short-barreled rifles or shotguns. With those, regardless of who the buyer and seller are, the buyer must undergo the entire class III transfer process, including lengthy background check, law-enforcement signoff, and $200 transfer tax. This process can take several weeks, and is also subject to state law.

      --
      The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
    51. Re:Prepaid phones. by blhack · · Score: 1

      I don't know about now, but about three years ago this wasn't possible (at least not in Mexico City, where I was).

      Our company was building an office in MC, we were just in the "looking for some land" stages, and the "office" consisted of 3 people. We needed to get them some cellphones.

      In mexico city, at that time, you couldn't get a phone "over-the-counter", you had to sign up for service, and they would mail you a phone later. It took about a week.

      This was very, very confusing to me, and I argued with him about it the whole way to the mall until we went into the store and had the very cute mexican girl tell me the exact same thing.

      --
      NewslilySocial News. No lolcats allowed.
    52. Re:Prepaid phones. by sabt-pestnu · · Score: 1

      I find it curious that you take issue with the Al Capone reference from a law enforcement perspective (IE, the police didn't catch him, IRS did), when the original context was an economic and social one (he made lots of money, did "bad things" and had a lot of guns in his employ).

    53. Re:Prepaid phones. by amoeba1911 · · Score: 1

      You shouldn't go to war on drugs, or operate heavy machinery on drugs. It seems like a recipe for disaster!

      The U.S. should just get all their helicopters and planes, arm them to the teeth and comb from border all the way down to the tip of south America and carpet bomb all of the drug fields, rinse and repeat until all the cockroaches and their eggs are gone for good.

      I figure it will take about $60 billion, maybe more but that's how much the illegal narc business makes every year. You want to stop them? You gotta make it not worth the reward. U.S. politicians are taking their sweet ass time bullshitting their way through the whole "war on drugs" nonsense. Fuck the war on whatever, just bomb the fuckers and be done with it. Why does it have to be a big fucking production?

      The U.S. had spy technology to spot a missile in cuban jungle 50 years ago, don't tell me they don't have the technology to spot a god damn pot field now.

      Locate the fields, stick some incendiary warheads on some cruise missiles and launch them from the gulf of Mexico or the pacific.

      The whole "war-on-drugs" is bull crap. It's a bunch of politicians-on-drugs instead. They can't get their shit covered beady little heads out of their asses. Because of these lame fuckers, civilians on the US-Mexico border are the ones suffering having to fend for themselves.

      Want to take it a step further? Increase the punishments of the convicted sellers. If the threat of punishment isn't deterring the crime, the punishment is clearly not enough and the crime still pays. Stop wasting taxpayer dollar by throwing them in jail: guillotine is cheap and 100% effective, and makes for good entertainment and crime deterrent.

    54. Re:Prepaid phones. by Pandrake · · Score: 1

      You use Al Capone as an example which is downright fucking *hilarious* since he was ultimately taken down by the IRS.

      Yes, but that was *during* prohibition and the only slip of bad luck Al had. Was he the only one making tons of money from illegal alcohol sales and distribution? Did the rest of the alcohol lords and ladies get busted by the IRS or even an Untouchable who was truly untouchable that could get a conviction, or did they simply lose their huge profit margins and power once prohibition was lifted?

    55. Re:Prepaid phones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So this law will force them to actually kidnap your relatives and use their cellphones to call you.

    56. Re:Prepaid phones. by toaster917 · · Score: 1

      I don't have any information on prepaid phone providers in Mexico; if they're as prevalent as they are here in the States, how will this affect those users? Can you just register the phone as belonging to Inigo Montoya and be done with it?

      Prepaid phones are much more common in Mexico than in the U.S. You can buy one at any convenience store (Though Carlos Slim has more OXXO stores, there are thousands of 7-Elevens here, if you can believe it). I would say 60% of phones are pre-paid. Mine is. This program is set to be a major hassle for people who live in Mexico and don't have a C.U.R.P. - as in all tourists and permanent foreign residents not legal to work... retirees, students, etc. (out of 150,000 Americans in Mexico). This includes me and my immediate family. I've had a cellphone here for going on 3 years. This will suck if I have to re-register my phone, as you get major discounts for ever year you keep your number. Probably most foreigners will have a Mexican friend buy the phone for them, and if we Gringos can figure this out, I'm sure drug dealers, kidnappers, and corrupt police can work around it as well. Like so many bureaucratic security measures (think taking off your shoes at the airport) it is easily worked around by the real bad guys and just provides a major hassle for everyday-folk. For more info about US citizens in Mexico this page is pretty good: http://www.peoplesguide.com/1pages/retire/work/bil-maste/%23americans.html

    57. Re:Prepaid phones. by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      Their war on drugs is powered by our war on drugs. In fact, it is our war on drugs, only exported across the border. During prohibition of alcohol we had an elevated level of violence in this country -- the current system is much more efficient, at least if you live in the USA.

      No, its not. While Mexico is far worse than the US, their is a huge impact in this country in terms of violence, and economic costs on top of that, from the war on drugs, which is the main reason that the US has more people in prison (either as an absolute number or proportion of the population) than any other country except, maybe, China (China's published statistics are lower than the US, but they have wide areas of exclusion that are included in most countries statistics, so its not directly comparable.)

    58. Re:Prepaid phones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I bought a prepaid sim card in Switzerland last year, they wouldn't give it to me unless they got my passport information etc.

      In Australia, you need to call to activate your prepaid sim card. When you do, they ask for your name and address under the pretext that they need it for emergency services.

      I was in Spain in February and they wanted some form of identification to buy a prepaid SIM card. They were willing to accept a US driver's license.

      In Italy, they insisted on a passport. Iirc, they had to see the actual passport and wouldn't accept the photocopy I was carrying around. I had to go back to the hotel and get my passport before they would sell me the SIM. Claimed it was due to some new "antiterrorism" law.

    59. Re:Prepaid phones. by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      How will it effect them?

      Easy, either you register or they don't work, or they just ban them outright.

      I expect this to be in the US within 5 years, 'for our protection'.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    60. Re:Prepaid phones. by chochos · · Score: 1

      The only mobile company here that didn't have prepaid (I think they still don't) in Mexico is Nextel. They were the only ones who had push-to-talk (now Telcel offers that too) so it is popular among businesses here because you can talk to your employees without spending money on a call, you just pay the monthly fee.

      Telcel, Movistar, Unefon/Iusacell all have prepaid phones and 3 years ago you could buy one for cash without showing any kind of ID. About 80% of all mobile phones in Mexico are prepaid.

    61. Re:Prepaid phones. by Kyusaku+Natsume · · Score: 1

      Our current "War on Drugs" was intended originally as a media circus; a way to make a show of strength after the contested presidential election of 2006. Since it was a political move, they didn't thougth about the reaction of the drug cartels; aside the increse of violence, now the drug cartels are also in the kidnapping bussiness and traffic of cuban and centroamerican immigrants. The violence is now way, way worst than 3-4 years ago. This law is only to appear that they are "doing something" against crime. It doesn't matter if it works or not.

      The drug problem grow especially after the collapse of agriculture and many industries after NAFTA and the financial crisis of 1994. Our small farmers didn't stand a chance against the heavy subzidized crops from USA and European Union, so the ones who didn't emigrate to USA became members of drug gangs. It didn't help that the Fox administration was in bed with the Cartel of Sinaloa and helped it to become the giant crime Syndicate that it is now, able to wage a war against everybody else at the same time. The top level security officers of the current administration served also under Fox, and these guys are so bad and incompetent that they make the Bush administration a shinning example of honestity, inteligence and integrity in comparation.

      --
      Mexico: 100% conservative's America now!
    62. Re:Prepaid phones. by EdIII · · Score: 1

      Oh, I did not take issue with it. I just thought it was an interesting coincidence he mentioned Al Capone when I was bringing up the IRS. Just an humorous observation.

      I do agree with him, compared to the drug lords, and even small time drug runners of today, Al Capone and many of the gangsters back then were rather tame.

    63. Re:Prepaid phones. by atraintocry · · Score: 1

      Mod up (and wise up).

    64. Re:Prepaid phones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      have you seen the trouble people lives to stop consuming ??

      I wouldn't want to deal with the overload of teenagers that got addicted just because it was easily accessible.

      Illegal is just right, corruption is other thing

    65. Re:Prepaid phones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The current registry will require both an valid id (Mexican voting credential which is the national id) and a fingerprint.

      Yeah, because if I'm a drug lord making $100MM/yr from my cocaine distribution network and I want to branch out into kidnapping and extortion I won't be able to find $100 (double the average weekly Mexican wage) to buy some plebs legal phone, who will claim he "lost" it.

      This law will do nothing to stop kidnapping, but will extend the power and reach of the government. So, just like every law ever passed.

  3. Border runs by Zerth · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I assume this doesn't apply to PAYG phones bought in the US? What a way to not affect criminals in the least.

    1. Re:Border runs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      I assume this doesn't apply to PAYG phones bought in the US? What a way to not affect criminals in the least.

      "I assume they are stupid. Then it would not work."
      It's pretty easy to make the law work. All the mobile phone operators already reject any connection which is not properly authenticated and that they can bill - they just have to check a flag in their database whether the billed caller had given sufficient information for the governement.

    2. Re:Border runs by Zerth · · Score: 1

      I'm not assuming they are stupid. I can see them requiring anyone visiting Mexico to register their phones with immigration or the border authority before local towers will authenticate. That's reasonable.

      It is erecting a large Tempest shield along the borders to prevent cell reception from outside the country that I find implausible, to say nothing of satphones.

      Perhaps they can get the US to use a fine mesh chain fence instead of building a wall?

  4. So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    All they require is that you text your CURP? So just text someone else's CURP. Make one up for that matter. How do they plan to verify the person using the phone is identical to the CURP associated with it?

    1. Re:So? by gringofrijolero · · Score: 1

      We got computers now.

      --
      Todos mis movimientos están friamente calculados
    2. Re:So? by icebike · · Score: 1

      Really, is this so hard to figure out?

      Users text in their CURP.

      Most will be accurate and there will be enough info on file to match them up to their phone number and carrier.

      Some won't send in their CURP. No service for you.

      Some won't match. Letter comes attached to phone bill. Mail it back with correct boxes checked, or No service for you.

      Claim my CURP on your phone, I check the box that says not my phone, and No Service for you.

      No number no ring-e-dingie. Its pretty simple.

      In the US, they get your SSN when you sign up for your plan anyway.

      Since pre-paid anonymous cell phones are almost always used for no good and legal purpose this sounds like a great idea for that kind of phone.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    3. Re:So? by mobby_6kl · · Score: 1

      No, here's how it's going to work:

      Users SMS in a CURP.

      That's it, there's no way to check if it matches the real user as long as the number/birthdays themselves match to the DB. There's no phone bill, you buy a prepaid card for X pesos at any kiosk when you run out of money. At least, that's how prepaid SIM cards work everywhere else in the world. Also, where do you propose you check the box that says it's not your phone?

      I also find it hilarious that, with the corruption levels as ridiculous as they are in Mexico, the criminals are supposed to be stopped by this. It's possible to buy out whole police departments, getting a clerk to accept an ID with a mismatched photo is going to be trevial.

      >Since pre-paid anonymous cell phones are almost always used for no good and legal purpose this sounds like a great idea for that kind of phone.

      You've got to be fucking kidding. Where's the evidence for this?

    4. Re:So? by Tweenk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Since pre-paid anonymous cell phones are almost always used for no good and legal purpose this sounds like a great idea for that kind of phone.

      That's a very old and tired lie that "those with nothing to hide have nothing to fear"
      http://www.biometricidentitycards.info/articles/NoHideNoFear.htm

      What about whistleblowers, victims of abuse, or political dissidents? What happens when the government becomes a totalitarian regime?

      Another powerful take on this:
      http://tithonus.livejournal.com/339295.html

      --
      Those who would give up liberty to obtain working drivers, deserve neither liberty nor working drivers.
    5. Re:So? by icebrain · · Score: 1

      Since pre-paid anonymous cell phones are almost always used for no good and legal purpose this sounds like a great idea for that kind of phone.

      Err, citation please?

      "Give me six lines written by the most honest of men, and I will find something in them which will hang him."

      --Cardinal Rechelieu

      --
      The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
    6. Re:So? by icebike · · Score: 1

      > Users SMS in a CURP.

      > That's it, there's no way to check if it matches the real user as long as the number/birthdays themselves match to the DB.

      Real CURP owner gets a mail/Email/SMS: Did you register a new phone?

      They reply No I didn't.

      No service for you.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  5. Corruption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    With an already corrupt government and police force this benefits the people how..?

    1. Re:Corruption by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Incredible increases in the efficiency of allocation of stitches to snitches are expected...

    2. Re:Corruption by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Really. It's so much better here in the US. Instead of CURP numbers and all that hassle the NSA just taps the phone companies on the shoulder and they give out whatever the government needs.

      --
      http://www.rootstrikers.org/
  6. Lots of transient workers by gringofrijolero · · Score: 5, Informative

    here where I live. I just pay them a hundred pesos to buy a chip for me. He'll be leaving town in a few months, and I got my phone. Repeat as needed. With a legitimate name and my phone is stolen, lots of luck defending yourself against false accusations here. Luckily the old system of "justice" is still in place. Una mordidita para las polis y ya.

    --
    Todos mis movimientos están friamente calculados
    1. Re:Lots of transient workers by byulzzi · · Score: 1

      maybe or not...

  7. Stupidity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And how exactly do they plan to prevent people from SMS texting random or other peoples IDs to the registry?

  8. You mean a log file or like a phone bill ? by Bob_Who · · Score: 3, Funny

    We don't need no stinkin' log file! How dare they keep records of everything. AT&T, Verizon and Sprint would never do that! No way! If our telecoms actually kept records they would bill me for every minute I log any time on the network so that they could over charge me. In America, we know how to lie about the truth so we can steal from our customers, and then turn em into the Feds! We better build a bigger wall so their cellular towers don't vector any of our border towns!

  9. No cell phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stories like this always make me very, very glad that I've never bothered to buy a cell phone. I mean sure, I know my government will track me somehow anyway, but at least I have the satisfaction of making the bastards work for their data.

    1. Re:No cell phone by jonfr · · Score: 1

      They don't have to. You have a internet connection.

    2. Re:No cell phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Stories like this always make me very, very glad that I've never bothered to buy a cell phone. I mean sure, I know my government will track me somehow anyway, but at least I have the satisfaction of making the bastards work for their data.

      By posting as an AC you really showed them. They'll be stumped for months on that one!

    3. Re:No cell phone by pclminion · · Score: 1

      And thankfully, you don't use the Internet -- imagine what they could learn that way!

    4. Re:No cell phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The mexican government?, It's more likely the american government will learn about my online activities, the mexican government doesn't have anything that resembles one of your investigative agencies, which it's the reason crimes here are never solved, except of course when they find someone to blame who can defend himself or that is willing to play guilty for some cash.

    5. Re:No cell phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      blah blah blah, real funny. Why should we make their job easier and give them our emails and everything else. At least AC's have plausible deniability ... see, I learned something from Ronald Regan.

      I'll tell you though, I came within an inch of creating an account tonight and I just couldn't do it. Why should we help surveil ourselves? The illusion of free speech in the good ole US of A is just that, an illusion. And before you go talking too much trash, I'll just say that I've been reading slashdot for more than a decade, which is a whole lot longer than some lame 8 digit slashdot id punk

      But hell, I dunno why I bother ranting at the void, nobody pays attention to ACs anyhow.

    6. Re:No cell phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Especially not the paranoid crazy ACs

  10. Ay, ay, ay, by gringofrijolero · · Score: 1

    no me gusta!

    --
    Todos mis movimientos están friamente calculados
  11. Re:brought to you by some long distance lobyist? by Dare+nMc · · Score: 1

    So US citizens living or working in mexico can no longer get a cell phone in Mexico?
    In AZ prepaid long distance cards covering "international" calls to Mexico are cheap and insanely popular. Mexico will not prevent US phones from roaming, so I am guessing pre-paid "International" cell phones will be here too.

  12. Stupid Laws, more stupid implementations. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I live in Mexico and I can tell you that one of the intentions of the law is to reduce the crimes that use cellphones to coordinate and execute (like kidnappings and drug deals).

    The problem with this is the implementation, the law clearly specifies that your cellphone provider must take an ID and your fingerprint, but the most popular provider Telcel lets you register sending a SMS with your name and birth date. Essentially rendering the registration useless.

    1. Re:Stupid Laws, more stupid implementations. by gandhi_2 · · Score: 5, Funny

      It would be more efficient to outlaw kidnapping and drug dealing.

    2. Re:Stupid Laws, more stupid implementations. by ClosedSource · · Score: 1

      This sounds more like a plan for Telcel to maintain its monopoly.

    3. Re:Stupid Laws, more stupid implementations. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      That'd destroy the economy. For instance, the police certainly wouldn't make the same income if they enforced the law.

    4. Re:Stupid Laws, more stupid implementations. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I live in Mexico and I can tell you that one of the intentions of the law is to reduce the crimes that use cellphones to coordinate and execute (like kidnappings and drug deals).

      One interesting thing is that a cell phone can be used to track your physical location. So they could monitor people's movements as long as they're carrying their phones.

      Talk about Big Brother...

    5. Re:Stupid Laws, more stupid implementations. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Talk about Big Brother...

      or hermano grande

    6. Re:Stupid Laws, more stupid implementations. by scaryjohn · · Score: 1

      The problem with this is the implementation, the law clearly specifies that your cellphone provider must take an ID and your fingerprint, but the most popular provider Telcel lets you register sending a SMS with your name and birth date. Essentially rendering the registration useless

      Or maybe President Calderón really is going to take up a life of bilocating petty crime a week after this law goes into effect.

      --
      One might ask the same about birds. What ARE birds? We just don't know.
    7. Re:Stupid Laws, more stupid implementations. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no! it would be more efficient to legalise kidnapping and drug dealing!

  13. Sounds like a great way to steal identities by anexkahn · · Score: 2, Interesting

    don't ya think?

    --
    Curious about Storage and Virtualization? Check out
    1. Re:Sounds like a great way to steal identities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      damn right!

      that's why I registered Felipe Calderon's (the president) data instead of mine. Still haven't recived the confirmation SMS yet.

  14. This will solve which problem again? by LoRdTAW · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I cant understand what this will solve for the Mexican Government. Does this have anything to do with all the violent crime linked to the Mexican drug trade? Do they really think sending a CURP via SMS is a secure and infallible method? Good luck to them.

    Oh and here is a possible theory: The USA could use this system to track illegals who might have bought their cell phones into the US. Doesent sound all that plausable but hey its a theory.

    1. Re:This will solve which problem again? by biggknifeparty · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's because of the kidnapping crisis. Cell phones are used to negotiate ransoms. This will just likely push criminals to move to VOIP out on stolen wifi connections.

    2. Re:This will solve which problem again? by Gutboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or they could use the cell phone of the victim, to 'prove' they have them.

    3. Re:This will solve which problem again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

        The problem is extorsion.

        This is a growing problem in Mexico.

        You get either a

        1. SMS that says that you won a prize. Most of the time you need to send another sms to another cell number where they tell you that you need to pay a deposit to get your prize. Or,

        2.- A call in which a person tells you that have kidnapped a relative of yours. They don't demand a lot of money. They just want to get some money because 99% of the time they haven't kidnapped anybody. They rely on getting you scared enough so you deposit some money before you can check if it was true.

        Most people know it's a scam, but still a lot of people fall for it.

        The thing is, most of the scammers come from inside prisons so this is an attempt to make it more difficult to get a stolen cellphone which is what the criminals usually use.

      - A mexican that has gotten those calls.

    4. Re:This will solve which problem again? by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Or more like it'll just ensure that being seen talking on a cell phone is the BEST way to get targeted!!

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    5. Re:This will solve which problem again? by LoRdTAW · · Score: 1

      I see now, many others have pointed this out so it makes perfect sense. It has also jogged my memory a bit too. I remember seeing a special on TV a number of years ago talking about the kidnapping problem in Mexico. I believe they said Mexico City was the kidnapping capital of the world. That scare led to many wealthy people (frequently targeted) to hire security and drive armored vehicles. Less wealthy people would have plastic film applied to their car windows to prevent shattering during a car jacking/kidnapping attempt.

      This problem was also bought to light in the remake of the film Man on Fire.

      It looks like it has now got to the point that everyone is so scared even an empty threat will scare them into paying. Everyone was so terrified during the surge of actual kidnappings that after a while the bad guys figured out that they didn't even have to kidnap anyone. Just fire off a simple "I have your ________ send me money" and you might get some cash. That's pretty fucked up that it has gotten to that point. But how will this stop anyone? SMS messages can be sent pretty damn easily and anonymously. Hell a friend once pulled a prank on me using the sprint internet SMS sender. Sprint has/had a web page where you enter the recipient number and message and then enter ANY number as the sender. You wont get a reply but you can easily send anonymously. I am sure there are many other sites that can do the same.

    6. Re:This will solve which problem again? by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      Or use payphones. Or maybe the government will ban magazines when the kidnappers start cutting out random letters from them and taping them to a piece of paper to spell out the ransom.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    7. Re:This will solve which problem again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, why bother with that when you can use the victim's cellphone?

    8. Re:This will solve which problem again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ho please, think about that:

      what happend if I send a SMS with your CURP from my cellphone and I start to extorsion people from my cellphone ?

    9. Re:This will solve which problem again? by dave.haku · · Score: 1

      Yes, but the point is to identify the criminals BEFORE they kiddnap their victims. Or in the cases when they don't plan on an actual kiddnaping, but an Express-virtual one.

    10. Re:This will solve which problem again? by dave.haku · · Score: 1

      He he he, I can imagine: --"Hey! Listen to me, we got your brother!" --"What? what was that?" --"I'm not joking @ssh*le, Do as I say or..." --"Hey, I can't hear you. Are you on the Skype again?" --"Shit... yes, hold a sec. I'm moving closer to the router... this... amm... Stupid stolen signal!" "How about now?" --"Still can't" --"SHIT! Listen to me..." --"Sorry, I'm losing you... Hey gotta go. Call me later k? Bye." Well, to call to a real phone you still have to pay, I guess you could still track the Credit card or something. Which of course could also be stolen. But heck, I see stupidity in this, but would like to think that there's a solution. I would like to see it working. Maybe I'm just daydreaming.

  15. There's still time by NonUniqueNickname · · Score: 1

    I predict 1 million users registering this month. The other 69 million users will try to register on the last hour of the last day before lines get deactivated. Let's hope they aren't showing Latin American Idol that night, phone networks would evaporate.
    Another likely scenario, 3-4 months from now some big story breaks out on how someone stole (read, bought) the database and used it to do very naughty things. Public outrage. Common sense wins round 2. Database scrapped.

    1. Re:There's still time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you just readed my mind, just look for the RENAVE, it was going to be a national database of every vehicle tied to the social security number and guess who was the director of that organ? MIGUEL CAVALLO!!! an argentinan criminal from the "dirty war", with particular experience in seizing and monetizing his victims properties...

      by the way, the RENAVE, much like this initiative, was promoted after the last big "crime wave" scare in the nineties.

  16. Lessons to be Learned by db32 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So...now that we have more and more technology and more and more capability for governments to track every aspect of their priso..citizens there should be a few things noted. This is nothing new. Advancing technology has ALWAYS resulted in governments trying to leverage it for this very purpose. I seriously doubt this will ever change despite various groups flag waving about how THEIR country would never do this and pointing at other countries that have implemented things like this. As such, all the bitching and moaning in the world is not likely to stop this. A number of countries throughout history have "reset" their governments abilities through various revolutions (some rather bloody, others bloodless). Unfortunately the bloody type ones have typically been the most likely to result in destruction of government records by one side or the other. (Which is why the whole 2nd Amendment thing was put there, the notion that we are supposed to use our right to bear arms to protect ourselves from our fellow citizens is a warping of reality...it was meant ensure an armed citizenry to discourage government abuse. Of course this is all moot when the majority happily embraces this kind of "safety" measure.)

    At the end of the day with technology constantly advancing and the "here there be monsters" parts of the map becoming non-existent there is only one way to ensure our future freedoms. My daughter will know how to execute SQL injections by the time she is 10! We live in an era where your average teenager is more capable of destroying/manipulating government plans/records/whathaveyou than any pitchfork and torch wielding mob has had since the days of the caveman!

    Disclaimer: Parents, be careful with this plan, you wouldn't want to have your records swapped with (notorious threat of the day) for grounding your kid.

    --
    The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
    1. Re:Lessons to be Learned by troll8901 · · Score: 1

      My daughter will know how to execute SQL injections by the time she is 10!

      Just be careful if you enroll her in Boston College, okay?

      Parents, be careful with this plan, you wouldn't want to have your records swapped with (notorious threat of the day) for grounding your kid.

      Either you buy me a pink VW Beetle when I turn 16, or I'll turn you into a federal wanted criminal!

  17. grammar by bsDaemon · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Seriously, how is one going to properly use 'whom' rather than 'who', but still end a sentence in a preposition?

    1. Re:grammar by pete-classic · · Score: 1

      Selecting the correct pronoun case is a question of a rule of grammar. Refraining from ending a sentence with a preposition is merely a guideline of style.

      -Peter

    2. Re:grammar by julesh · · Score: 1

      Seriously, how is one going to properly use 'whom' rather than 'who', but still end a sentence in a preposition?

      Did a teacher tell you that prepositions are not for ending sentences with?

      (Any rule of style can be violated if you understand the reason for it. The reason for this one is that there is usually a better way of phrasing the sentence that doesn't end the sentence with a preposition; there are exceptions.)

      (Alternatively: "This is the kind of fucking pedantry up with which I shall not put." (Churchill, attrib.))

    3. Re:grammar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, English is not Latin. Otherwise I'd be able to say phrases like "English Latin not is" and this would actually be preferable. :-) Romance languages have a requirement that prepositions be followed with something, however there is no such history for English. So-called educated people prescribing Latin grammar rules upon English speakers notwithstanding.

  18. Well... the gov. didn't saw the issues of this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The measure of a cellphone number database is to identify who is the user of the cellphone, this is intended to reduce the criminal movements of drugdealers and mafias all over the mexican country.

    Well it's a good idea, but the mexican government didn't saw the real issues of relate cellphones and users: the institutions that will have access to the databases are corrupt far beyond solution, we all know in Mexico that institutions like AFI (similar to FBI in USA) and others are full of double-agents of organized crime.

    So, from now on, organized crime will be aware of my phone number, my residence and another bunch of personal data. Great, just great. (Yeah, I live in Mexico if you haven't noticed by now.)

  19. Just on principle by whitespiral · · Score: 0

    In the totally corrupt government we have, this is completely idiotic. The mafias will get access to all this data a couple of days after government officials get it. We all Mexicans know that. But even if that weren't the case, just on principle alone, I won't submitt to big brother. When that deadline comes, all the cellphones in my house will cease to be. I'm not a number, I'm a free man!

    1. Re:Just on principle by masshuu · · Score: 0

      I'm a free man!

      wait, your either Mexican or a free man, which is it

      --
      O.o
  20. Mexican here by Tatisimo · · Score: 4, Informative
    Prepaid phones are sold pretty cheaply to anyone with hardly any name needed for the transaction last time I checked. Note that I do not own a cell phone due to privacy concerns, and with this new law I am unlikely to get one.

    In my experience, there's several people who due to poverty or lack of concern are not registered with the relatively new CURP system. Thus I wonder, how will it affect those people? Will they shell out 20 pesos to pay some kid with internet access to get it for them, or will they stop using cell phones?

    I believe (and hope) this law will fail in epic proportions. Mainly due to Telcel, pretty much the only cellphone provider, losing too many costumers over it. Also, there seems to be much opposition: there are very few comments supporting the law on the article linked.

    Mexico does need a way to get rid of our infamy before the eyes of the world, a police state will only make us even worse. We don't need this kind of stupidity coming from our government, however corrupt it may be.

    --
    Give Kashyyyk back to the Wookies
    1. Re:Mexican here by pimpimpim · · Score: 1

      From a different point of view, Mexico becoming a police state would make Mexico just fit in line with the rest of the world, no exceptions. That's the state of it now. Can't even say that it's more or less corrupt than others, when even in a 'civilized' like France the media boss friends of the president can get ridiculous laws on internet access all the way up to the senate (that battle is still not finished).

      --
      molmod.com - computing tips from a molecular modeling
    2. Re:Mexican here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It likely won't fail; the class of "illegals" will just grow a bit. Or a lot. Who cares? Those people don't exist anyway. The market for forged identity documents might grow a bit, too. But that'll just bring stronger sentences. Problem solved!

      More info on wikipedia's "informal sector" article, and eg. the works of Hernando de Soto.

  21. Useless. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Seems pointless. You only need to know 2 things and they are both available without registering the phones.
    1) where the person is, and
    2) what they said.
    Knowing their name (fake or true) is largely useless as most of the criminals will just use an alias and most ordinary/nonviolent criminals will just add a lot of noise to the databases.

    Plus you risk criminals abducting or killing people to get their hands on legitimate cell phones. Terrible idea.

  22. Virtual Kidnapping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was due the surge of virtual kidnapping. Millions of Mexicans receive SMS or calls indicating some kind of extortion: "your son is kidnapped, deposit $$ pesos to this phone number", etc. Now every user is responsible for the use of their phone.

    Government is fingerpring also cellphone users also.

    1. Re:Virtual kidnapping by Requiem18th · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Of course getting an stolen phone or cloning a numbers is still as easy as ever. This accomplishes nothing except perhaps tracking of innocent citizens.

      --
      But... the future refused to change.
  23. Virtual kidnapping by mapuche · · Score: 1

    It was due the surge of virtual kidnapping. Millions of Mexicans receive SMS or calls indicating some kind of extortion: "your son is kidnapped, deposit $$ pesos to this phone number", etc. Now every user is responsible in theory for the use of their phone.

    Government is fingerprinting cellphone users also.

    Re-posting because forgot I had an account here :p.

  24. Hey, Mano... by djupedal · · Score: 1

    Let me use your phone for a minute...

    Why?

    You know...battery is dead again.

    Oh, sure.

    1. Re:Hey, Mano... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go ahead, let me take my chip out first.

  25. Crackdown by Anenome · · Score: 1

    I'd imagine this has something to do with an attempt to crack down on the drug running cartels that threaten to grow so powerful as to destabilize the government. A threatened government is a dangerous thing.

    --
    "I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist"
    1. Re:Crackdown by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      I'd imagine this has something to do with an attempt to crack down on the drug running cartels that threaten to grow so powerful as to destabilize the government. A threatened government is a dangerous thing.

      Well, except that the cartels aren't becoming any stronger. What has happened recently that has led to the escalation of violence is that the government has gotten strong (or simply motivated) enough to work against the cartels, rather than being completely in bed with them. The cartels have, as a result, increased the violence against the government, the citizenry, and tourists in an effort to get the government to go back to the way things had worked for quite some decades previously.

      A threatened criminal enterprise that is used to having carte blanche is also a dangerous thing.

  26. so, use an iPhone with Fring or Skype by xmark · · Score: 1

    Don't even have to change gadgets. That takes care of the average citizen who would be fine with consumer-grade privacy.

    One could add complexity by creating multiple Skype land-phone-accessible numbers, and push them through Grand Central. Or get sexy by using VOIP over a VPN connection to a stateside proxy.

    The nontechnological solution: "Hey, amigo, lemme use your phone for a minute - I left mine in my Mercedes."

  27. All of the National Mexican Databases (we have 11) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yep this is another stupid law passed under the guise of trying to fix a national security problem. The truth is it is just another way for the government to get another Nationwide Database of us Mexicans. Let us count how many we have.

    1) We have the CURP. (national ID number)

    2) We have the IFE. (national voting card)

    3) We have the RFC. (national Tax Number, complete with electronic digital certificate plus you need to fingerprint your 10 digita for that one)

    4) We have Cartilla de Vacunacion (national medical card, needed for most hospitals and free health services)

    5) We have drivers license (again taging all the above)

    5) We have CLABE (national bank account database... all your Financial info are belong to us linked to the Mexican Tax Sistem)

    6) We have the Afore (national retirement account number)

    7) Some states have a secondary voting card (since the national one could be untrustworthy)

    8) We have birth certificate records with the CRIP (a longer version of the CURP)

    9) National Military Card (for all males 18 and older which technically makes all of Male Mexicans National Reserve and you need to have it for the next database one, the passport)

    10) Passports, (not required by law but do require #9 to get one and will also be required if you ever need to leave this place.)

    woohoo.. so much for freedom of speech.

    Most of them have all your personal info in them, plus fingerprints, plus anything and everything to tag you. There was the defunct RENAVE which was the national car ID. That was pass under the guise of people commit felony's on stolen cars.

    Now a National Celular Id, what is next a National Phone Id, since people also commit crimes on the phone. Or maybe a National Public Phone id, since criminals could also use Public Phones. Or a National Internet Users Id while you are at it. Or a National Credit Card registry since credit cards are used in scams. No wait we have that one also (chalk it as number 11)

    Maybe a national knife owners id, so in the supermarket when you buy a knife it will be registered in your name.

    Now seriously, the main problem in this is that one more database to cross reference you by will not solve the crime problem. I used to work for a telemarketing firm, and they had bought half of the Databases mentioned above, so the information contained in those database is readily available thanks to corrupt officials. Some of them are even online like the CURP. (one XSS away from full access).

    If you are Mexican, don't worry about all the databases, organized crime already have them all. That is how they target you. I know of cases where the criminals even know how much money you have in your bank account and suggest it to you if you try to say you don't have any money.

    Now the implementation, you can send a SMS with what ever info you want. Want to become your neighbor, look his CURP up online here:

    http://www.emexico.gob.mx/wb2/eMex/eMex_Consulta_tu_CURP

    (just need his name and his birthday).

    Seriously the problem is the Corrupt Mexican Government, why don't they pass laws to fix that, and maybe we wouldn't need just another national public database.

    Here in Mexico they passed a law to instantly tax your deposits in the bank, if you get a cash deposit of 25000 pesos or more (like 2000 dls) instead of going after the known tax evaders. So honest folk pay taxes for the criminals which never do, and the criminals either don't care, have lawyers, or use bribes. Do you think criminals have money in the bank, come on.

    This database will get abused like all the others and it is not in the public's interest. Criminals will now have access to all you family's cellular phone numbers so they know who to ask ransoms to.

    MEXICAN GOVERNMENT, solve the problem don't make another stupid law that will not solve the problem.

    In Soviet Mexico are belong to us, all your information.

  28. WOrse then Mexico by Joce640k · · Score: 1

    Only in the USA do they lock/tailor the phones to some sort of "plan". Everywhere else you just open an account then buy yourself a handset in a 'phone shop.

    --
    No sig today...
    1. Re:WOrse then Mexico by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1, Informative

      Only in the USA do they lock/tailor the phones to some sort of "plan".

      Not quite. there's at least one telco here in Australia that locks their phones. Or they did before I acrimoniously parted ways with them a couple of years ago.

    2. Re:WOrse then Mexico by totally+bogus+dude · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think all the telcos here (Australia) lock the phone if you buy it through them. They will unlock it for a fee, and I think they're required to unlock it free of charge once your contract expires. This only applies if your new handset is part of the contract. Most let you buy the phone outright and that should come unlocked.

      Even so, if you buy a handset outright from a third party it'll come unlocked, and I've never heard of any of the telcos refusing a phone on their network which you didn't buy from them. I'm with 3 and bought a new phone to replace my N73 (the contract I got that on doesn't expire until September or so) - just put the SIM from my old phone in my new one and it works fine. Better in fact, since my new phone supports HSDPA. This phone isn't actually carried by 3 at all and I suppose is technically not supported by them as a result, but they don't do anything to prevent you using your own phone if you want to.

    3. Re:WOrse then Mexico by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1

      I think all the telcos here (Australia) lock the phone if you buy it through them.

      I bought a Motorola Razr2 V9 outright through Telstra not so long ago, and that was unlocked. I am with Vodafone (for now) and was able to just plug the SIM in and get going.

    4. Re:WOrse then Mexico by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      What I mean is situations like in the USA where if you want an iPhone you have to go with AT&T or where texting is regarded as an extra (ie. needs you to sign up for a 'premium' plan).

      Around here I can walk into a shop, buy an iPhone, and it'll work. No plans have any kind of feature restrictions, I just get billed for what I use.

      --
      No sig today...
    5. Re:WOrse then Mexico by totally+bogus+dude · · Score: 1

      Couldn't be bothered reading the rest of the paragraph before replying, eh? :)

    6. Re:WOrse then Mexico by quenda · · Score: 1

      Nonsense. If you have a contract, any lock will be removed for free. Its only the prepaids that are normally locked, and then only for 6-12 months, or until you spend enough money or pay a fee.

      Why would they lock the phone if you are already committed to a contract? Pure corporate greed, thats why. But fortunately the regulator will not allow it.

    7. Re:WOrse then Mexico by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only in the USA do they lock/tailor the phones to some sort of "plan". Everywhere else you just open an account then buy yourself a handset in a 'phone shop.

      The stereotypical complaint is that Americans are ignorant of the world around them, but you're a moron who doesn't travel much.

      All sorts of countries (France, UK, Canada...) have plans where you can get a free or discounted phone in return for a contract that runs for a period of time. They also have prepaid plans and postpaid month-to-month plans where there is no long term commitment.

      Choose what works for you.

    8. Re:WOrse then Mexico by cayenne8 · · Score: 2, Informative
      "Even so, if you buy a handset outright from a third party it'll come unlocked, and I've never heard of any of the telcos refusing a phone on their network which you didn't buy from them. I'm with 3 and bought a new phone to replace my N73 (the contract I got that on doesn't expire until September or so) - just put the SIM from my old phone in my new one and it works fine. Better in fact, since my new phone supports HSDPA. This phone isn't actually carried by 3 at all and I suppose is technically not supported by them as a result, but they don't do anything to prevent you using your own phone if you want to."

      Not all phones and networks in the US have 'sim' cards. Only ATT and Tmobile I think, use phones that use 'sim' cards.

      I've been with Sprint all my cellphone life, and until a couple years ago, I'd never even heard of a sim card, or the ability to take phones from one network to another.

      I'd been very happy with Sprint till last few years. Their reception/signal has gotten abysmal, especially since I moved back to New Orleans proper (been living all around it for past 4 years). I guess they never quite recovered from Katrina maybe.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    9. Re:WOrse then Mexico by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Sprint/nextel have sim cards. They used to be built into the phones and I remember having to actually take one completely apart to remove one when I changed a phone once. Any phone you get now will most likely have a sim car somewhere in it. It just may be hidden and not considered user accessible.

    10. Re:WOrse then Mexico by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "Sprint/nextel have sim cards. They used to be built into the phones and I remember having to actually take one completely apart to remove one when I changed a phone once. Any phone you get now will most likely have a sim car somewhere in it. It just may be hidden and not considered user accessible."

      They do? Interesting...I thought they were only for the GSM phones?

      Hmm, well looking here it appears we both may be right. The equivalent in a UMTS phone is called a UICC, in a CDMA device, it might be a R-UIM or no card of this type at all...with the phone info hard coded into the handset somewhere.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    11. Re:WOrse then Mexico by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Interesting. Thanks for the link.

      I was basically going from personal experience and some of that involved being asked to transfer phone books, pictures and other crap from dead phones to replacement ones ordered from ebay or given to them from friends who upgraded at some point in time. Sometimes they get the new phones from sprint or whoever directly and their service staff tells them they can't tranfer the stuff. (from my experience this generally means they don't have the time or expertise or don't want to spend money on making it work.)

      I have generally found something in most modern phones (after 2002-3 or so) that I was calling a SIMs card (perhaps incorrectly) that I could put in a working phone or get to work in working phone enough to get the information from and then transfer to the new phone. I have noticed that not all phones are compatible and while sometimes newer ones work in older phones, the reverse seems to not be true. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not claiming to be some phone guru here either, I just do what I can find from Google and depending on what your trying to do, plenty of other people have done it before or attempted to with enough success that something is better then nothing that family and friends are otherwise left with. Sometimes, you just take what they offer and adapt it slightly to make it work for you. Well, that and I'm not afraid to solder on something that doesn't work anyways which surprisingly scares most people for some reason.

    12. Re:WOrse then Mexico by guardianangelz · · Score: 1

      I envy you. In Japan, cell phones are sold only by the telco you wish to sign up with. All phones are locked to their respective networks, and unlocking them is illegal. They won't unlock your phone for you when your contract expires, and every new service plan requires the purchase of a new phone - something which only makes sense if the telco pays for most of the price of your phone, which they quit doing a handful of years ago. Even worse, you can only get any specific model of cell phone from only one carrier - the Razr only came from NTT, the iPhone is only available from SoftBank. It's actually funny to me that I never hear or read about the draconian lockdown in the Japanese cell industry in various publications online and otherwise. Has anybody here ever heard about this on Slashdot or anywhere else?

  29. Credit database is nothing new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is interesting and disappointing.

    US Cell carriers have your SSN already if you ever had a 1year or longer contract. The central databases being Equifax, Transunion and such.

    I'm actually surprised mexico did not do this.

    Even Canada does this.

    No ssn, no credit, 400$ deposit required. Unless you are on the blacklisting, in which case the deposit can go into the thousands of dollars.

    If you have a bad credit history, you can't sign up for services for like 7 years.

  30. This is really stupid (I'm a mexican) by Lord+Juan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There is simply nothing that stops you from grab the CURP from anyone, send the sms and get your phone linked to other person, then you can carry on with whatever illegal activities you plan to do and have the other person blamed.

    It is insane, and I asked someone I know that works at Telcel and you can have more than one phone number linked to a single CURP.

    Yes, this is supposed to difficult the coordination of illegal groups, such as drug dealers and kidnapers, but I fail to see how will this help unless we would do as the law says, be required to go on a cellphone center and provide our fingerprint.

    And, personally, I completely dislike this measure, just for civil disobedience I'll go to somewhere where the CURP it's required, memorize a number of a random person (fortunately I can memorize long numbers easily), and send a sms with that number.

    1. Re:This is really stupid (I'm a mexican) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can get whoever you want CURP at the Civil Registers requesting a `Birth Certificate', they come with the CURP and you don't need to identify yourself.e

    2. Re:This is really stupid (I'm a mexican) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, soy de Estados Unidos but I lived in Mexico for three years. Why would this work any different than anything else in Mexico? You pay the money and they look the other way.

      I really don't mean to pick on Mexico, at least there, the people think of corruption as a bad thing. Here, we have legalized corruption; we call it "campaign contributions".

      Un Tejano sin esperanza.

  31. No news for Italy! by VincenzoRomano · · Score: 1

    In Italy is already this way: you cannot buy a SIM without proper identification.
    And if you sell or give it away, both parties should update the registration details.
    Since 1994. We are ahead!

    --
    Maybe Computers will never be as intelligent as Humans.
    For sure they won't ever become so stupid. [VR-1988]
    1. Re:No news for Italy! by lufo · · Score: 1

      Same for Spain. New prepaid cards are only sold to properly identified persons. It's not mandatory yet for prepaid cards bought before the regulation passed, but on november 9 those lines not identified will be shut down (link in Spanish).

    2. Re:No news for Italy! by amorsen · · Score: 1

      Indeed, I tried to get a SIM in Italy. They asked me for my government health insurance card, so I showed them my Danish one. They didn't accept it. Tried it three times with different providers.

      So much for free trade within the EU...

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
  32. There already is a very similar thing in Bulgaria by spirtbrat · · Score: 2, Informative

    There already is a very similar thing in Bulgaria (and probably in other countries). Here, the cellphone providers, the ISPs and all traveling agencies must keep detailed records in electronic format and grant access to them for the authorities at any time, without any warning. It's basically a human rights violation, but it seems that no one affected gives a damn. Maybe it's because the non-tech people don't realize the threat.

  33. inevitable ending by michalk0 · · Score: 1

    global fascism over the horizont

  34. Obligatory by tinkertim · · Score: 1

    Sent via SMS (just now):

    "Hello! My name is Ignito Montoya, you killed my father, my new number is ...."

  35. Slippery slope much? by boogerme0 · · Score: 0

    Hmmm. Anyone familiar with slippery slope arguments? I think it's fairly simple to fathom this as being the beginning of a slippery slope.

  36. Facism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All,
    Hail Calderon
    Hail Calderon
    Hail Calderon

  37. IPv6 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If only we had a numbering system for the internet that was big enough to uniquely identify every person on the planet...

  38. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  39. Spain too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yup, same in Spain. Comes into force in November, I think.

  40. Violent mobile theft increase? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Erm, is it just me or will this lead to nothing but huge increases in mobile theft with various degrees of violence? Perhaps I missed something.

  41. Flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    You made the same points he did. You just used twice the space and threw in some condescending insults for good measure.
    .

    This post is begging for a flamebait.

    1. Re:Flamebait by EdIII · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You made the same points he did. You just used twice the space and threw in some condescending insults for good measure.
      .

      This post is begging for a flamebait.

      Well, you can't read then. That's not flamebait either. You. Can't. Read.

      What condescending insults? There was none. I identified with him. I said I agreed with him. There was no insult of any kind whatsoever. The closest I came to anything remotely like that, was expressing my dissatisfaction with his points to make marijuana legal. That's it. As for condescending, well that is your interpretation. I was merely trying to express to him there can be more effective means of not only communicating his points, but to win over people in this argument. To say that I was acting superior or patronizing is a stretch IMO. You are entitled to your opinion though, but to say I insulted him is just incorrect.

      Here's what he said that had to do with marijuana (the rest was about himself and Mexico):

      Legalizing marijuana (and possibly cocaine) would solve 96% of the problem overnight. Not to mention creating new revenue streams for the government, and maybe allowing the US to once again step behind Russia in the running to imprison the largest percentage of the population.

      To the crowd: Face it. It's illegal. But your kids smoke it, your co-workers smoke it and you/your spouse smokes it. Its illegal status is not a deterrent. Wouldn't you rather know where it's coming from and that people aren't dying over it?

      Legalize marijuana.

      So now, where I am making the same points he did? Keep in mind that I made a specific commentary on the 2nd statement.

      He made a point about the reduction of crime and a new revenue stream for the government. I made no such points at all. If anything, I disagreed with the new revenue stream as the government gains a far more valuable level of control AND revenue with the current illegal status of marijuana.

      We both pointed out the prison population, but we were using it in different ways. He was saying that we could reduce the prison population while I was pointing out that it was illegal for the very fact it could create a profitable prison population in the first place. He implies we can address a problem, while I point out that the problem was desired and designed. Not the same point.

      He used Al Capone as a comparison against the current Mexican drug lords, while I mentioned it specifically in regards to the IRS, something he never mentioned did he?

      So I fail to see how I was redundant.

      I honestly believe that his argument about how 1) Everyone does it and 2) The laws are not stopping anybody are extremely counter productive towards achieving the goal of legalization. You can think I insulted him, or that I was patronizingly superior, but I did NOT make the same arguments for legalization that he did.

    2. Re:Flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem here is that you don't have a keen grasp on your own tone and temperment.

    3. Re:Flamebait by ndogg · · Score: 1

      Sure, just like Martin Luther King Jr's "I Have a Dream" speech really just boils down to, "Minorities should have equal rights."

      --
      // file: mice.h
      #include "frickin_lasers.h"
    4. Re:Flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's just how pro-drug hippies talk. They know better than everyone else, and they want to make sure everyone knows it.

    5. Re:Flamebait by ibbey · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're right... You shouldn't be moderated Flamebait. Too bad you can't moderate someone "-1 Asshole", though. No offense, but you annoy the shit out of me (Hmm, where have I heard that before?).

      You're also right that you didn't make the same points as the GP... He made rational point, your random paranoid conspiracy ramblings aside, your post added absolutely nothing to the discussion except insults.

      Some of the GP's statements may have been overbroad, but none of them were actually wrong. Marijuana's legal status is clearly NOT a deterrent, at least not in any significant sense. You may disagree with the rationale for that legal status, but that does not invalidate the accuracy of that observation.

      It's incredibly ironic that you take it upon yourself to educate the GP on how to effectively argue the pro-drug position after you have just done everything you possibly could to alienate him ("No offense, but you annoy the shit out of me", for example). If that's the way you always start these discussions, it's no wonder that you think none of your friends smoke pot: you don't have any friends left. After reading his post and yours, I can promise you that his was the much more persuasive of the two.

    6. Re:Flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're just an asshole.

    7. Re:Flamebait by EdIII · · Score: 1

      You're right... You shouldn't be moderated Flamebait. Too bad you can't moderate someone "-1 Asshole", though. No offense, but you annoy the shit out of me (Hmm, where have I heard that before?).

      Gotta love the hypocrisy here.

      You're also right that you didn't make the same points as the GP... He made rational point, your random paranoid conspiracy ramblings aside, your post added absolutely nothing to the discussion except insults.

      Oh please. Your just being insulting in an attempt to make your point. What I said was hardly random, paranoid, or ramblings of a conspiracy. Those were FACTS. There are too many numerous examples of where laws have been created to specifically target a group of people to marginalize them or control them. To say that observation is random, or paranoid is ludicrous.

      The way that drug laws, income taxes, and the IRS have abused people is not fantasy, or delusions in my head. If you really feel that way, well then ..... you are very naive. Not trying to be insulting, or hurt your feelings here, or get a -1 asshole moderation. You really are naive if you feel that way.

      As for adding nothing to the discussion, that is hardly true at all, and designed more to be an insult. More hypocrisy.

      My point about how his arguments are received by other people are hardly worthless. That's psychology, which is a discipline over 100 years old. What I said about creating a more effective argument, was a worthwhile addition to the discussion.

      Some of the GP's statements may have been overbroad, but none of them were actually wrong.

      The only thing I said was wrong, which I think you agree was overly broad, was the generalization that "everyone was smoking pot". That is wrong. It's also offensive to those that really don't smoke it for whatever reasons they choose.

      As for his other statements, I only pointed out that were ineffective.

      You may disagree with the rationale for that legal status, but that does not invalidate the accuracy of that observation.

      Once again you need to read a little more before attacking someone and flinging around insults in an attempt to defend a person which is really a veiled attempt add vitriol to a discussion. I never said that his statements were inaccurate. Not Once. Not even CLOSE.

      It's incredibly ironic that you take it upon yourself to educate the GP on how to effectively argue the pro-drug position after you have just done everything you possibly could to alienate him ("No offense, but you annoy the shit out of me", for example). If that's the way you always start these discussions, it's no wonder that you think none of your friends smoke pot: you don't have any friends left.

      Now, who is deserving of the -1 asshole moderation? I don't think you "came down to my level". I think you were here all along.

      As for all of my friends, they are quite diverse. I don't make any judgments against those that smoke pot and they know that. As long as they are responsible people with good moral character, I could care less how they choose to relax in their free time. I don't smoke pot anymore, but that is a personal decision and not meant as a commentary or opinion against anyone else.

      I think you already agreed that his generalization about everyone smoking pot was "overly broad". Considering that, your statement was just meant as a vicious attack against me.

      Shame. On. You. What hypocrisy. You come to his defense only to do far worse than any imagined and alleged insults I threw his way. Congratulations.

      After reading his post and yours, I can promise you that his was the much more persuasive of the two.

      And that is where you are WRONG. That was my whole point, and what was worthwhile to add to the discussion. That as a

    8. Re:Flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

        I read both and the person you were responding to had the better argument.

        "95% of the problems go away"?
        Everyone is doing it anyway?
        There's no deterrant?

      Those are blatantly false. I'll bet you personally know people who refuse to use drugs that are illegal, and that you know others who sneak it but would never take it up as a habit because it's illegal. I also bet you know some potheads who have ruined their lives.

          People won't listen if you say their side is wrong.
          You have to appeal to the personal interest.
          Use injustice, not inevitability, as the main argument.

      These are proven rapport and human relation techniques.

      I think you're just confused because the person you responded to was not trying to convince people that drugs should be legalized. He was telling a legalization fan why his approach isn't working (and it is not).

         

    9. Re:Flamebait by ibbey · · Score: 1

      Now, who is deserving of the -1 asshole moderation? I don't think you "came down to my level". I think you were here all along.

      I believe in treating others as they treat others. You're an asshole, I'll be an asshole right back. Don't like it? Easy to fix: Don't be an asshole.

    10. Re:Flamebait by EdIII · · Score: 1

      I was not the asshole you were. I never actually insulted him. Read it again. I never actually disagreed with any of his points other then his overly broad generalization. Read it again.

      You like to excuse YOUR behavior, with a "he did it first" argument. Well that falls flat. It does not make you morally and/or ethically superior.

      It just makes you an asshole that subjectively and incorrectly recognizes another alleged asshole and gives you an excuse to be yourself.

      It's funny that you attack me as providing nothing to the discussion, and yet your vicious and unprovoked attacks have done exactly that. I also at least have one supporter that quite succinctly explained what I was trying to do and mentioned nothing about any attacks I made on the poster.

      Your suggestion that I can fix the "problem" is to not be an asshole. That way, assholes like you won't attack me. Well, that does not make you the better person here. You made no productive arguments of any kind, did not refute any of mine, did not support any of his. So what did you do again exactly?

    11. Re:Flamebait by ibbey · · Score: 1

      Umm... I never said I was "the better person". I said I was being an asshole. The difference is I acknowledge it.

      That said, I'll try to be more polite and maybe you'll begin to understand why your post prompted the reaction it did.

      The main reason I responded the way I did was the last sentence of your post ("Just some positive criticism (really, its intended to be positive) on how you argue for legalization."). Regardless of your intentions, there was not a SINGLE positive thing in your entire post. It ranged from full bore asshole (once again, "No offense, but you annoy the shit out of me") to condescension ("You will never be effective in communicating...") without ever going positive. Your post was criticism, but it was quite clearly the negative kind.

      No one faults you for trying to help someone make their arguments more persuasive. But your post attacked the GP on every front ("No offense, but you annoy the shit out of me" (Hint: saying "no offense" doesn't magically make the statement any less offensive), "fucking *hilarious*", "I find your comment hilarious", "That's false", "just rubs me the wrong way") without once even acknowledging that his key points (1: That the problem isn't going to be solved by just increasing the size of the corrupt Mexican police force and 2: that Mexican crime syndacites have money and power and won't be driven out of business easily) might have at least some validity. Even if you disagree with his his rhetoric, I think it's hard to argue that those two points aren't pretty strong.

      What makes this really sad is that you almost made a few good points in your posts as well, but- at least for me- your condescension and rudeness buried any actual value your posts contained. Had you criticism actually been positive, none of the follow up to this thread would have happened.

      One final point: If you reread the GP, He's not really even arguing for the legalization of drugs to begin with. I doubt that he really set out to change any minds with his post. Instead, he made a quick, off hand reply to another post that ended with the conclusion that legalizing drugs would be the best solution. Making a statement isn't the same as making an argument. It's a subtle distinction, but I think an important one. Unfortunately, the entire premise of your post assumes that he was trying to change people minds-- something that will never happen in a brief post such as his. So you're attacking him for his ineffectiveness at something that he presumably wasn't even trying to do. The irony here is that his post is the sort of thing that plants a seed of doubt that can later be used by people like yourself with your more detailed and finessed arguments. Instead of attacking him, maybe you should be thanking him for making your task easier.

  42. Amen, Brother! (something on topic, too) by Velska1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Even if you're an anonymoys coward, I have to agree with you. On both counts.

    If we legalize Mary Jane and Nose Candy now, the "hip, with it" people will move to something else that is way too dangerous to be legal (crystal meth, anyone?). That will create a lucrative market for it.

    The real solution would be to have a new kind of culture, that doesn't glorify delinquency and criminality. That'll be the day...

    By keeping Marijuana illegal we make teens think they're living on the edge when they toke a joint. The fans of rock stars (if not the stars themselves) think they're out there, when they get busted for coke. They could be dealing with much more dangerous substances, and there is absolutely no way of completely blocking a supply for something that has such high-dollar demand.

    It all comes back to how much freedom we can allow ourselves.

    And not to be completely offtopic, a word about the phone deal: It is where we are going everywhere. ISPs forced to keep an IP log forever and other Patriot Act features that are now permanent. UK tracking all internet traffic (if not being able to analyze it all yet). China (among others) controlling what regular surfers see on the 'Net.

    This are not alarmist FUD, they're today's reality. Increasing capacity of PCs will enable ever more complete tracking of everything we do online - and eventually analyzing and compiling relevant data to central databases; your whole life is an open book to the Big Brother). Orwell was eerily correct in his predictions. What he got wrong were the year and who would be behind it. It turns out that it was the most conservative Congress and President, who sold the whole thing, because we are afraid. Very, very afraid. Besides, you never know when seemingly benign activities turn out to be preparation for terrorism, so we'll have to keep track of everybody all the time. (Google Panopticon.)

    When I was a kid, I heard a joke:

    Q: What is the difference between capitalism and communism?
    A: In capitalism some people exploit others; in communism it's the other way.

    Either way, taken to the extreme, you end up in totalitarianism.

    --
    Every problem has a solution that is simple, easy and wrong. Selling our Liberty for a little Security is a much too de
    1. Re:Amen, Brother! (something on topic, too) by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "If we legalize Mary Jane and Nose Candy now, the "hip, with it" people will move to something else that is way too dangerous to be legal (crystal meth, anyone?). That will create a lucrative market for it."

      Maybe it's me, but, I never thought anyone really did booze or drugs to be 'cool', they did it to feel good and party?

      I'm sure 'some' people and kids do it just to be cool doing something illegal and getting away with it, but, I can't believe that the majority of people do it just to be 'cool'.

      Unless things have changed radically from when I was a kid...people got high because it felt good and made things more fun....

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    2. Re:Amen, Brother! (something on topic, too) by Zerth · · Score: 1

      Morelike kids will do whatever is easiest to get messed up, which is why they do household inhalents, choke themselves, and sniff jenkem(fermented crap).

      When I was in highschool, I made booze out of grapefruits. Nastiest stuff I've ever tasted, but bring it to a party and people would drink it because they couldn't get anything easier until they could drive across the border.

      If someone came up with a safe, cheap oral/smokeable euphoriant/intoxicant that wore off quickly, they'd make a bundle.

    3. Re:Amen, Brother! (something on topic, too) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You think people use psychotropic drugs in order to define themselves as hip and edgy? Clearly this opinion is possible only from someone completely outside drug culture. Everyone I've ever known that used psychotropic drugs (and this is a fair number) did it for the experience of it. Each drug provides a different kind of experience. Legalize marijuana and people who like that experience will keep doing it. Same with any other. This idea that people will move on to something else because their drug of choice is now legal is just stupid.

    4. Re:Amen, Brother! (something on topic, too) by ibbey · · Score: 1

      If we legalize Mary Jane and Nose Candy now, the "hip, with it" people will move to something else that is way too dangerous to be legal (crystal meth, anyone?). That will create a lucrative market for it

      Might get modded redundant for this, since I'm not really saying anything that others haven't said already, but I can't let this statement stand unchallenged.

      There is absolutely no reason to believe that people will switch to harder drugs if marijuana or cocaine were legalized. In fact the opposite is likely true, since legalizing cocaine would lower it's cost, and some of the thousands of people currently addicted to crack might be able to make the switch to straight cocaine instead. Who know... That might be fantasy. But it's no more fantasy than the belief that people will switch to harder stuff.

      The notion that people will do harder drugs if we legalize the (relatively) soft stuff is based on the notion that people do drugs -because- drugs are illegal. It ignores the possibility that there might be some other possible reason for drug use. While I suppose that there might be a few teenagers who would do meth to look cool, most teens are smart enough to know that looking like you're in your forties when you're eighteen isn't exactly cool.

    5. Re:Amen, Brother! (something on topic, too) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "If we legalize Mary Jane and Nose Candy now, the "hip, with it" people will move to something else that is way too dangerous to be legal (crystal meth, anyone?). That will create a lucrative market for it."

      Way too dangerous to be legal? This is the authoritarian attitude that creates such 'counterculture' in the first place. let those morons kill themselves with meth, if that's what they want to do. Why waste tax income on locking them up? If we must spend money on them, lets offer non-compulsory help programs. Treating these people as criminals to get the self-righteous in our society off is not worth the money, nor is it effective.

      "The real solution would be to have a new kind of culture, that doesn't glorify delinquency and criminality. That'll be the day..."

      People rebel because the law prohibiting such behaviors in various circumstances isn't justified in the first place. What happens when someone you know keeps bullshitting? Eventually, you stop trusting his judgment. Well, that's what's happened here. Large cross-sections of society have lost respect for an authority that whores itself out to moneyed interests and moralist crusader groups who are good at polarizing society. A polarized society cannot effectively self-govern, freeing said authority to do as it wishes.

    6. Re:Amen, Brother! (something on topic, too) by atraintocry · · Score: 1

      I get it. It's sort of like how prescription drugs are legal, and now nobody abuses those.

      I don't suppose this new culture you talk about would revolve primarily around Christian rock bands, would it?

  43. About Contraband by Velska1 · · Score: 1

    Remove prohibition and even the most powerfull and influential drug lords will disappear into the dustbin of history.

    Uhh.. Not quite. The Capone argument is a fallacy, since although his organization took some serious hits, organized crime never went anywhere. It just changed its face. It's not your Italian-American bookie now. It's the tagger in the 'hood, that sells you pot, coke and rock, plus a trick with his favorite hooked-up girl, who does it to get high.

    Again, contraband will always be in demand.

    --
    Every problem has a solution that is simple, easy and wrong. Selling our Liberty for a little Security is a much too de
    1. Re:About Contraband by dwye · · Score: 1

      > It's not your Italian-American bookie now.
      > It's the tagger in the 'hood, that sells you pot, coke
      > and rock, plus a trick with his favorite hooked-up girl,
      > who does it to get high.

      And who gets his product from a Russian, Columbian, or Asian mobster, as opposed to a Sicilian/Neapolitan mobster or a Jewish mobster, like in the good old days.

      Ending Prohibition absolutely killed the income of the Mob, NOT! The "We're bigger than General Motors" quote was from the 1950s, before they were really into selling drugs (with its vast revenue stream). All that Prohibition did was kill off the mobsters who couldn't shift out of alcohol or become "respectable" bar owners or liquor wholesalers. The Chicago Mob just became quiet, like the mobsters in every other major city had long been, not because of a lack of money, but because Frank Nitti and later Capone successors succeeded in consolidating the city under one group, rather than the several that had once existed.

      > Again, contraband will always be in demand.

      And if it isn't, something else will be found, like kidnapping, just as privateers became pirates, rather than going back to supplying beef jerky for passing ships. These people are not willing to become ordinary "chumps" like Wall Street brokers or bank financial products specialists or bond salesman, even if the latter group made far more money.

  44. No Roaming by Velska1 · · Score: 2, Informative

    So what happens if you buy and activate a prepaid cellphone in the US or Guatemala, then use it in Mexico??

    Simple: Your prepaid phone will work only as long as it has a connection with a carrier that has a roaming contract with yours. Many, if not most, prepaids don't work internationally unless you register them (often for a fee), because international calls are hard to charge on prepaids (at least, where receiving one is charged to your account). Sure, you can use a fake ID, but pretty soon that will be considered a premeditated action to conceal illegal/terrorist activity.

    Slam goes the door!

    --
    Every problem has a solution that is simple, easy and wrong. Selling our Liberty for a little Security is a much too de
    1. Re:No Roaming by FireFury03 · · Score: 1

      Simple: Your prepaid phone will work only as long as it has a connection with a carrier that has a roaming contract with yours. Many, if not most, prepaids don't work internationally unless you register them (often for a fee)

      This is certainly untrue for prepay phones in the UK - you haven't had to ask for roaming for years, they Just Work when you take them to other countries these days. I'd be pretty surprised if the same wasn't true for the majority of GSM carriers in other countries.

      because international calls are hard to charge on prepaids (at least, where receiving one is charged to your account).

      AFAIK, this problem has long since been solved by the CAMEL SS7 protocol.

    2. Re:No Roaming by Reziac · · Score: 1

      For the criminals, the solution seems simple -- observe someone using a cell phone, target them, and use THEIR phone to make your ransom demands. Why bother with your own phone when your victim's phone is so handy and clearly works just fine?

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  45. Coming soon to a country near you... by Stanislav_J · · Score: 1

    So, our neighbors to the South are getting ahead of us on something, eh? I must say, given the slow but steady trend of the U.S. towards ever increasing surveillance, one thing that has puzzled me is why our government has not yet implemented something like this. If you're going to go so far as to use warrantless wiretapping and monitoring of the domestic phone system to keep tabs on your own citizens, it can't be very effective if anyone can walk into a Wal-Mart or 7-11, use cash to buy a cheap prepaid cellphone with a number and talk time already set up for it, and use it -- no ID, no registration, no way to know who belongs to that number. Criminals make wide use of these anonymous and more or less disposable phone accounts, and it is astounding that no legislators have yet played the "if you use one of these phones, you must have something bad to hide" card and passed a law similar to what Mexico is proposing.

    --
    "Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket." -- Eric Hoffer
  46. Orwell Resurrected by Velska1 · · Score: 0

    Seems that any way the political winds turn, they always lead back to totalitarianism (and eventually to total xenophobia, because of point two below). And it's always sold under the same pretexts:

    • Security - be it against counterrevolutionaries (aka revisionists), criminals or terrorists.
    • Patriotism - if you're not for this, you are Anti-[insert your nationality here].

    Orwell just got the year wrong. Otherwise he was eerily prophetic. Advances in computer science will make meaningful analyzing of data and collecting them in central databases possible in much larger scale than what is done today. Makes me want to go offline for good and start a subsistence-living only farm. Then again, encrypting most of our communications will postpone the advent of the final dystopia.

    "Anything you do, anything you say, I'll be watching you..."

    But wait. Everything that can be used to do good can be used to do evil. Potential is potential. We determine the direction it takes. Sure, it will make society more complex, but we'll need a lot of safeguards against unreasonable invasions. We just have to determine unreasonable. And that is a political back-and-forth, that is ongoing, and lasts forever.

    --
    Every problem has a solution that is simple, easy and wrong. Selling our Liberty for a little Security is a much too de
  47. Narcomenudeo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually,

    I think what officials want to target with this meassure is "Narcomenudeo".

    Meaning, Highschoolers and college undergrads that are bullied (or some do it by choice) by the narcolords into selling small ammounts of drugs and use them as distribution channels.

    Once they have the distribution figured out, you can trace the cash flow back to the head honchos. The ones that even know carry like ten phones and switch SIM chips like crazy.

    Fact is, Mexico is at war with the organized crime, and every bit of intel helps save lives.

  48. CURP is not like SSN by niktemadur · · Score: 3, Informative

    ...CURP (Unique Registration Population Code in Spanish, like the Social Security Number in the US) ...

    Not by a long shot. CURP consists of four sections:

    1. Four letter acronym - last name, mother's maiden name, first name and second name (or second letter from first name).
    2. Six digits indicating your birth date.
    3. Three letters indicating your state of birth.
    4. Three letters and three digits, seemingly random but actually a predictable tag, to differentiate you from others sharing the first three sections, all very similar.

    Many commercial apps in Mexico have the "CURP function" installed, you just type in the first three criteria, and out comes the full CURP. I believe even some legit Mexican websites provide this function. It's not intended to be secret and it's not tied in with your personal finances in any way.

    Little or nothing to see here, folks, move along.

    --
    Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
  49. Give me your CURP! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your CURP or your life! Oh, never mind, you don't have to decide. I'll just take both.

  50. So when alcohol was legalized.... by professorguy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So when alcohol was legalized in the 30's, everyone ran out and started doing heroin? I think you were doing heroin before you suggested this.

    1. Re:So when alcohol was legalized.... by Cruciform · · Score: 1

      Heroin doesn't warp reality like that. He's either a user of hallucinogenics or a Republican.

      *I kid, I kid. I'd never call someone a Republican*

  51. Not that this will do anything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First of all, I'm no fan of the "privacy at all cost" crowd Slashdot seems to attract. This can be done in Mexico because the values concerning privacy are different than the norm in the US, and you don't have a small, outspoken "privacy at all cost" crowd.

    That said, if you know someone's full name, date of birth, and the state they were born in, making a bogus Mexican CURP number is pretty trivial.

    My experience living in Mexico is that records are poorly kept (one geek project I had recently was generating a bunch of bogus CURP numbers for a database at work) and that the criminals shouldn't have a problem putting bogus names and CURP numbers in the cell phone database. This will be about as reliable as one's New York Times registration information being reliable.

  52. I'm cheap, not evil. by professorguy · · Score: 1

    Since pre-paid anonymous cell phones are almost always used for no good and legal purpose this sounds like a great idea for that kind of phone.

    I have an anonymous tracfone. I got it not because I am evil, but because I am cheap. My phone has lasted me 18 months for a total of $140 or $7.78/month. Tell me the cell plan that would be cheaper than this.

    I'm sure the telcos would agree that not paying at least $50 every month should be illegal. Don't worry, I'm sure in a few more years it will be.

  53. Off topic with an great seg to on topic!! by shoemilk · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I hope you got modded "interesting" for your on topic bits, because your off topic drug bit was some of the worst drivel I've ever read. As a former pothead and someone who has studied 1920's America and alcohol, I respectfully as that you please educate yourself and not just live off of Nancy Regan propaganda.

    The collateral damage of crime surrounding narcotics is so much worse than the actual damage that the narcotics cause. Even your "way too dangerous" drug, the most dangerous thing about it is the production of it. I agree meth ravages a person and isn't something someone should be taking, but instead of throwing them in a pound-them-in-the-ass federal prison, we should be giving them counseling.

    Look at tobacco and alcohol, two things that are legal, and please realize that everything you wrote is completely nonsensical. Your entire argument reads like a pro-prohibitionists argument during the 1920's. Absolutely nothing is solved by making narcotics illegal and thousands of problems are created.

    By keeping Marijuana illegal we make teens think they're living on the edge when they toke a joint.

    This sentence is the most ignorant of all. It sums up your complete incomprehension of the motivation of teenagers with your lack of the ability to see the major problems that prohibition causes. Just like this bill will do nothing to deter criminals in Mexico and only put more innocent people in harms way as the incentive to mug someone for their cellphone has just increased tenfold.

    1. Re:Off topic with an great seg to on topic!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree meth ravages a person and isn't something someone should be taking, but instead of throwing them in a pound-them-in-the-ass federal prison, we should be giving them counseling.

      Why? Why "give" them anything as the alternative? The nazi/nanny state invariably follows the socialist/welfare state. Frankly, I'd rather pay for neither. More so, the argument is stronger when counseling is NOT suggested as the solution to anything. Better is to point out that doing nothing is superior and unambiguously cheaper.

  54. uh oh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get a plan in the US that is not pre-paid without your social. Good luck. Sure, it may be in your mom's name, much like the basement you inhabit, but not a stretch to find you regardless...

    1. Re:uh oh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My first cell phone had a misspelling in my name, because the guy who ran the cell-phone store was not a native speaker of English. I never bothered to change it; all my bills were in that misspelled name, until I changed carriers.

    2. Re:uh oh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      better to change carriers than end up on the terrisy watch list

  55. Re:All of the National Mexican Databases (we have by kabocox · · Score: 1

    At first, I was going to moan about how awful that you have 10 different numbers to keep track of. Then I thought a bit about it. That actually makes more sense and should in theory be more secure than our system of just using the SSN everywhere. In the US, we are only really required to have a SSN, DL, Birth Cert, Marriage Cert & tax records to get by in life. The SSC has no real useful info on it. Your name and a number. The DL is the most dangerous one, it has you name, address, and physical info. Our birth certs are kinda of joke as an id medium. They've got like name, a baby foot print, and parents name, or and doctor/medical place that you were born. You can't really use that to ID an adult, but we pretend that's o.k. ;) Marriage Certs don't really give much info. It tells the names of two partners, the religious person/government official that performed the ceremony, the place, and witnesses. You'd almost think that photos of all involved and other tracking numbers other than a name would be on the document, nope. Tax records, have your name, address and how much you've made from various sources. That's the other dangerous one, but it is kept private as far as I'm aware of.

    Here it seems like dozens of places that you need to hand out your SSN as a form of ID or to be entered into their private little DB because they are too lazy to make their own key number for you!

    I have an really weird private idea that /. would utterly hate, but I think would solve all these data breaches and privacy concerns. Require all these various DBs to be publicly available and search able by anyone through the internet. It'd basically be everyone living in a glass data box. My case for something along those lines is that you and others claim criminals or others that shouldn't have any access to the data already do. So what's the theory behind trying to hide all this data that only the government and criminals know? Oh, yes to keep the citizens in the dark. Basically, I think of a lot of this stuff as sort of like the phone book. It's more useful if we all had access rather than only the folks at the phone companies and a handful of government employees.

  56. Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm Mexican. I don't think it's that bad of a law. What's wrong with it?. After all, don't Americans, for example, need to provide their SSN for EVERYTHING? You do it before you buy a cell phone. You do it before you get a credit card to buy a cell phone. The police asked me for my cell phone number, birth date, license plates, and make and year of car yesterday just to help me recharge the battery of my car, and they did not even know how to do it and left me by myself...I had to get wires and call a friend.

    1. Re:Anonymous Coward by base3 · · Score: 1

      In the U.S., I can (as of today) buy a prepaid cell phone for cash, activate it, and use it giving NO personally identifying information in the process. Which is as it should be.

      --
      One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
  57. Re:All of the National Mexican Databases (we have by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    9) National Military Card (for all males 18 and older which technically makes all of Male Mexicans National Reserve and you need to have it for the next database one, the passport)

    10) Passports, (not required by law but do require #9 to get one and will also be required if you ever need to leave this place.)

    No, we don't need it since a long time ago, see this.

  58. Get some EXPERIENCE, and then maybe we'll talk ... by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "If we legalize Mary Jane and Nose Candy now, the "hip, with it" people will move to something else that is way too dangerous to be legal (crystal meth, anyone?). That will create a lucrative market for it."

    OK. We get it. You call Marijuana "Mary Jane". and Cocaine "Nose Candy". You use the word "hip". You speculate what "hip" people would do in ways that make it painfully evident that you have exactly zero insight into what it is like to be one of those people. You are not hip, and never will be. You didn't have to go so far out of your way to make the point. You did not have to make a statement like the above to prove that you have no reason or excuse for speculating on matters oif this nature, since you have zero experience with same. We get it. We really do.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  59. Agreed, too many cops everywhere by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here in Sunnyvale, CA, we have 10 cop cars and 3 big fire trucks show up at the scene of every minor traffic accident.

    At the same time, nobody ever gets a ticket for running a red light : they are waiting for a big accident to justify traffic light cameras.

    Cops in Mexico are extremely corrupt on a personal level. In the US, the corruption is more a system dynamic : pass enough laws == create criminals , the entire law enforcement and prison system benefits.

  60. already done in Malaysia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All cell phone number in here must be registered with national id. And that includes prepaid services.

    It's not much of a problems to implement and since then has reduced cellphone related crime.

  61. Just another way to trow money by rafagadeviento · · Score: 1

    This is just another "genius" way to spend tax money, a way to give a job to some politician relatives and say "we are doing everything we can to fight criminals" ... which is completely false, but, every time that the government start doing something like this, in a few months the public find that a relative of some high politician was charging a HUGE quantity for a lousy Access database... that the database is not working as intended, but, the govs would still not drop this thing... because some politician cousin/brother/father/husband/lover is the national director and he is winning a lot money doing nothing...

    Just think about this people, in Mexico, we pay a tax for the right to have a car each year (Tenencia), this tax was intended to just help to pay for the Mexican Olimpics of ... 1968 !!!

    And we still pay it... because the government needs money to pay for this kind of amazing ideas.

  62. Extortion in relative's name by lamber45 · · Score: 1

    Something similar happened with my brother-in-law as the alleged victim and his aunt as the dupe. Unfortunately, the criminals actually got some money out of her.

  63. I like this law.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shit I like this law, now I don't have to try and smuggle guns across the border but I can bring a shit load of pre-paid cells to Mexico and making a killing... hope no one else get the same idea...

  64. Re:Get some EXPERIENCE, and then maybe we'll talk by Velska1 · · Score: 1

    Just to talk back a little: I know damn well I'm not hip, cool or whatever the current hip jargon is for that. I dropped out of it in the 1970s.

    And yes, I did it all. Booze, pot and onward. Most of my friends from that period of my life are dead and buried (ODs, shootings, stabbings - all connected with drug buys/busts or then people totally losing it on a mixture of narcotics and running amok).

    I just know the reasons I did it. I grew up, but a lot of my friends didn't. And to most of us, although there was the thrill of getting high, it felt edgier to be doing something illegal (few of us inhaled vapors of industrial or household solvents - we weren't stupid as much as we were rebellious).

    So I won't buy all the above without some bargaining, although many good points were made.

    --
    Every problem has a solution that is simple, easy and wrong. Selling our Liberty for a little Security is a much too de
  65. Re:All of the National Mexican Databases (we have by ibsteve2u · · Score: 1

    So did Carlos Slim Helú get the exclusive distribution and consulting rights for all of the major database and hardware vendors' products in Mexico or something?

    --
    Orwell: "In a Time of Universal Deceit, telling the Truth is a Revolutionary Act"
  66. You didn't quite do it all ... by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

    "And yes, I did it all."

    I will take you at your word that you did drugs. I will also take you at your word that you did them for all the wrong reasons. You are totally lost in this absurd idea that people do drugs because of peer pressure or to "look hip". You obviously had this as your foundation and so there is no surprise that it didn't work out for you. Reality is for people who can't handle drugs. Reality is for you ;-)

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    1. Re:You didn't quite do it all ... by Velska1 · · Score: 1

      I suppose you're right in a way. Actually, pot was a letdown for me, and harder stuff just started looking too dangerous to acquire after a while. Booze was the one I got hooked on. It distorted reality just right for me.

      I ended up an alcoholic at a young age. Was sober for years, and had a relapse - made the mistake of thinking I could handle it. I probably would be homeless or dead, if I hadn't sobered up. I did it in the interest (among others) of having meaningful human relationships. When I was drinking my relationships went a little sour...

      Oh, and one thing is, that addictive behavior is a pattern that tends to get repeated. It doesn't have to be psychotropic substances.

      --
      Every problem has a solution that is simple, easy and wrong. Selling our Liberty for a little Security is a much too de
  67. you dont need to convince everybody by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am sure an adequately funded lobby group could work wonders.

  68. WRT crystal meth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would argue the most dangerous aspect of it is not its effects on the health (as you pointed out) or its manufacture (your stated hypothesis) but rather the way people behave while they are under its influence. Especially in cases of prolonged usage.

    If we were to legalize crystal meth, it would probably be best to distribute it for free, in strictly controlled government boarding/work facillities staffed by psychologists and other types of researchers.

    There would need to be safeguards in place to ensure people were able and encouraged to "get clean" long term.

    It would certianly be an interesting experiment

  69. I Give Up by Velska1 · · Score: 1

    I don't want to make this another religion-bashing thread, but I really don't consider policy and religion necessarily inextricably twined. Common sense is common sense. Any rock band would do, if they had some other attractions besides delinquency.

    OTOH, one example of legalization comes from my native country, that had a prohibition around the same time the US did, and repealed it around the same time, too. After the repeal, alcohol consumption spiked up, and kept growing until the WWII, which caused a decline in availability. After that, during the reconstruction boom, people had more money for discretionary spending than ever (this coincided with a major shift from agrarian/subsistence to urban/industrial). This lead to another upsurge.

    40 years ago, alcohol sales limitations were cut much deeper (removing state monopoly from beer, among other things) with the idea, that people would learn more moderate habits, when the "forbidden fruit" factor was further removed. 40 years later alcohol is the #1 direct cause of death among men of 25 to 60 years old, followed by cardiac arrest and colorectal cancers, which are both linked to high alcohol consumption.

    Alcohol-fueled violence is at its highest since early 19th century, when a peasant rebellion was partially caused by government restrictions on alcohol distilleries. Current alcohol-fueled violence follows the same pattern overwhelmingly: A group of people gather in a home, tavern or something, start drinking, and 6 hours later someone has been shot, stabbed or bludgeoned within an inch of his (usually his) life or dead. Alternately, this doesn't happen until bars close between 2 and 5 AM, and people congregate on the sidewalk, were the smallest perceived slight is enough to spark a free-for-all.

    Make of it what you will. We can hardly solve this by arguing anyway.

    --
    Every problem has a solution that is simple, easy and wrong. Selling our Liberty for a little Security is a much too de
    1. Re:I Give Up by atraintocry · · Score: 1

      I misread you and thought you were blaming pop culture (arts & entertainment really) for the evils of society. I'm just not for censorship in any way.

      I agree, a lot of it is cultural. When I was in Germany I was told that although the drinking age is lower than in the US, they have less DUIs because it is more of a social stigma there. I don't know if that's actually true but it seemed like the legal consequences were harsher as well.

      It's an odd situation. I suppose in a perfect world we wouldn't consider something as destructive as alcohol to be cool. On the other hand, people drink precisely because the world isn't perfect.