Slashdot Mirror
Biometric IDs For Every Indian Citizen
wiedzmin writes "This month, officials from the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), armed with fingerprinting machines, iris scanners and cameras hooked to laptops, will fan out across the towns and villages of southern Andhra Pradesh state in the first phase of the project whose aim is to give every Indian a lifelong Unique ID (UID) number for 'anytime, anywhere' biometric authentication. While enrolling with the UIDAI may be voluntary, other agencies and service providers might require a UID number in order to transact business. Usha Ramanathan, a prominent legal expert who is attached to the Center for the Study of Developing Societies in the national capital, said that, 'taken to its logical limit, the UID project will make it impossible, in a couple of years, for an ordinary citizen to undertake a simple task such as traveling within the country without a UID number.' Next step, tying that UID number and biometric information to to their RIM BlackBerry PIN number."
The difference seems to be that this number is tied to a fingerprint, iris scan, and facial photograph. That's a lot scarier than my social security number currently is.
"He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
Yeah, the credit fueled binge and bust worked out real well in the US ...
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
I once was talking about biometrics with a preacher whose PC I was installing. The whole bit where the guy had his entire life and house controlled by the RFID chip in his hand had folks talking, so I naturally assumed a preacher would think Revelations. "Nope, not worried about that in the least" When I asked him why he said "Do you really think a being THAT old, that originally stood at the side of God, would be THAT obvious? It is so much easier to do, and the public will NEVER catch on". When I asked him how he asked me to tell him my last three SS digits, which of course I could from memory. He then emphasized this passage "And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads . He said we ALREADY had a mark, and all it would take is a national rationing system like in time of worldwide disaster to make it true. While I don't believe in religion, I have to admit I couldn't think of a comeback for that one.
As for TFA, in many ways I feel sorry for India. While we were able to gradually progress they are basically trying to jump from third to first world pretty much in super fast forward. The logistics of doing that and dealing with the unreal amount of info one has to collect to keep from having widespread fraud in the digital age is just insanity. While I can understand them wanting to take any shortcuts they can gvet, tying this much info without a hell of a firewall around it will come back to bite them in the ass if they aren't careful.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
The original intent of this ID is create something akin to the social security number in the US.
I'll tell you two important reasons for this
1. Make resource allocation more efficient.
For example, there is a concept of basic items like rice, wheat etc... being sold subsidized to poor people.
That mechanism is very inefficient and red tape laden presently.The ID is supposed to streamline it .
2. Currently there is no concept credit history in India other than a credit card.
There is no way a dealer would sell you a TV on credit unless you bring somebody known the dealer along with you.
Imagine US without SSN. That is what it is now in India. very inefficient.
My goodness -- it'd be like ... Britain, Australia, New Zealand, and all those other countries that don't use a social security identifier as a de facto single compulsory ID for everything else in your life apart from just social security. How horrifying!
In a related topic, the UK's proposed national ID has been scrapped even before it has become compulsory, with the government scrapping it saying they want 'to reverse the substantial erosion of civil liberties and roll back state intrusion.' When you've got a government saying that national IDs are a substantial erosion of civil liberties, it's worth listening to
Of the two "important reasons" for an SSN you mention, neither is valid.
The first does not require your social security number to be used by anyone other than (shock) social security themselves. It doesn't even need to be a universal number across both tax and benefits (and given that tax law and benefits law might sometimes consider income differently, or in ways that are open to case-law interpretation, it seems like a good idea not to link the databases too closely). In India, one of the controversial aspects of the biometric ID is that it will include your caste -- seemingly inviting caste-based discrimination. Again, a case where there's an advantage to deciding not to keep information on file.
The second doesn't require a social security number at all. Australia, Britain, and many other countries have reasonable credit history checking methods that do not require revealing your tax, social services, or other government identifiers.
I suspect India is actually more interested in the biometrics than in the individual ID. The problem they face is that they have a very large rural population who don't interact with official government documentation very often -- and do not have birth certificates, driving licenses, passports, and other documents that are used as proof of identity in more urban/developed countries. A biometric ID would give them one, and one that doesn't matter if the ID card itself gets lost on the farm.