Biometric ID Cards Ready For Trial In UK 416
0ctal writes "Looks like us lucky Brits are getting ID cards no matter what... A 10,000 user trial starts next week. There's been a fair amount of debate on this recently, and it's been coming for some time, but live trials are sooner than expected. The trial is set up to evaluate three competing biometric products. Qinetiq, quoted by the story, are a government backed company set up to use MoD tech in civilian apps."
Tin foil! (Score:4, Funny)
A good Q&A on this from the BBC too... (Score:3, Insightful)
Glad to see that privacy concerns, and not having to prove that you are a citizen are on that list.
To be honest, i'd be for ID cards in a way - we do have a bit of a problem with illegal immigrants in this country lately, who are totally abusing the system - the current trend is buying cheap cars, and then they just drive around the city in them with no tax insurance or anything.
Having ID cards would mean these guys could be instantly checked out, as many don't speak English and the police forces don't have the resources to be able to question them in any of the many different languages they use.
Re:A good Q&A on this from the BBC too... (Score:5, Insightful)
Today, NI number and basic details.
Next decade, criminal convictions get added.
Next decade, genetic abnormalities get added.
Next decade, political stance gets added (gotta get those anti-terrorism measures in there somewhere).
Paranoid? Maybe. Look back to what happened Germany in the 1930s and we should be very, very concerned about how this kind of "information" could be abused.
Re:A good Q&A on this from the BBC too... (Score:3, Interesting)
If we have to carry cards, we can also carry card readers. If we have to show id, then the person requesting id also has to show id. We swap cards and read them into our respective card-reading wireless terminals.
Technology is neutral. When we sense that we are being outnumbered by a more organized ecosystem, there will inevitably be an organized defense. Organized
Re:A good Q&A on this from the BBC too... (Score:3, Insightful)
What exactly is to stop them using someone elses ID? The basic problem is that with any such scheme the "bad guys" will simply either use bogus IDs or steal the identity of honest people. ID cards which cannot be forged and tot
Re:A good Q&A on this from the BBC too... (Score:2, Informative)
That would be the biometric identifiers. The word is even used in the slashdot headline, it's not like you even need to read the article to find that out!
Re:A good Q&A on this from the BBC too... (Score:3, Informative)
Biometric information will not be a practical deterrent to identity card theft and fraud. The only pieces of information that will deter theft are the pieces that can be checked by everyone - the photograph and the signature. Thus t
Re:A good Q&A on this from the BBC too... (Score:3, Insightful)
All that proves is that the card and the cardholder match. Putting fingerprints, retina scan or whatever information on the card dosn't address this issue any more than having a photograph (the most common form of current biometrics) on the card.
ID cards don't work against illegal immigrants. (Score:5, Interesting)
They *also* don't make a blind bit of difference against terrorist organisations, as Spain also found out to their cost.
It's pure myth that ID cards are effective tools against illegal immigration and terrorism.
Re:ID cards don't work against illegal immigrants. (Score:3, Informative)
I'll answer my own rhetorical question I asked in my (rejected) submission: what countries will follow if Britain is successful? Answer: all other modern world countries -- only a matter of time here in the US, imo.
Here [ccla.org] is a article mentioning at least some of the uses of national ID cards:
Re:A good Q&A on this from the BBC too... (Score:3, Insightful)
IDs are simply white elephants. They won't prevent crime (in fact ID theft will become a massive problem), they won't stop terrorism (they didn't in Spain) and they won't stop immigration (because people are desperate).
I would be in favour of immigrants being DNA swabbed, fingerprinted & photographed (all of
Re:A good Q&A on this from the BBC too... (Score:2)
I think the British are the indiginous population of the UK.
Re:A good Q&A on this from the BBC too... (Score:2, Informative)
Not strictly true. Great Britain is: the combined Kingdoms of England and Scotland plus the principality of Wales.
It's the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. So the "indigenous" population is British and Northern Irish.
Mind you, we're such a bunch of Mongrels anyway: Celts, Anglo-Saxons, Poles, Germans, Dutch, French, Normans. What most people mean when they try to define "British" is "White like me".
Historically the UK has absorbed a real hodge-podge of peoples and they've been ass
Re:A good Q&A on this from the BBC too... (Score:4, Informative)
Toronto is now home to dozens of languages (plus English & French) and, except around World Cup time, is quite sane. The cultures are melting, but they are melting at the edges, instead of being shredded and spun vigorously.
Re:A good Q&A on this from the BBC too... (Score:5, Funny)
I'm constantly astounded at how badly some 20th and 30th generation immigrants speak English.
Re:A good Q&A on this from the BBC too... (Score:2)
A country can only afford to have ONE culture...
It's not necessarily easy for a country to have more than one culture, but it is most certainly affordable: lil' ol' New Zealand seems to manage, lil' ol' Wales seems to manage, I discovered recently that Finland has a significant Swedish culture (there's this guy, Linus Torvalds, you may have heard of...)
Re:A good Q&A on this from the BBC too... (Score:3)
and here's the second point. this is just nonsense. i mean, c'mon. read
Re:A good Q&A on this from the BBC too... (Score:2)
I'd of thought the 'UK' appended to my username might have helped you work out where I lived, but I guess not
Blunkett scares the... (Score:4, Insightful)
Ok, so add biometric identification to the ID we already have; passports, driving licence, etc. but why on earth are we having this centralisation? Surely everything we've learnt about security technologies says a layered approach is needed?
What happens when someone beats the system? Everyone will trust it completely because nutters like Blunkett say biometric id is unbeatable. What about the human element of the system? If someone exploits this database they can write themselves a few new lives, delete other peoples lives, etc.
It scares me. Ah well, I'll just move abroad with my girlfriend and take our 30 000 of student loan with us.
Re:Blunkett scares the... (Score:5, Insightful)
More to the point, he's literally the only person in the UK who thinks ID cards are a good thing and yet still they're being pushed through.
Even the house of commons thinks he's crazy, and everyone else has been wondering for years why Blunkett still has a job.
Choice quote from STAND:
Re:Blunkett scares the... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Blunkett scares the... (Score:5, Insightful)
If it does violate it, don't expect the ID card scheme to change, instead the government will Opt out [cnn.com] just like it did before when the law didn't suit them.
Re:Blunkett scares the... (Score:2)
Re:Blunkett scares the... (Score:4, Interesting)
More to the point, he's literally the only person in the UK who thinks ID cards are a good thing and yet still they're being pushed through.
This survey [bbc.co.uk] shows that your assertion is wrong.
Re:Blunkett scares the... (Score:3, Insightful)
Besides, the home office has previously discounted such surveys as not representitive. To get a true representation of public opinion they ran a public consultation lasting several months. In that, the majority of respondents were against the cards, but the home office fudged the figures to say otherwise.
When I wrote to them the reply from Beverley Hughes said they had chosen to ignore a huge number of email responses because they were no
Re:Blunkett scares the... (Score:3, Insightful)
It does indeed, well spotted. Perhaps instead of saying that nobody agrees with David Blunkett, I should have said that at least 800 people in Britain, when asked a question that we don't know the details of, responded in a way which could be interpreted as their "backing" of a plan for ID cards.
[ ] Do you support terrorism?
[ ] Do you fear terrorism?
[ ] If we introduce an ID card to stop terrrorism, would you support it?
Of course, these people
This was a telephone poll! (Score:3, Insightful)
I could be mistaken, but acording to Fridays Today programme [bbc.co.uk], this was a Mori telephone poll.
Perhaps Mori would have seen a different result if, every time someone told them to fuck off and slammed the phone down, they treated as an 'I value my privacy' responce.
Re:Blunkett scares the... (Score:2)
Re:Blunkett scares the... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Blunkett scares the... (Score:3)
That would require a "radical interpretation of the text". Given that very few parts draw any distinction between people who are US citizens and those who are not...
Re:Blunkett scares the... (Score:2)
One of the worst things is that, when presenting his proposals to the House, he said (something along the lines of):
... which has been shown to be wrong - a glaringly obvious example is the automated identification of people in Belgium in the '30s, including their race, which was oh-so-useful to the invading Nazis when they wanted to liquidise the Jewish population.
Technically, I suppose, that would be misleading the House. It's still, just abou
Re:Blunkett scares the... (Score:2)
All that does is make it easier to match the document and it's holder. It dosn't prove much otherwise. Also a driving licence was intended to indicate that the holder was competent to drive motor vehicles, subsequently abused as an identity document
but why on earth are we having this centralisation? Surely everything we've learnt about security technologies says a layered approach is needed?
Most people don't
Re:Blunkett scares the... (Score:2, Insightful)
Your AC status says it all really, you are frightened of being modded down so you choose to keep your login private.
Re:Blunkett scares the... (Score:3, Insightful)
Normally I'd respond to this with a long list of reasons that even people with nothing to hide -- now -- may have something to hide soon.
But I'm going to the March for Women's Lives today, because I want to show my support for keeping Bush and Ashcroft out of our bedrooms and our pants and our reproductive decisions -- even when we decide to have abortions.
Right now abortion is still legal in the US, although
Re:Blunkett scares the... (Score:2)
Having an ID card doesn't deprive you of that either. If the police suspect you of a criminal offence now, they have the right to stop you and ask for your identity and to explain yourself. Having an identity card actually frees you from the risk that the Police don't believe you are who you say you are and arrest you.
Anonymity (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Anonymity (Score:2)
Join the campaign (Score:5, Informative)
Visit the site, write a letter then Fax your MP. [faxyourmp.com]
Parliament (Score:2)
Re:Parliament (Score:4, Informative)
It hasn't had to pass through parliament because so far it isn't compulsory.
Furthermore, it would probably pass without too much problem because there is generally good public support.
>News of the pilot follows an opinion poll suggesting 80% of people backed a national ID card scheme.
Re:Parliament (Score:4, Insightful)
Is there? Personal anecdote aside, I honestly don't know anyone who likes the idea at all.
Apart from anything else, the rationale behind the scheme just doesn't make any sense. According to Blunkett, it will help "combat terrorism". I want to know how it will do this exactly.
An often ignored factoid in the this debate is that Spain has compulsory ID scheme and it's just endured a major terrorist atrocity. I honestly can't see how ID cards help anybody but the Government and the health of its coffers.
Re:Parliament (Score:3, Insightful)
I too don't see how on earth this is going to help with anything, the various methods of ID people have at the moment; birth certificates, passports, driving licences seem perfectly adequate to me. If they are worried about the security of these methods then they should spend the money on sorting out the existing systems.
Whatever ID card they do come up with won't be 100% unforgeable but as soon as s
Re:Parliament (Score:2)
Re:Parliament (Score:2)
Last year, the UK government undertook a public consultation into the exercise. Stand.org.uk did not trust them to honestly report negative views, so they set up a form for people to contact the government, and Stand kept a record of the responses. Well, the government did lie about the response, here is an extract of a fax I sent to my MP last year:
According to Hansard, on 28th of April, in an answer to Mr Paul Marsden, Beverl
Qinetiq! (Score:4, Informative)
As for people being in favour of this scheme. There was a big online have your say for this last year. Several thousand people objected, they some how lost all of these negative votes and decided to count them as 1. That way they still had a majority in favour vote from the Chancellors freinds (me cynical?)
Compulsory how? (Score:4, Insightful)
Does this mean that if a cop stops you on the street you must either be able to produce a valid ID card or take a trip to the police station so that your identity can be confirmed?
Where I live a government issue ID (or at least a valid social security number) is practically required if you wish to drive a car legally, open a bank account, get insured, get a job, benefit from the public healthcare and so on. Yet, we do not have a legal obligation to carry an ID and show it to any cop on the street. Sounds rather draconian to me.
"What has anybody to worry about having their true identity known?" he said.
Ah. Yet another version of "If you have done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to fear".
Re:Compulsory how? (Score:2)
According to Mr. Blunkett on Breakfast with Frost this morning, the proposal is they they will be as with driving licenses - you don't have to carry them all the time, but you can be given a 'producer' and have to report with valid ID to a police station within 7 days.
Of course, just because that's the initial proposal it doesn
Re:Compulsory how? (Score:3, Insightful)
Policeman: "Hey, you! What are you doing?"
ManOnStreet: "I'm out for a walk."
Policeman: "At 3am?"
ManOnStreet: "Yes, I just finished a shift at the call centre where I work."
Policeman: "Can I see your identification sir?"
ManOnStreet: "I don't have it with me."
Scenario 1: Policeman: "Oh well...here's a producer, if you don't bring it to the station within 3 days then....there's not really a lot we can do, but...err...you better do it."
Scenario 2: Policman: "Oh well...yo
Arggghhh! (Score:3, Insightful)
The EU constitution, presumably soon the Euro, identity cards... The government seems intent on its "progressive" schemes no matter what the public opposition.
Emphatically not flamebait! (Score:2, Insightful)
Frustration at the autocratic actions of the government is widespread. The lack of an effective opposition makes it even more frustrating.
(Sorry, I know it's lame to follow up my own post)
Shrykk.
Re:Arggghhh! (Score:2)
Actually the European Constitution was an extremely good thing for the UK to adopt: finally we actually have a written Constituion and some (limited) restrictions on the power of the Government.
Prior to that the Government could legally do *ANYTHING* as long as it could get it through Parliament: and given the way Parliament operates (or doesn't these days) that means *ANYTHING*- as Blair/Blunkett's pushing of ID cards proves.
The difference is that now they can do almost anything. Not perfect but a move i
Re:Arggghhh! (Score:3, Informative)
Further: the EU constitution will do very little to curb the powers of the UK government. If the UK government decided to suspend general elections, the EU constitution would have nothing to say about it. However, they would never get the required law through parliament and our Head of State would
Re:Arggghhh! (Score:2)
Re:Arggghhh! (Score:5, Insightful)
Except that, according to opinion polls, the vast majority of British people are in favour of ID cards. Why? Probably because of the FUD whipped up about terrorism and asylum seekers.
The majority of the British people are also anti-the EU Constitution, and we're now having a referendum on it. Why? Probably because of all the lies, half-truths and other crap run by the "little England" right-wingers in the Daily Mail, and the anti-EU, pro-USA Murdoch press.
If all these screaming idiots on Slashdot would stop, step back, and give some thought to the way democracy is working at the moment, you could observe perhaps two key things:
Of course it can backfire when it comes to things like wars, "ethical" foreign policies and the like. And when you have a socialist party like New Labour doing everything it can to curry the favour of the corporate elite (who run the press and the expanding part of the economy), it really backfires sometimes.
But please, let's not be so melodramatic about ID cards for Gods' sakes. Yes, there are some privacy concerns, but I don't really see the big deal. They have them across the EU, they're not that different to something like a driving license, and though there are questions that need answering, they're hardly as big an issue as some of the other things Blunkett is ramming through.
It's like CCTV cameras. Though there are problems associated with mistaken identities, have yours or anyone elses' lives been made substantially worse because of their introduction? Privacy, in my opinion, is only a matter of your home and your private life, and violating other aspects of your privacy is only a problem if you are affected adversely, the invasion of privacy aside.
-1 Offtopic (Score:2)
Perhaps someone can explain this referendum thing to me because the newspapers assume an understanding of European politics that I just don't have.
Is the referendum at attempt to rewrite the European Union constitution or is it an attempt for the UK to pull out of the European Union? I really hope not the latter, as I'm living in London [colingregorypalmer.net] under an Irish passport.
And while I'm off topic, why i
ID cards have support in the UK (Score:3, Insightful)
Are there similar pushes for this in the USA? - who lets face it (along with Spain) were on the sharp end of the current terrorist activity.. not the UK..
Re:ID cards have support in the UK (Score:2, Informative)
The UK police have been quite successfull in stopping a few events.
1)Downing civil airliners with portable SAM launchers
2)Gas attack on underground
3)Confiscated 1/2 ton of fertilizer bomb
statistics (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, I know this has nothing to do with biometric data, but it has something to do with conducting survey after survey and playing around with statistics until you get what you want. This includes surveys showing 80% of the UK population in favor of national identity cards containing biometric data.
Herr Adolf Blair (Score:5, Insightful)
A fair amount of debate yes: and all of it indicates a) it will be very expensive and b) we don't want it.
But Herr Blair and his propaganda minister Josef Blunkett (aka the blind facist) have decided that that is what we must have, and have it we will.
I think we Brits are getting to the point where we're as desperate to get rid of our right wing Prime Minister as you are to get rid of your right wing President.
The ironic thing is that Blair is the leader of the Labour party: which was historically established to protect the rights of the working class (ie Socialist, left wing). Blair however seems to see his mission to kiss the arse of Corporate Britain and fuck the workers because if they disagree they're probably don't understand what he's saying.
The scarey thing is a comment by Roy Hattersley (a leading old-school labour politician) that Tony Blair has a second rate mind: ie he's as thick as pig-shit. yet another thing he has in common with Bush it seems.
Both Bush and Blair strike me as shining examples of why Universal Suffrage doesn't work. Personally I think you should have to pass an exam before you can vote. Only simple stuff like: "Who are the leaders of the 3 main parties?", "Who is the Constituional head of state?". Let's face it, if you can't answer questions like that a) you're not well enough informed to vote and b) you don't fucking deserve to be able to vote.
Re:Herr Adolf Blair (Score:2, Interesting)
It's a walk in the park compared to Herr Blunkett of ze Gestapo.
Regards,
Tim.
Re:Herr Adolf Blair (Score:2, Interesting)
This is basically a socialist/communist move. Just because your basic rate of tax hasn't gone up, doesn't mean that this isn't a socialist government. Look at how mu
Biometrics becoming the default (Score:3, Funny)
Bah! Whatever. (Score:3, Funny)
I won't be happy until we've all lost our humanity and we're eating Soylent Green.
Economics of national identification (Score:3, Interesting)
This [bbc.co.uk] is another article on the BBC that discusses the last time Britain had a national ID card scheme, back during World War II. According to the article, it was not concerns about security shortcomings or civil liberties that ended the ID cards so much as that "the system was expensive and difficult to administer, and offered few benefits."
>ID Plans: 2008: 80% of economically active population will carry some form of biometric identity document. Estimated cost of 3.1bn pounds.
Administering a system where over 50,000,000 people each have to hold an identification card to carry on their daily business is going to have many direct and indirect costs and benefits. The people of the nation, and the government meant to represent those people, should think long and hard about those costs and benefits before implementing the system.
Politics/slashdot joke (Score:5, Funny)
persona non grata? (Score:2, Interesting)
I guess if you're an blind Islamic female double-amputee then they'll have a few problems here.
If your blindness is due to cataracts, you've lost both hands, and your religion requires you to wear a yashmak at all times then will they give you a blank card or what?
blind people can be dangerous... (Score:2)
The blind armless chick may not be able to do anything physically but she could easily be a symbol for or mastermind of something dangerous.
The trouble with ID cards... (Score:2, Insightful)
Their only real use is to track ordinary, average people.
quick rant (Score:5, Insightful)
When the subject comes up and I express my feelings against it, the two responses I always seem to get are "Well, why not have it?" and "I've got nothing to hide".
Firstly, the question isn't "why not", it's "why". It will cost a fortune, make a whole new layer of beaurocracy, upset a lot of people etc etc and no one has yet given a good example of what we really gain, so, why bother?
Secondly, *everyone* has something to hide. Everyone. It may not be something criminal, it may not be something wrong, it may even be something you have no logical reason you want to keep to yourself, but you still have a whole raft of things you don't want the policeman who has just randomly stopped you to know.
I could (and previously have) go on and on, but I'll spare the gentle reader and leave it at that. If you are a halfway intelligent person who bothers to think for yourself you'll be able to come up with a dozen more reasons against introducing ID cards in no time. You don't need me (or anyone else) to tell you what to think.
Re:quick rant (Score:3, Interesting)
Secondly, *everyone* has something to hide. Everyone. It may not be something criminal, it may not be something wrong...
Yup. The introduction of mandatory ID cards is something I'm happy to go to prison about. I'm not a criminal, I've "nothing to hide". But that doesn't mean that I'm willing to have the government poking around in my life. The introduction of biometric ID cards is a possible foot in the door for much larger things.
Al.Re:quick rant (Score:3, Insightful)
For future reference, on the second question (nothing to hide), here's the simplest and most effective response I've yet heard to that point of view:
I sometimes wish watching repeats of "Yes, Minister" were a precondition to being allowed to vote. Especially the one about 'salami tactics'.
some of my concerns... (Score:5, Interesting)
Volunteers, as in people who think the ID cards are an OK thing in the first place? Who will more likely than not give positive feedback?
Neil Fisher, from QinetiQ - one of the companies developing the new technology, said the public would want to be able to prove their identity to show they were not a risk.
A risk of/for what?
> The plans are designed to tackle identity fraud, which costs Britain an estimated 1.3bn each year.
> The government has said it sees ID cards as a weapon against terrorism.
I keep seeing statements like these over and over again but I have yet to hear an adequate argument as to how it works as a weapon against terrorism, identity theft, etc.
He said the biometric system proposed would end multiple identities and give a boost to the fight against terrorism and organised crime.
I hope I'm not the only one who sees how naive this statement is...
And lastly, considering these cards will be obligatory but not free of charge, I see them as nothing more than a money making mechanism for the government than anything else.
Qinetiq -- clueless company (Score:3, Funny)
The web site opened, crashed and remained unavailable for about a year.
Does anyone think that a company that can't build a simple web site can provide a working id cards system? I certainly don't.
We already have ID cards (Score:3, Insightful)
As for why ID cards and not the current system of one of several forms of ID (for things like buying a mobile phone they require two forms of ID from a very short list - an my provisional driving license wasn't on them), it would give a form of identification that everyone would accept. Sure, they could be faked. But so could _every_ _other_ form of identification currently in use.
So I ask the question, why not?
Most responses seem to be along the lines of 'we don't know what they could do with the data', or that the police could stop you and demand ID. The police could stop you now if they suspected you, and ask for some form of ID, and if they thought you were a known criminal and couldn't prove otherwise, you would still be taken to the station for questioning.
All the worry about privacy concerns seems to be way too overexagerated. It's just a card that says who you are, not something that broadcasts to the world that you slept with your mates girlfriend last night, or whatever it is you don't want everyone to know.
But why a card? (Score:3, Insightful)
I already tend to carry my eyes and fingers with me at all times.
Re:ID Card "trial"? (Score:5, Informative)
If by "stupid" you mean deploying a system meant to be universal to a small handful of people, then you are right. Which is why trials like these are not done in that fashion. They will not pick any old 10,000 people. Typically in situations like this they would find a town with a population of around 10,000 people and give the cards to everyone. Then they could put the card readers everywhere appropriate, and nobody who lived in the town would feel left out.
It wouldn't be a proper test of the cards if they didn't actually scan them once in a while. And they can't put the scanners all over the country for a limited test; so they can't distribute the test cards truly randomly, where any person in the country is likely to get one. So they will probably pick one 10,000 person town. Or, better yet, three 3,333 people towns; one for each company.
Re:ID Card "trial"? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:ID Card "trial"? (Score:2)
Really? I can't say I had noticed. Of course I haven't been in there since I read that Colchester also tested how well they can carry on working with sewage on the floor [mcspotlight.org]
Re:ID Card "trial"? (Score:2)
With three 3,333 population towns can we give the one remaining ID card to the xenophobic jerk who started this project?
-Colin [colingregorypalmer.net]
Re:What's the problem? (Score:5, Informative)
Aschroft recently sought information on doctors who perform abortions using his new found anti-terrorist powers.
He also sought information on Anti-war protesters again using his new terrorist powers.
http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=1790
Thats just two incidents we know about because they were leaked. Now (under Patriot 2) its a crime to leak what he's using his terrorist subpoenas for.
A republican senator is equating voting for Kerry with being anti-American.
The problem as ever is not: "If you are doing nothing wrong you have nothing to fear." but rather "if your government never does anything wrong you have nothing to fear".
Re:What's the problem? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:What's the problem? (Score:2)
You: "What have you got to hide?"
Me: "That's none of your's or the Government's damn business."
Re:What's the problem? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:What's the problem? - Here's the problem. (Score:5, Insightful)
How long before it's compulsory to carry the card?
How long before everyone's DNA is required and index linked to the card ID?
How long before it's illegal to not carry the card at all times?
Who can demand to see it? ("Papers please.") and when can it be asked for? ("Why are you out at this time of night? Papers please.")
How long before they are index linked to the IMEI of your mobile phone and periodic logs of your location taken and an easy to access system provided to civil servants?
How long before banks are required to log all your financial transactions provided in an easy to access system provided to civil servants?
How long before all your telephone, SMS, email and web access logs are indexed to your card and provided in an easy to access system to civil servants? (Note to Americans - all of the above is already logged by law under the RIPA Act and the government will be making available to bodies such as the Food Standards Agency and the local council).
How long before someone starts a side development to chip children (to protect them from all those pesky paedophiles) and integrate this with location technology to allow parents to see where they are at any time?
How long before it becomes law to have children chipped at birth? (don't forget the paedophiles!)
How long before it's illegal to remove the chips?
How long before someone gets the "bright idea" that they can be used instead of those pesky ID cards?
How long before we are treated like nothing more than cattle?
Either read Orwell's novel 1984 [online-literature.com] or bone up on database admin - both should leave you feeling concerned.
Re:What's the problem? - Here's the problem. (Score:3, Informative)
lol - you really don't understand UK law. We don't have a constitution you see - basically what happens is this:
Someone does something the Government doesn't like, or finds a loophole in a law.
The Governement changes the law to make it illegal.
People don't want ID cards - the Government is citing some bullshit survey that allegedly happened and that 80% of
Re:What's the problem? - Here's the problem. (Score:2)
Re:What's the problem? - Here's the problem. (Score:2)
Please log in if you want this discussion to continue, Mr AC.
Re:What's the problem? - Here's the problem. (Score:5, Interesting)
Stand.org.uk issued a wakeup call. They basically said "If you have an opinion on this, please tell the government." They put up a form with a free text area which would forward the response to the correct Home Office email address. It wasn't a 'click here to register a no vote' form, just a way for people to communicate their views to the Home Office.
The consultation was extended to February 2003 (can't remember why), and closed on the 28th of that month. On 28th April, Beverly Hughes stated in a parliamentary answer that the government had received about 2000 responses with a majority of 2:1 in favour. Stand had counted over 5000 responses (note they did not know what proportion were in favour as they weren't tabulating answers, but they did know that over 5000 messages had passed through their form).
I wrote to my MP to ask where the discrepancy came from, and to seek assurance that my vote had been counted. The Home Office response was that Stand had in effect coordinated 5000 no votes, and they would be counted as one vote coming from one organisation. That is untrue. I have no affiliation with stand other than sharing a concern about my rights, and since stand isn't a membership organisation the same is true of all the other respondees. Funnily enough, they also reassured me thay my particular opinion had been counted. So much for consistency.
There has been little public debate on ID cards. The draft bill was announced (leaked?) on a Friday . This is being steamrollered through, regardless of what the population think.
(It's far too nice to stay in this afternoon. I'll check back later for any response. Ithought you might be trolling as AC, that's why I wanted you to log in).
Cheers.
It has happened already (Score:3, Insightful)
Or the Hutu identified the Tutsi. Just 10 years ago FFS!
Re:What's the problem? (Score:2)
Yes but you don't HAVE to have a passport, and it can't be demanded that you produce it on the spot by the police (which is where all this is heading - "Papers please."
Re:What's the problem? (Score:2)
Untrue, within the EU I can use pretty much any kind of ID to move around: I just need to be able to prove I'm an EU citizen. So, for example, a Driver's License will work. Some countries even accept any credit card issued in an EU country.
Re:What's the problem? (Score:2)
Re:And... (Score:2)
And the Business Software Alliance/RIAA/MPAA and friends will consider it all well worth it.
Re:The thing is.... (Score:2)
Whether or not I have something to hide it's none of your's or the Government's business.
The Government is there to serve *ME* not the other way around.
It's a seriously fucked up country where the Government has more rights to know about me and what I'm doing than I have to know about them and what they are doing!
Re:The thing is.... (Score:2, Insightful)
So, you don't mind the government installing cameras in your bedrooms and bathrooms then? Because, after all you've got nothing to hide.
Re:The thing is.... (Score:2)
So just because an organization has information on me means that everyone is allowed to have information on me?
2. If you've got nothing to hide, then why worry about it, and if you've got something to hide, then it's something you're just gonna have to deal with
I have plenty to hide; it is part of being human. I'm not a voyeuse. My secrets are none of your or anybody else's fscking busines
Re:The thing is.... (Score:3, Insightful)
If you've got nothing to hide, then why worry about it, and if you've got something to hide, then it's something you're just gonna have to deal with.
Who says I've got nothing to hide, and who says it's the police I wish to hide from. I could be a battered wife who wants to adopt a new identity, or I could be a witness to a crime that criminals wish to intimidate. Organised criminals are going to love these things because it will make tracking their victims so much easier. I bet loan sharks will now re
If you think this is Funny (Score:5, Informative)
If you think this is Funny, then you should read Fun with Fingerprint Readers [schneier.com] from May 2002 issue of Crypto-Gram Newsletter by Bruce Schneier:
Interesting, isn't it? See also: T. Matsumoto, H. Matsumoto, K. Yamada, S. Hoshino, "Impact of Artificial Gummy Fingers on Fingerprint Systems," Proceedings of SPIE Vol. #4
the reliability of fingerprints (Score:3, Interesting)
here's something interesting I read not too long ago:
Are fingerprints really infallible, unique ID? [theregister.co.uk]
How unique are your fingerprints? It's general held (and as er, The Register confidently stated just yesterday) that your fingerprints being found at the scene of the crime tied you up with it pretty conclusively, but a report [newscientist.com] published earlier this year by New Scientist claims that t
Fax Your MP .com (Score:3, Interesting)
I hope I'm wrong, but a 10,000 user trial doesn't actually sound that impressive
It isn't
Just don't preach to the converted and get down to www.faxyourmp.com [faxyourmp.com] instead.
Tell our MP's both the civil libities AND technical reasons why this is bad. Most MP's havent a clue about electronic security. Tell them why biometrics are not the solution, why its a bad idea to have all your eggs (data) in one basket (or card), why this wont prevent "terrorists and pediatricians"(!) and why this is just a BAD idea.
Dont