Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Government Privacy News

Leaked Government Doc Reveals UK ID "Coercion" Plans 187

BoingBoing is relating a hair-raising tale from the UK anti-ID-register group 'NO2ID' that claims to have a leaked government document [PDF] detailing how the UK government plans to "coerce" citizens into a national ID register. "UK campaigners NO2ID this morning enlisted the help of bloggers across the world to spread a leaked government document describing how the British government intends to go about "coercing" its citizens onto a National Identity Register. The 'ID card' is revealed as little more than a cover to create a official dossier and trackable ID for every UK resident - creating what NO2ID calls 'the database state'."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Leaked Government Doc Reveals UK ID "Coercion" Plans

Comments Filter:
  • by KublaiKhan ( 522918 ) on Friday February 01, 2008 @03:41PM (#22265464) Homepage Journal
    Perfect opportunity to set up a few convenient aliases--with all the work that they'll be getting, the folks registering will likely not pay quite as much attention as they ought to new registrants. Voila, government-approved IDs, guaranteed to pass any test for fakes.

    Of course, getting past the initial screening may not be trivial--but investigation into that avenue may be worthwhile.
  • by khasim ( 1285 ) <brandioch.conner@gmail.com> on Friday February 01, 2008 @03:47PM (#22265520)
    Since these ID's will be "official" for just about anything ...

    Find someone involved in issuing them who has a gambling / drug / sex / whatever problem who can be bought / blackmailed.

    The whole system breaks down when it depends upon the honesty of people.
  • Coercion (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 01, 2008 @03:54PM (#22265640)
    Why is "coercion" in quotes? Coercion is the business of government. Government is, after all, the organization holding a monopoly on the special right to employ coercion as a business model. Coercion is what defines government.

    Put it this way: If the people actually volunteered to hand over their money and follow the aribtrary rules set forth by a central committee, then government would be entirely redundant. The reason why government exists is precisely because the people would not voluntarily hand over their money and follow that arbitrary set of rules.

    Again, coercion is the fundamental tool which all governments MUST hold -- otherwise it ain't government.
  • by Zarquon42 ( 873333 ) on Friday February 01, 2008 @03:54PM (#22265646)
    Yeah, I am sure that the "gestapo" took the site down because they don't want anybody to see it...it couldn't possibly be that the pdf that was linked to was several MB, and there are a lot of people trying to get to it.
  • Who cares? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TheRaven64 ( 641858 ) on Friday February 01, 2008 @03:57PM (#22265698) Journal
    This is the British Government we're talking about. They have shown themselves, time and time again, to be completely incapable of completing any IT project. Every time they try, they award the contract to EDS, it goes horrendously over-budget and ends up being cancelled. Expect the big brother database to go online some time around 2050, only be able to store first names, and crash losing all data the first time someone tries to run a query.
  • Re:NO worries (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Bloke down the pub ( 861787 ) on Friday February 01, 2008 @04:06PM (#22265844)

    The database will be written in MSAccess and kept on someones laptop until it gets left in a pub or the back of a taxi by a pissed up junior bureaucrat.
    Fixed that for you.
  • by Lilith's Heart-shape ( 1224784 ) on Friday February 01, 2008 @04:07PM (#22265848) Homepage

    You think a revolution is going to help? Replacing one government with another is only a temporary reprieve. Once the generation that dragged the last batch of tyrants to the guillotine dies off, people will forget what happened and grow complacent. They'll go back to saying "there ought to be a law" every time something doesn't go the way they think it should, and a new bunch of tyrants will corrupt the new government. Every revolution, even the American revolution of 1776, is a case of "Meet the New Boss, same as the Old Boss".

    Go ahead and have your revolution. Found a new government on the ashes of the old. Swear in a new parliament while the heads of the old rot on pikes. It won't help you for long. You will get fooled again.

  • by Yaa 101 ( 664725 ) on Friday February 01, 2008 @04:14PM (#22265950) Journal
    This system shows that the ruling class is paranoid to the bone, I think it stems from the amount of poor people they see as potential threat to their pitiful life.

    They outright want to go back to the middle age serfdoms where people are owned, they see the 20th century as a nasty period when almost all would have went wrong for them.

    Being bribe able is a work prescription you need to have to be able to do certain jobs like being a politician, no honest person is able to do that job, being non bribe able makes you too expensive for the system that rely on low payments and big dossiers of all mishaps of politicians.

    The whole system breaks down due to dishonesty within their treacherous class where everybody is paranoid and nobody trust each other.
  • by Lilith's Heart-shape ( 1224784 ) on Friday February 01, 2008 @04:42PM (#22266328) Homepage

    I agree with you concerning the Framers' reasons for including the Second Amendment. However, I have to ask you why you think that simply overthrowing an oppressive government and replacing it will do any long-term good? Do you think that leading Congress to the guillotine will work in a country where most people, thanks to public education, think that consistent respect for individual rights means leaving poor people to starve to death in the streets?

    The American revolution was as successful as it was because of the people behind it, and I'm not just talking about the heroes you read about in school. Just about everybody in the colonies had at least a nodding acquaintance with the ideas of thinkers like John Locke and Thomas Paine.

    An armed rebellion today would fail miserably, because most of the people are beholden to the government. They either get money directly from the government, or they work in industries that receive government subsidies. Do you think, for example, that public school teachers will do anything but teach the children in their ever-so-tender care that the rebels are anything but villains?

    Before you can have a revolution, you need a people on fire with the lust for liberty. We don't have that, for the most part. Most people, if you were to tell them that it was possible to have a government that did not rob Peter in order to provide Paul with a welfare check, would laugh at you. Suggest repealing the income tax, and the first thing you'll hear is "how will the government replace those 'lost revenues', as if the government was ever morally entitled to that money in the first place.

    A revolution won't work right now. The people are not ready; they do not burn with a passionate need for freedom.

  • by element-o.p. ( 939033 ) on Friday February 01, 2008 @04:52PM (#22266448) Homepage

    I think that the problem both in UK and in US is that people don't truest their government. I don't know if this is because of history of wrong doing in part of the government, or because of television and movies...


    Unfortunately, I think that in the U.S. at least, most people *do* trust the government. I don't, and a lot of people here on /. don't, but I think that is more because history has shown again and again that governments that are not kept in check by their constituents tend to become abusive. In fact, the relative freedom that western societies have enjoyed for the last several generations are an historical aberration; one that I *don't* want to see corrected.
  • by Abcd1234 ( 188840 ) on Friday February 01, 2008 @05:20PM (#22266832) Homepage
    Honestly, I think we all have the necessary reading comprehension to see what the document is driving at. I don't need some ridiculous side commentary, which is wholly devoid of any useful insight, to help me understand the content of the document.

    Frankly, the commentary sounds like the rantings of some extremist, conspiracy-theorist wanker, and does nothing but muddy the issues, not to mention make reading the document more difficult, as I have to wade through their irritating scribblings.
  • Re:Hmm (Score:3, Insightful)

    by thsths ( 31372 ) on Friday February 01, 2008 @05:25PM (#22266894)
    > Well, at this point, you don't have to give out your SS number, or have it scanned for travelling by airplane. Or soon...to be scanned when buying booze, or entering a bar...or maybe after that, for any CC transaction to validate identity.

    Since you say social security number, I assume that you are an American citizen. You do know what the USA do with every foreigner entering the country, I assume? Taking 10 (!) fingerprints! Plus a scan of your passport, storing your credit card number, plus any other information in a related computer system. This gives the "land of freedom" quite a new interpretation.
  • Re:Coercion (Score:3, Insightful)

    by HalAtWork ( 926717 ) on Friday February 01, 2008 @05:38PM (#22267068)
    Or... government officials could be paid the minimum wage that they themselves dictate, be excluded of all gifts and other monies, and constantly audited watched and surveyed by the public (with those little traffic cameras set up in every room, hey they're good enough for us), guaranteeing those who get the job really want it and does a really good job.
  • by Dutch Gun ( 899105 ) on Saturday February 02, 2008 @01:03AM (#22270568)
    Funny you wrote that. I actually added 'perceived' after I had written the line, but then deleted it again. Here's why: I actually believe that removing freedoms can, in fact, actually increase security in some situations. The old Soviet Russia (sorry, cue the jokes...), from what I've heard, was a pretty secure place in many ways. Not so much freedom, though. The old American wild west was a dangerous place, but a libertarian paradise.

    I'll grant you that many policies don't do a damned thing while chewing up personal freedom, though, so your point is certainly valid.

Real Programmers don't eat quiche. They eat Twinkies and Szechwan food.

Working...