Biometric IDs For Every Indian Citizen 166
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."
Social security number (Score:1, Insightful)
That's what it basically is in other countries. What is the news here? That India only started the practice now?
Re:Social security number (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re:Social security number (Score:3, Informative)
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.
A) Not trolling. Mods, get your shit together. This [slashdot.org] is trolling (NSFW).
B) Reply is correct in that, yes, a difference exist; the country is requiring biometric information for unique identification. Although some could argue picture, birth cert. etc for a SSN card are similar, this is one step further. The summary (FTA) makes the point that if this UID become a ubiquitous requirement, well, your biometric identity will be stored by the government. This could be a good thing. It could be bad. Who knows. I do know that I do now trust American authorities with my biometric identity; we all know how tight their data retention and security policies are.
With that said, coming to a country near you. Minority Report!
Re:Social security number (Score:2)
Mods, get your shit together.
This looks like an innocent fuck up. Mods are human and the occasional human might be distracted by chaos in the world, relationship problems, and a quart of tequila. So say sweet dreams to this fellow now resting an unconscious head on a keyboard collecting drool.
Re:Social security number (Score:2)
Re:Social security number (Score:1)
Actually, before Slashdot going Ajax, a moderation would only happen after you pressed the moderate button. That way, if you happened to mis-click on moderation, you could immediately correct it. Nowadays your moderation goes life immediately. No chance to correct your mistake (except for the "nuclear" post-to-undo option).
Re:Social security number (Score:2)
Re:Social security number (Score:2)
Keep in mind, this system in itself isn't necessarily evil, but it allows a lot of bad stuff to be implemented. You can have this system yet block any government encroachment on privacy (or repeal the privacy problems after it after it becomes a hot-button issue). However unlikely that separation may be, you have to consider that chance compared to the chance of getting a less-intrusive system to work at a similar level of reliability. There may be some such system (and I welcome it), but some people will come up with some wild idea and never put it in perspective.
the mythbusters pointed out how easy finger prints (Score:2)
the mythbusters pointed out how easy finger prints are easy to fake.
Re:the mythbusters pointed out how easy finger pri (Score:2)
Yes, there is always bribery, but this system may be more secure than others on that aspect, as you may still need that faked fingerprint (as opposed to the corrupt worker just looking up the victim's SSN).
Re:the mythbusters pointed out how easy finger pri (Score:2)
The summary states they're taking fingerprints, iris scans, and photographs. That's quite a lot to fake all at once.
Re:Social security number (Score:4, Interesting)
At least this is happening in India, not in a country that actually matters globally. I feel sorry for the poor bastards that have to deal with it, but if they're not willing to fight for their freedom, then this is what they'll get. At least in the U.S. we've had our experience with SSNs and the more intelligent members of our population (the ones that aren't out to dominate others - that caveat has to be added, since there's plenty of intelligent people who have no respect for freedom, responsibility, or accountability) should, mostly, be able to understand why a program like this is a very, very bad idea for those of us who value our freedom. SSNs are bad enough as-is - a government program that has become a tool of the private business sector as well, tracking every significant purchase or decision a man makes in his life. I'll undoubtedly be haunted the rest of my life by the problems I had when I was married, despite the fact that I made the best decisions that I could at the time (some of which were forced by the economy, some by personal circumstances, some by business matters gone awry)..
Actually, what bothers me the most about identification systems like this is the invasion of one's privacy. You will never have a chance to start over after losing everything, any person at all may be tracked by government agencies much easier, et al. It makes evil deeds on the behalf of so-called "authorities" (be they governing bodies, businesses, credit tracking agencies, or what-have-you) much easier to accomplish, while offering nothing in return to the citizens subjected to such measures.
Re:Social security number (Score:3)
India doesn't matter globally? Try googling for the meaning of BRIC.
Re:Social security number (Score:2)
Which in turn leads to the question : does quantity equal quality? And by that I do not mean the quality of each individual member of their society, but rather in the quality of their lives, the quality of what they have to offer (which, at least in IT, has been very little of worth so far - please feel free to give me counterexamples, but when even people who aren't in IT [such as a young woman I was chatting with at a doctor's appointment this morning] express their frustration at the outsourced services they receive from Indians, it only further illustrates my point that most Indians' degrees and certifications they aren't worth the paper they are written upon; my own experience in IT confirms it, with some outstanding exceptions), et al.
Just because you have a large population does not mean that it is a worthwhile country. You could combine the entirety of the continent of Africa, and not come up with one worthwhile contribution to modern society (and that includes most of the Whites living there as well).
Economic theories (which may or may not hold true, and extend to the limits of your or my lifetime, unless you're 15) aside, India has very little to offer the rest of the world. It has to get it's own shit together first - something that this article suggests that it is not doing.
Re:Social security number (Score:3, Insightful)
... You also have an easier time being sure someone is who they say they are ...
The problem, as I see it, is that people are led to believe that such a biometric system is infallible and therefore unquestioningly accept such proffered 'ID' as secure. Given that such biometric IDs simply aren't infallible this means that those who wish to offer a false identify can do so more readily because no one questions the biometrics. The other side of the coin is that if people always do question (ie mistrust) the Biometrics (as indeed they should!) then they are no better than the old system.
Simply put, Biometrics aren't the answer ... now what was the question again?
Re:Social security number (Score:2)
Social security numbers won't get memorized, and ID cards will get lost (just try to hand out ID cards in a shanty town or teach illiterate people how to deal with SSNs), but with biometrics it is simple for people to prove they are who they say they are. As far as false negatives go, biometrics may well be the best system out there.
As for false positives, it is harder to forge a fingerprint or iris scan than to memorize the victim's ID number. A physical ID may or may not be harder to forge, so IDs may be better in this respect. If fingerprints an iris scans and whatnot requires someone observing (and perhaps checking your fingers, etc.), you quickly reduce system failures to bribery, which again is largely independent of what ID solution you use. Of course, even a corrupt biometrics worker might not be able to forge a fingerprint for you the way they could look up the victim's SSN for you.
Re:Social security number (Score:2)
As for false positives, it is harder to forge a fingerprint or iris scan than to memorize the victim's ID number.
Interesting that you should say it is harder rather than it is impossible!
Two possibilities suggest themselves to me:
1: Someone sets themselves up with fake fingerprints and becomes you.
2: Someone changes the stored info so their biometrics are stored against your record, so not only do they become you, but you are no longer you!
If we can agree that biometrics are not infallible, then we must assume that all ID checks will have to also check something else and the whole process is no longer any better than the current one!
Not really (Score:2)
Re:Not really (Score:2)
Insofar that you cannot go back to the iris scan, finger print or facial photograph from the number
What makes you think that you won't be able to? The whole point of using biometrics is that the number is verifiable. Of course they're going to have a lookup service, which I'm sure will, if not immediately, at some point give you all the information based on any single identifier (number, fingerprint, iris, or facial photograph).
Re:Social security number (Score:2)
I think the AC meant that in other countries it's just the same. Argentina and Chile, just to give examples I'm acquainted with, require photographic ID and fingerprints for many things. In Argentina, you have to give your ID number to travel to other regions, in Chile, a quick fingerprint is used to legalize contracts. Neither country has yet descended into orwellian conditions because of this (we have descended into orwellian conditions for many other reasons. You could point out that it's all part of a whole.)
Re:Social security number (Score:1, Informative)
Basically BG is classic "database nation" in the way UK and USA geeks keep scaremongering about. And you know what - my privacy there is infringed LESS than in the UK or USA. Much LESS.
yeah, all this scaremongering is silly. All it needs is proper implementation and security.
Also, it is India we are talking about. Does anyone around here believe that a database of this size written in India will work?
If you take your head outta your ass you'll see that most large databases in the world today, are indeed implemented by Indians. You see larger number of crap Indian techies because there are soooo many Indian techies in total.
Re:Social security number (Score:3, Insightful)
All it needs is proper implementation and security.
OK, now I've worked in 'Computing' for 30 years or so and I know the only way to guarantee that a computer system is 100% secure is to not have it connected to anything else and for it to be stored in a sealed room. This somewhat degrades the usefulness of the system for real-world applications.
In all areas of 'Security' you have to be successful at maintaining the security 100% of the time, whereas those who feel the need to breach your security only have to do so once, and they often have a really powerful inclination to do so. Indeed, it could be argued that the more successful the security is, the greater the value of breaking it because if such an ID system is perceived as 'bullet proof' and you are the only person to break in then you can sell fake or cloned ID's that will NEVER be questioned.
Re:Social security number (Score:2)
... Fear of security breaches cannot be a reason to stop a project like this which has so many benefits.
So many benefits to whome? The biggest winners in any sort of national ID scheme are the Government, and by a country mile!
The nu-Labour shysters who tried to impose such a system on us in the UK tried time and time again to tell us how it would be better for us, and each time their argument was shot down in flames! Not one cogent reason was put forward. Not one!
I don't know though, perhaps there's something inherently different about India that there is a benefit to be gained by the general public which will outweigh the unbelievable cost of the system.
I'd be interested to know what these benefits would be.
Re:Social security number (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Social security number (Score:2)
But there are still enough things that depend on the SS number, and those things are the real reason SS isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
Re:Social security number (Score:2)
Re:Social security number (Score:2)
In database terms... (Score:2)
In database terms, perhaps a lot of places are being lazy enough to not set up a better primary key?
Re:In database terms... (Score:2)
Re:In database terms... (Score:2)
what I meant by that was using the SSN or its non-US equivalent as a lazy way to get a primary key or something analogous to one. The SSN does work for that, just with a lot of other issues.
A non-SSN number to serve a similar ID purpose sounds like a good idea for that combining reason, yes
I have a lot of database theory/design-type classes fall term, so this phrasing is especially likely to come to mind, sorry
Re:In database terms... (Score:2)
what I meant by that was using the SSN or its non-US equivalent as a lazy way to get a primary key or something analogous to one. The SSN does work for that, just with a lot of other issues.
A non-SSN number to serve a similar ID purpose sounds like a good idea for that combining reason, yes
I have a lot of database theory/design-type classes fall term, so this phrasing is especially likely to come to mind, sorry
Yes, I was thinking database too. The thing is, it's never used as a primary key in a good database; just as its own unique value for easy lookup. That why student ID cards have an ID number on them. That's the school's primary key.
But, for the purposes of finding a student's record, SSN is much easier than student ID when the student is present.
Re:In database terms... (Score:2)
Yes, although I can remember the one particular ID number for my university, having to remember a lot of such ID numbers would be like something /.'ers probably know well - password wrangling on The Internet. I suppose multiple businesses all wanting the SSN is a good analogy in meatspace. Guess some have a higher memory capacity than others.
Re:Social security number (Score:3, Informative)
Try dealing with insurance companies, buying a house, even getting a simple loan on a used car that you'll pay off in 6 months. Things like that are interconnected due to your SSN being used to track you and your "credit score" (an arbitrary number that isn't affected much by any good credit actions, or payment of past debts, but is heavily penalized for the slightest failure to pay anything; I've literally had a home loan turned down because I didn't pay off the last 5 dollars on a loan for a laptop due to a billing error). While this state of affairs may or may not be the desired result of the decision to assign SSNs to citizens, it still causes more harm than good. Anyone who gets ahold of your SSN can damage you in many ways. For example, I recently went to the ER at my local hospital. I got into an argument with the head nurse about whether or not I could go outside and smoke a cigarette and wait for the pain medication to take effect before they (with my assistance, since I don't permit anyone to work on an injury that I can do myself) cleaned and dressed the gunshot wound. So instead of getting treatment, I was told that I was "discharged" upon my return from my cigarette break.
And yet they'll be hounding me for money for services rendered, despite the fact that they did nothing except look at the wound, go "yep, you've been shot, the bullet exited your body, we need to give you some pain medicine and dress that wound" (since I'd already stopped the bleeding and all that before I got to the ER). They'll try to bill my insurance company and try to bill me, despite the fact that they did nothing other than provide me with a room for an hour. If they didn't have my SSN, they would have a much harder time doing that, since my name is relatively common, I didn't give them my correct address, and I can tell my insurance company to deny the claim.
Re:Social security number (Score:3, Funny)
Hahahahaha, wait - you got shot, bandaged the wound, went to the ER, gave them a fake address, argued with the nurse, stepped out for a smoke break. Would you say this is a typical day for you?
Re:Social security number (Score:1)
Given, YOU may not have signed a cell phone contract, but a majority of people have these days.
Re:Social security number (Score:5, Interesting)
Not in Canada, there's strict laws about who can ask for a SIN (our SSN). Basically, only your employer and the tax man, as it's only used for tax purposes. I couldn't even tell you what mine is, because I don't carry the card for it, and nobody ever asks for it.
Re:Social security number (Score:2)
Re:Social security number (Score:2)
On file (Score:2)
Wow glad America doesn't do business with India (Score:2, Funny)
Numbers (Score:2)
It's interesting that people automatically seem to think of numbers when thinking of unique IDs, like phone numbers or government IDs.
Why?
It would make more sense to just use email addresses. In the same way that it makes sense to use sentences for passwords, it makes more sense for unique IDs to be based on something significantly more diverse and difficult to guess than a meaningless string of numbers.
IDs should be determinable by the person who's going to be affected by them, and in the rare case of duplicates, they should be asked to choose another. There's no reason why everyone needs a "number".
Re:Numbers (Score:4, Funny)
Do you REALLY want to be tied to xXxcockxhungryxXx@aol.com for the rest of your life?
Re:Numbers (Score:2)
Why should ID numbers be difficult to guess? They are the identification/user name part of authorisation, so they should be as simple and easy to remember/use as possible.
Dont know why you tied this to the blackberry (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Re:Dont know why you tied this to the blackberry (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Dont know why you tied this to the blackberry (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Dont know why you tied this to the blackberry (Score:2)
"Earn" has classically been the most abused verb in the West.
"Steal" has taken close second place, especially since the recent invention of "intellectual property".
Over the past decade, "terrorize" has been creeping to third place.
Re:Dont know why you tied this to the blackberry (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Dont know why you tied this to the blackberry (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re:Dont know why you tied this to the blackberry (Score:2, Insightful)
Troll article (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Troll article (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Troll article (Score:4, Interesting)
You seem to have a lot of faith in government (or in your government).
The reason Slashdotters (and others) are skeptical of government power is that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
FYI, India is at 74 on the corruption index [livemint.com].
By the way, an ad that pops up when searching for india corruption index is: http://indiaunheard.videovolunteers.org/?s=corruption&x=0&y=0&gclid=CLm1qair-aMCFQtN5wod2T5cGw [videovolunteers.org], which details a lot of corruption. The more tools you give government, the more harm they can do.
It's naive to think that government officials won't use the awesome amount of cross-linked information for their own purposes.
Also, you must likely not be a member of any kind of minority or repressed group (there are such in every country).
Re:Troll article (Score:1)
Re:Troll article (Score:3, Interesting)
The reason Slashdotters (and others) are skeptical of government power is that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Now I do agree with you. I would not like to see this much information so easily collated in the hands of administrative authorities and I would add that it's not only governments, but also powerful private interests which would value access to such information about individuals. However, mindlessly repeating glib cliches is a poor way of demonstrating scepticism.
Does absolute power really corrupt absolutely? I sincerely doubt it. Is there even anything approaching a (negative) correlation between some index of government power and the corruption index you cite? China which is marginally less corrupt on that index appears to have far more authoritarian control, the bottom position is shared between Myanmar where the state rules with an iron fist and Somalia which has seen a complete collapse of state power, while Germany, which for decades has required citizens to carry an identification pass bearing a unique number ID is among the least corrupt.
Re:Troll article (Score:1)
In a previous attempt, this same exercise created many dupes and gave birth to many non existing people. I am talking about iris scanners here, and the officials themselves, top civil servants can be trusted. It is not a bad database design too, remember, we create most of the designs for your systems. It was later found out that a political party created these, and the method was by bribing some of the data collectors.
Every system is corrupt, even this one. If your authorities want to screw you, trust me, they don't need this. This is only for the better.
Re:Troll article (Score:2, Insightful)
> Every system is corrupt, even this one. If your authorities want to screw you, trust me, they don't need this. This is only for the better.
Faulty logic. This makes it far, far easier for the authorities to screw with you. How are you going to get on the internet, train, order tickets for flights abroad etc etc if you're going to get rejected because your number's on a database, having been added by someone who knows you and doesn't like you?
Re:Troll article (Score:2)
It strikes me as interesting that most of the countries opposing UIDs on principle are island nations or otherwise isolated, who have never experienced occupation or dictatorship. It seems to me that in some respects they are still just theoretical experiments in democracy with no real-world validation.
What does "freedom" mean to a nation who's never had it taken away from them by force? It's just an empty word, something taken for granted. It's like a child imagining what it's like to be an adult or a rookie without the baptism of fire imagining war. They worry about meaningless things. Only once you've actually experienced the darkest form of denial of freedom you learn what freedom means, you value it, you learn to protect it. And then you stop worrying about silly things like UIDs.
The nations using UIDs have learned those lessons. Most European nations at some point in history have had to take shit from someone. It was a healthy exercise.
It's not that they trust their governments. Of course all governments are corrupt to some extent. Of course any system can and will be abused, since you have to trust someone at some point. They accept and live with this reality. You know who is the ultimate watchdog of the people's civil liberties? The people themselves. When liberties are trampled, such as an UID being misused, they react and correct the situation. When politicians step out of line they are reminded of it.
Opposing the technology itself is the solution of the person who has already given up on defending their civil liberties and sees no other hope. Is that what's going on the US and the UK?
As for biometrics, it's a stupid non-issue. We already use biometrics. Picture IDs are biometrics. Except they're very poor ones. Pics of the head taken once every 10 years? As the sole means of identification it's a stupid idea. They're worthless when you think of beards, scars, glasses, cosmetic surgery, haircuts, hats and so on. Easy to fake, unreliable. As long as that was the only technology we had it was alright but why not complement it with something better if we can?
Re:Troll article (Score:1)
Indeed there's times & places where it's important to be sure who you are dealing with (for example when opening a bank account, or do a driver's exam), and having a unique ID for that purpose is okay IMO. What's wrong is using such unique ID anywhere & everywhere just because it's convenient, and store loads of info coupled to that single ID that isn't absolutely necessary for its purpose. Train company shouldn't need to know who's on the train & exactly what route someone is traveling, just that passenger has paid his/her ticket. Keeping more personally identifiable info than that around, is the same as poking around in people's private lives where you have no business poking around. Which is even worse when governments are doing it... Also love this quote:
"For the poor this is a huge benefit because they have no identities, no birth certificates, degree certificates, driver's licences, passports or even addresses."
If I were one of those poor, I'd be deeply offended by silly statement like that. All people on this planet have identities (as in: unique person unlike any other), place/date where they were born & address / area where they live. The only thing you're talking about here, are pieces of dead tree that state one thing or the other (true or otherwise).
Re:Troll article (Score:2)
Trains in India [youtube.com] and attempting to validate everyone's ID? Good luck with that!
Actually, when we book a ticket online, and take the printed ticket on a train, we have to carry some ID to ensure that the person who's travelling is the same that the ticket was booked for. This is basically to prevent people from booking in bulk in advance and then reselling the tickets. Usually, it's just any photo-ID, and the conductor glances at it and at your face, and moves onto the next passenger. If the ticket is for multiple people, any one person having the ID is usually enough.
Re:Troll article (Score:2)
Maybe you ought to think a bit harder about the positive implications of this such as crime prevention, speedy resolution of land disputes, etc. etc. etc.
Not to mention how it streamlines the often difficult task of identity theft.
Re:Troll article (Score:2)
I'm glad I've been able to persuade you. ;)
Seriously though, the fact that a very obvious, very profitable (meaning it will happen), and very serious (for the victims) misuse exists doesn't give you pause? No offence, but in weighing up the pros and cons, I don't feel you have been as diligent as you might have been.
Re:Troll article (Score:4, Funny)
What exactly is wrong with having a Unique ID number?
People with lower UIDs end up with a superiority complex.
Here we go... (Score:1)
the financial otption (Score:2)
Getting people biometrics is sure cheaper than teaching people how to read! Way to go, Indian government! Keep the people ignorant to save a few bucks.
Duplicate names and birthday do not serve well as (Score:5, Interesting)
India has a much less uniform naming system, with a lot more duplicate birthdays + names, and much less variance in traits. How many Amrish Patels exist with the same name, color hair, color eyes, and same birthday in India?
My name is not too common, but still I have a duplicate in my home US state - same name and same birthday for two people. That's fine most of the time, but the other guy is a felon, and the state does not require SSN when you are arrested. Therefore, they cannot distinguish me from the felon. My insurance was cancelled retroactively for 1 month while I was out of town. (thanks to Choicepoint for incorrectly associated his name and criminal record with my insurance - you should opt out). My voter registration was cancelled since they do not use a common primary key for voters.
Therefore I prefer a real unique identifier that the state government would respect and correctly associate with me. Since the state uses drivers licenses as their primary key, and the feds use SSN as their primary key, I can have different identities in different states, and the cops may accuse me of being the escaped felon one day when I am innocent.
I don't like the idea of biometrics, but I also don't trust an inaccurate primary key as my identification. A name + birthday != unique.
The enforcement of privacy should be in the way they allow usage of the identity. Credit and Taxes perhaps are tier 2 concerns compared with entering and leaving the country.
Just a thought...
Re:Duplicate names and birthday do not serve well (Score:5, Interesting)
Not to mention, names can change through a person's life, say by marriage, or by religious conversion. Or maybe simply because someone doesn't like their current name. Or because they're the-artist-formerly-and-now-currently-known-as-Prince.
In India, it becomes even more difficult - I see newspaper reports every day with people named as "A" alias "B"; not necessarily for illicit purposes, but just because they may be called differently by different people. Besides, I (for example) don't really have a "family name" - I have a given name and a couple of other identifiers. Even for those who do have "family" names, it's more of a "community" name. For example, the name "Singh" would indicate a North Indian, either a Sikh, or one of the many Hindu clans that use the name. It's not just likely that someone bearing the same first + last name would be pretty similar in physical characteristics, it would be almost a given.
Quite frankly, I'm glad we're finally getting this.
Re:Duplicate names and birthday do not serve well (Score:1)
why is it the rest of the animal world has gotten by just fine without incessantly tracking each other? it seems monkeys, zebras, lions, etc. have gotten by for ages without know whats going on 2 neighborhoods down, but humans can't handle it?
Re:Duplicate names and birthday do not serve well (Score:5, Funny)
As soon as the zebra's get together and hire machine gunners to defend their watering holes from lions, they're going to need some sort of way to determine that all the zebra's chipped in to pay for it.
Then again, they'll probably just use some sort of barcode scanner.
Re:Duplicate names and birthday do not serve well (Score:2)
Because you will now see UUIDs in newspapers ?
There are some good reasons to change name. (think witness protection program). Some are traceable, some are not. Depends on the intent.
But saying you want an ID isn't necessarily the same as saying you agree with biometrics. In France and in Norway, we have a unique social security number, but we don't use biometrics to define it.
Re:Duplicate names and birthday do not serve well (Score:2)
India has a much less uniform naming system, with a lot more duplicate birthdays + names, and much less variance in traits. How many Amrish Patels exist with the same name, color hair, color eyes, and same birthday in India?
How many Amrish Patels exist with the same name, fathers name, mother name and birthdate? I am assuming not many.
PS: if you still believe many, add pincode (Indian equivalent of zipcode) to the list.
Re:Duplicate names and birthday do not serve well (Score:1)
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/In-Gunnalli-village-all-men-are-Gyanappa-all-women-are-Gyanavva/articleshow/6494036.cms>/a> [indiatimes.com]
Re:Duplicate names and birthday do not serve well (Score:2)
I can't understand how anyone who dislikes unique numbers assigned by government would even consider involving your mother's/father's name, your birthdate and place of living.
"name, fathers name, mother name and birthdate" = much, much bigger invasion of privacy than a unique ID number. If a document being processed by some official lists your name+birthdate, then it opens up issues for possible discrimination by age/sex/nationality - think officials processing permits looking if the guy has a muslim or hindu name, or age-screening of CVs by the birth-dates listed for identification.
Why should anyone care who your father is and even if you know his name? Why should your ID change when you move to a different state, a paternity suit decides that there is a different father, you change your name and recolor your hair?
Given an average Indian level of corruption, any objective systems of identification are far superior to subjective ones, where some random official can decide if you are or aren't person X based on some criteria. Your comment "I am assuming not many" is ridiculous - the only acceptable answer would be "I can personally guarantee that only 1 such person exists", otherwise it means that it's ok for one person to be held accountable for another persons debts or misdeeds simply because their names/birthdays might happen to randomly match, or one person has deliberately claimed to have a different name/birthdate in a identity theft attempt.
So what happens when.... (Score:3, Funny)
... someone forgets to use unsigned instead of signed and you end up wrapping around to being a negative person?
What to call it (Score:2, Funny)
That way every checkpoint can require Caste'r-Card and Visa to get in.
What about the Mritak Sangh? (Score:2, Interesting)
/* Yes, corruption can override anything. I know. */
It's all a matter of implementation (Score:3, Insightful)
There are many benefits to having a national ID system that go well beyond the SSN in the US. For example, authorities may finally have a pretty good idea how many folk live in a particular area, which helps for voting, disaster-relief, and other efforts traditionally spearheaded by the authorities. Similarly, the use of one unified system that does not rely on the presence of a physical card could hopefully make law enforcement a bit better at avoiding false positives and negatives.
In a country with over a billion inhabitants, having a system that assigns a ID number which is anchored by multiple biometric identifiers seems like a pretty good start, assuming the back end is secure, hard to tamper with, etc. This is what worries me though - similar previous Indian Government efforts, such as "untamperable" electronic voting machines designed for the Indian elections, have been proven to be quite vulnerable to tampering. Similarly, given how easy it can be to bribe corrupt officials, I wonder what the quality of the data will be once it has been entered / maintained / etc. for a while.
The bottom line is that systems which rely on aggregating a lot of data have to be pretty resistant to being fed garbage in the first place and/or manipulated in the future. This is where Indian institutions have to do better in the future and one good reason why India lags other nations as badly as it does. And yet, I imagine the system that is being presented will still be light-years ahead of what India has now.
Re:It's all a matter of implementation (Score:1)
MOD parent up. Refreshing to see a sane comment after all the tripe about 'privacy', 'dictatorship', and so much bullshit. The focus needs to be on the technology being used, the implementation methodology, how secure the databases are going to be, how access will be limited to the system.
Instead of presenting technical facts about this massive implementation and presenting it as a technology article, it's been presented as a [smirks and sniggers] 'your rights online' article, with bullshit scaremongering and half baked information about 'caste system' and 'religion'. This is a retarded article.
Not sleepwalking, more like zombies (Score:2, Informative)
"ZeroPaid has a fascinating roundup of news stories surrounding the latest surveillance laws passed in India, including a first-hand account of someone writing from inside India. The legislation in question is the Information Technology Act's amendment bill 2006, which was recently passed in the Indian parliament. Things you can't do with the new legislation include surfing for news in Bollywood and looking up porn on the internet. The legislation also allows all transmissions over the internet to be monitored for any form of lawbreaking and permits a sub-inspector to break into your house to make sure you aren't browsing porn on your computer."
Democracy is null and void for the moment.
What's the big surprise here? (Score:2)
Regrettably this is the way the world is going and the stupid sheeple don't know how to fight back. Also, isn't India the country that cut off the balls of thousands during forced sterilization in the '70s?
Re:What's the big surprise here? (Score:2)
True enough. Many (all?) countries have practiced oppression of one or more groups at one time or another, sometimes for decades or centuries.
Which brings me back to India - look at their treatement of the Dalits for, oh, about three thousand years, give or take a few.
Re:What's the big surprise here? (Score:2)
Limiting it to the last decade seems awful convenient when you're considering a societal practice that has endured for millenia in a country that is one of the worlds oldest civilizations, despite the efforts of some prominent people, such as Gautama Buddha himself to change it.
Well 300 million sounds like a lot but that still leaves 700 million - who, I imagine, are really the ones who make up the might of the Indian state, in the world's most populous democracy.
It's telling that, almost 60 years after the abolition of the caste system, its roots still run deep.
Many of the incidents listed at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste-related_violence_in_India [wikipedia.org] fall within your 10-year limit and the description of violence are quite horrific. It seems that the Indian state is judiciously withholding its might.
I've not had much success in finding reliable statistics among inter-caste marriage (at any level). When that becomes commonplace and accepted throughout the country, then talk to me about dramatic change.
And, as yet, no Dalit has risen to the office of Prime Minister, although a Sikh has.
By the way, where are the terms of Chief Justices so brief? Most don't make it to the end of their 5-year term.
Re:What's the big surprise here? (Score:2)
And, if you feel the need to criticize the USA, by all means, proceed. I both praise and damn it, and other countries, on a regular basis.
But, I'm a bit mystified as to why you believe it's my country.
Re:What's the big surprise here? (Score:2)
Regarding the "affirmative action" or "uplift" program, it seems that there are Dalits and then there are Dalits - the ones who practice Hinduism fare much better than those who don't - a double helping of apartheid in a secular democracy.
I would sooner see India become the Asian superpower over China but I doubt they can heal the huge societal rifts that have plague them. Stepping outside your 10-year fence but staying within modern times, it's instructive to recall that, after the withdrawal of British rule, India quickly became, not one country, but three.
Re:What's the big surprise here? (Score:2)
This nonsense of 'there are Dalits and there are Dalits' is mischievous malicious propaganda. Dalits are Hindus. They were treated as the bottom rung of Hindu society by the other castes historically, but they were, and are Hindus. A Dalit today will mention his religion as 'Hindu', if asked to fill it in an application form.
Is it surprising that someone would lie on a form if it made the difference between getting assistance or employment or not?
India of today is modern India, and in no way identifies itself with pre-independence India - the two are completely separate. No one in India even dreams about going back to the pre-1947 state. When we say India, we refer only to post independence India. Now, it's the other country, Pakistan which has divided into two, while on the other hand, India has stayed united, in spite of all the naysayers and skeptics! So, your argument about India being divided is extremely silly.
I wonder if the Punjabi Sikhs would think me silly or are they not still dreaming of a Khalistan formed out of the (pre-Independence) Greater Punjab. It's probably a very good thing for Indian unity that Manmohan Singh leads the country and is so well regarded across the political spectrum.
We don't consider the other two countries to be part of India, we don't want them, we don't want anything to do with them. Let them go their own ways - they were never part of "India" and hopefully never will be.
It's a lot easier to keep a country together when you have contiguous borders or do not have a large, strong enemy territory to cross.
I think it was inevitable that the 2 former Pakistans would go their own way. If Islam hasn't been able to create one giant united state in the Middle East despite having so much in common and having so much of the most useful and coveted substance in human history, there was little chance of a split Pakistan enduring.
Re:Should I quote from the book of Revelations? (Score:5, Informative)
And [the Antichrist] causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
And that no man might buy or sell, save [except] he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six. Rev 13:16-18 KJV
Comment removed (Score:2)
Re:Should I quote from the book of Revelations? (Score:2)
Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.
I lived alone... My mind was blank...
Re:Should I quote from the book of Revelations? (Score:2)
"Only smart people will be able to figure out the number of the beast. Oh, and by the way, it's 666."
Huh?
Re:Should I quote from the book of Revelations? (Score:2)
The number of the beast is meant to be understood using the concepts of the time in which it is relevant. In this case, my guess is ASCII. Maybe it's just coincidence, but:
B + I + L + L + G + A + T + E +S + III
66 + 73 + 76 + 76 + 71 + 65 + 84 + 69 + 83 + 3 = 666
I do not think that trying to use Greek numbering is relevant, though.
Re:Should I quote from the book of Revelations? (Score:1, Informative)
So India is home to the "best and brightest" huh? This proves the country is populated by idiots and mindless drones willing to voluntarily enslave themselves to the government masters. May a thousand plagues beseige you.
Re:Should I quote from the book of Revelations? (Score:2)
Reminds me of the plot of "On Wings of Eagles." EDS was implementing a national ID card system which went beyong the population's threshold. I sure hope we do not see a similar outcome in this case.
Re:Should I quote from the book of Revelations? (Score:2, Interesting)
So India is home to the "best and brightest" huh? This proves the country is populated by idiots and mindless drones willing to voluntarily enslave themselves to the government masters. May a thousand plagues beseige you.
Why? It is voluntary. What happens if only 1% of the Indian people actually allow themselves to be scanned? That would be a powerful signal to the governemnet that people don't want this system.
Re:caste system... (Score:2)
Because in many places, it's part of a person's identity in India. Though reduced now, it's quite common for legal contracts to state a person's caste, religion, name, father's name, residence, age, and pretty much anything else.
Re:caste system... (Score:1)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Mark of the Beast (Score:3, Informative)
If your Social Security Number is your "true name" then you told this preacher the most powerful part, quite casually.
The first three digits are location. Anyone doing a tiny bit of research can find that out about you, and the next two digits are "lot number." This can be guessed pretty accurately by knowing the time of birth. If you can bracket the birth date with others' whose lot numbers you know, you can determine it as well.
That leaves four digits to uniquely and "secretly" identify you. Of which you gave up three without any prodding....
Comment removed (Score:2)
Re:Mark of the Beast (Score:1)
You should have made them up. "666" would have been a pretty interesting choice. :-)
Re:Mark of the Beast (Score:2)
the "right hand" is the fingerprint, and the "forehead" is the retinal scan. Think of it from John's perspective. What he saw were people scanning their fingers and eyes, and he described it as best he could.
all it would take is a national rationing system like in time of worldwide disaster to make it true.
21 Dec 2012. I wish it were just silly Mayan prophecy, but it isn't. You will see prophecy fulfilled.