UK anti-ID card campaign Gains Momentum 380
Jack writes "The British No2ID campaign, which opposes the creation of a National Identity Database to hold biometric data on all UK citizens, has created an online pledge as part of an effort to publicise their cause. The three-day old pledge has recently gained the attention of the blogging community, with bloggers bringing a thousand new signatories to the pledge today alone. Readers in the UK are invited to look at the No2ID FAQ on the plans for mandatory ID cards - some of it makes for scary reading." Update: 06/14 17:13 GMT by T : Side note: Tom Steinberg, director of MySociety.org (organizers of this petition) writes "The ID pledge is cool in that it is so big and successful, but it is a very small insight into what pledgebank.com can do." It's actually a much more general organizing tool.
Ironic... (Score:2, Insightful)
hmmm...
Seriously, go get 'em guys.
Yeah, so? (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't care if the government or whoever knows who I am and where I live. They already know that, because I pay taxes. So now because of opposition to this national ID thing, my name's in a database somewhere. Well, God forbid anyone would put me in a database besides the oh-so-trustworthy twenty to a hundred direct marketing firms who are sending me catalogs all the time.
But: The fact that my name is in the hands of this random anti-ID petition site whereever does not put me at risk that in a year, I'll go to sign up for a Barnes and Noble discount card or something, and they'll demand to see a copy of my signature on this anti-ID petition before they will give it to me. Or that someone-- maybe the clerk at Barnes and Noble-- will get hold of the SQL ID for my signature on the anti-ID petition website, and use that, since it is valid proof of my identity, to go sign up for two or three credit cards in my name.
A national I.D. card of the sort that's being proposed here, however, does neatly create these problems and a number more like them. The problem here isn't the mere act of being identified, it's everything that happens after that. So I don't really see being identified by some random website somewhere in order to prevent or just protest a problematic ID card program as being a problem.
What an uninsightful comment (Score:5, Insightful)
See the difference?
Re:What an uninsightful comment (Score:2)
I agree with the parent (Score:5, Insightful)
We are against the idea of being forced to identify ourselves, being forced to carry id cards, and more commonly against the idea of spending vast amounts of public money for a system that clearly won't live up to expectations.
We are against a system that will be fragile and prone to abuse by having a single point of failure, and we are against the fact that it will not solve *ANY* of the problems that the Labour government claim it will:
* Fighting terrorism. Oh dear, it's the 'T' word. Compulsory id cards in Spain didn't stop the Madrid massacre. Those flying the planes on September the 11th entered the US with valid documents. It won't stop any sufficiently determined terrorist attack here either.
* Cracking down on illegal immigrants. Since most illegal immigrants tend to find work at the very edge of the law to begin with, ID cards won't make any difference. In fact, what happens if you suddenly deny everything to those who are already in the country? They'll probably turn to crime to survive.
* Identity theft. Won't be stopped by this scheme, for sure - anyone sufficiently determined will be able to get around this. Biometrics is not a mature technology, and has never been implemented on this kind of scale. Besides, most 'identity theft' is just credit card fraud anyway, which is a whole different matter.
* If you're innocent, you have nothing to fear. Well yes, we've heard this one before, and we know why it's a terrible argument. The best way to enslave the people is to do it slowly, etc.
Re:What an uninsightful comment (Score:2, Insightful)
See the difference?
But the Government have said they want a compulsary ID card the volountry one is just a trial to see how people react before they become compulsary.
Re:What an uninsightful comment (Score:2)
How long will it stay voluntary, once in place? Things like this tend to creep into many facets of everyday life. Perhaps soon you will need to be registered if you want a visum to the US, obtain a passport, open a bank account, make use of the NHS, or buy a train ticket. That is, if the government doesn't simply decide one day to make the thing mandatory for everyone, because "only criminals have a reason
Privacy vs "Justice" (Score:5, Insightful)
I equate my right to privacy with my right to personal freedom so eat that you "freedom"-loving police-state-loving psychos.
Re:Privacy vs "Justice" (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Privacy vs "Justice" (Score:2)
Either they are dim-witted buffons who have no idea about technology, or they are trying to fool us into allowing them to track all our movements. Either way, frankly, it scares me, and it's likely to be b
Re:Privacy vs "Justice" (Score:5, Insightful)
Fact of the matter is that although a lot of damage is being done to our civil rights (and world peace) terrorist scenarios in western countries are still as real as ever.
The 9/11 hijackers did not carry forged IDs and neither did Timothy McVeigh. They never needed to. It may be conforting to think of terrorists as bearded Bin-Laden lookalikes, but in reality a terrorist may as well be a model citizen, a patriot with no record right until the moment he blows something up.
And since we haven't found a descent answer to terrorism in the last couple of years, maybe we should cool down and stop panicing.
Re:Privacy vs "Justice" (Score:4, Funny)
Exactly. The "Don't Panic" approach is what helped the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy outsell it's competition (that, and being slightly cheaper).
Re:The enemy of my enemy is not my friend (Score:2, Informative)
Each invasion was a message to the Suadi's, each invasion led the US closer to Saudi and the Mujahadean.
Re:The enemy of my enemy is not my friend (Score:5, Insightful)
Just to clarify: since in fact no Afghan soldiers were involved, no "act of war" was in fact committed. The taliban "government" came to power with aid of the US and were later removed by US force. A souvereign state with innocent civilians was raped over an issue that is primarily US internal.
Surely, Afghan training camps weren't there out of American pattriotism. But neither were the Saudi families on US soil that paid for the camps. They were NOT hunted, caught, killed, or tortured without trial in Guantanamo. Far from that. They were put on planes and allowed to escape to Saudi Arabia even when the post-9/11 no-fly measure was still in effect.
Fingers could equally point at agencies, airport security, North-American, European and Asian countries. That's what I mean by Afghanistan being related only peripherally and Iraq not begin related at all.
OK. I'm ranting, so I'll stop.
--
Ps. Thanks for spelling corrections, but please have another go
Oh, great fucking idea (Score:5, Insightful)
Here's an idea: How about America privatize its army. Just spin it off into its own independent corporation.
After that, oh, what? It's invading other countries purely at random? Well, what they choose to do in their own time is their own business.
Pentagon Inc troops are marching on France? Paris in ruins, the government overthrown? The U.N. a little upset about this act of war? Oh now hold on a fucking second there. I'll not hear you slandering the U.S. like that. Since no American soldiers were involved, no "act of war" was in fact committed.
---
Every single goddamn thing in your post after the sentence I quoted above has not one thing whatsoever to do with the Afghanistan invasion. They are entirely, entirely separate issues.
The problem with the Bush administration is that they abandoned the "war on terror" after a few weeks blowing random things up in Afghanistan, ignored crucial issues with Pakistan, ignored crucial issues with Saudi Arabia, ignored root causes and in fact exacerbated root causes. The problem is not that in their brief, feeble attempts at combatting terrorism instead of just using Terrorism as an excuse for other things they want, they started with going after the groups in Afghanistan. The fact the Reagan clan helped the Taliban to power is extremely important, and the persons responsible (such as, for example, much of the current Bush Administration...) need to be held accountable, but this does not rob America of the right or need to react when groups which are literally a guest of the Taliban are launching attacks on the U.S.. And those of you who just plain denounce things the Republicans did because the Republicans did them are making things very difficult for those of us who are trying to get America to denounce the Republicans have been doing because they are wrong.
In the meantime, if you seriously think that substate entities can't commit acts of war, then you are in for some rude awakenings. States are effectively no longer able to wage war, at least not against the U.S.. Iraq proved that. This means that states are no longer going to try. That does not mean no one will. It just means it's nothing but privatized armies from here on out.
Re:Oh, great fucking idea (Score:3, Interesting)
One data point does not make a proof. I'll even give you Afghanistan. Okay, two data points do not make a proof. Furthermore, while we removed Saddam from power, it's hard to see any "Mission Accomplished" in Iraq at this time.
Also, does the name China ring a bell?
Re:Privacy vs "Justice" (Score:5, Insightful)
My outlook on ID cards is very different to a normal persons - pretty much any person who has had contact with the military has a different outlook on them. I have no qualms about registering for an ID card, after all I need to register to vote, register to drive, register to own property, register to travel outside the country, register to have a bank account. All of those things bring the burden of proof of identity on you, and a government backed proof would make all of these things easier.
What I do object to tho is having to pay for an ID card - up to £100 by most estimates. I am as big on privacy as anyone else on slashdot, but I fail to see how a national ID card can invade or strip my privacy any more than a drivers license or any of the other things Ive mentioned above.
Re:Privacy vs "Justice" (Score:5, Informative)
Possibly because you are used to carrying an ID card with you at all times and possibly because what you consider to be an ID card (name, address, maybe a couple of other sensible pieces of information) is nothing like what the government are proposing. Their ID card would include: fingerprints, iris scanning, possibly facial scanning amongst other things. Along with the requirement that all agencies are required to inform other agencies of any changes to these details it means that a large amount of information on me is available to people for no real reason, this is what I object to, especially given their current record of data security.
I wouldn't mind the one off cost of these things in the same way that I don't object to paying for my passport, but I do object to ANYBODY demanding my information on spurious grounds of "security" and that "the public support for ID cards has remained consistently high across all sectors of society [quote from ID cards briefing - http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/docs4/Id_Cards_Briefi ng.pdf%5D [homeoffice.gov.uk]"
which is arrant bollocks and typical of the current slippery incumbents of the UK government
Re:Privacy vs "Justice" (Score:3, Insightful)
But a requirement of ID to perform within your own country is definitely ridiculous. The implication is not only you feel alien in your own nation, but quite far reaching.
Remember, there is no guarantee that the private information about you will not fall in wrong hands. This joke [freedomradio.us] is self explaining.
Re:Privacy vs "Justice" (Score:2)
Actually, you don't need to do any of those things, so if you felt strongly enough, you could choose not to interact with those organisations and n
Re:Privacy vs "Justice" (Score:2)
Re:Privacy vs "Justice" (Score:2, Insightful)
But you want to talk about the U.K.? Fine, then, an alternate way of looking at it. The U.K. is just as much to blame as the U.S. for the fact the U.S. is currently buried ass-deep in a disastrous war in the newly-created terrorist haven of Iraq-- with all the attendant problems that has created for various
Re:Something that should never, ever be forgotten (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Something that should never, ever be forgotten (Score:2)
Re:Something that should never, ever be forgotten (Score:3, Interesting)
And I really want to know:what did we do to deserve this. Don't answer that if you're a terrorist - I'm talking to the law abiding non ter
Re:Something that should never, ever be forgotten (Score:2, Informative)
Total chaos (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Total chaos (Score:5, Insightful)
Get the picture? Civil rights are traded for pennies. Near-unbreakable IDs have less to do with terrorism than with control, efficiency, direct marketing and (mis)use by greyhats.
Re:Total chaos (Score:2)
When did anonymitiy and flimsy-identifying methods become civil rights? What the government is concerned with is properly identifying someone.
The world is a big place, gone are the days when you need personal, face-to-face relationships to get by.
You cannot expect the gov. to continue to allow rife fraud simply because a few nutters read too much dystopian SciFi. I agree with the parent, the question is not t
Re:Total chaos (Score:2)
And speaking of dodgy rhetoric... You cannot expect the gov. to continue to allow rife fraud simply because a few nutters read too much dystopian SciFi Why don't we combine the unspported presupposition that fraud is in fact rife, with a similarly unsupported presuposition that the this alleged fraud can only be combatted by means of the proposed ID card. And while we're at it, we'll throw in a quick ad
Re:Total chaos (Score:5, Insightful)
Being able to move around freely and anonymously if you've done nothing illegal. (Vs. being treated like a suspect/potential criminal by default.)
--
"We really don't have any enemies. It's just that some of our best friends are tr ying to kill us."
Why everyone becomes a suspect... or worse (Score:2)
OK, here's Standard Argument Against National ID Cards/Database #3 of 17,469,285. :-)
This system would be backed by a national identity database, holding amongst other things various biometric information on each individual in the country.
The police would have access to this database.
Having found something that might be matched biometrically at a crime scene, the police could therefore search the da
Re:Total chaos (Score:2, Informative)
The UK Passport service will look after the database.
All our normal Data Protection Act laws will apply.
You will not be forced to carry it around with you 24/7.
More from the Home Office's FAQ here: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/comrace/identitycards /faq.html [homeoffice.gov.uk]
The only thing that bothers me is the amount of money the government wants me to pay for my new card and the amount of money they want for making changes to the card. Anything more than 0p is too much in my eyes.
Re:Total chaos (Score:2)
Yes, so you have an ID card scheme where there is no actual requirement for you to have any ID.
What do you think evil terrorists and council estate dole bludging scum will say when asked for ID, I am guessing they will say they have no ID in which case this whole scheme is a total waste of money since the people they are intending to catch with the ID scheme will not have to have any ID.
Re:Total chaos (Score:4, Interesting)
I think your logic is a bit confused there. Not being forced to *carry* an ID all the time doesn't mean that you are not required to *have* and ID or that you are *never* required to carry an ID.
We have national ID books in South Africa. We are required to produce them as proof of identity when we open bank accounts, apply for loans, offer to purchase property, or engage in other transactions with strangers in which proof of identity is required. If you look like you're under the legal drinking age, you might not be sold alcohol if you can't provide an ID. However, as far as I am aware, there is no legal requirement for you to carry your ID book around with you all the time. And if there is such a legal requirement, then it is certainly not enforced. Policemen don't do spot checks in the street.
Considering the specifics of South Africa's apartheid history (people who weren't white used to have "pass" documents, which they were notoriously required to carry around with them all the time, or face arrest), if any politician today suggested that this was a good idea, he or she would be shot down in flames.
In spite of having a government-controlled identification document, South Africa is not a totalitarian regime. I really don't see what the fuss is about. How is having such a document any worse than alternative means of identification? At least it is a dedicated document which serves only to demonstrate that you are who you say you are, and doesn't give away unnecessary personal information.
Re:Total chaos (Score:2)
According to them no one will be forced to either register for the ID scheme or carry an ID card for something like 10 years.
What they hope is that by making it non compulsory to begin with people will not be put off by the cost of registration ( since they will decide not to register ).
The government then hopes that business such as Banks, Credit Card Companies, Utility companies etc and Government agencies e.g. the benefit office will begin to use ID cards s
Re:Total chaos (Score:2)
But if they did do it the taxation way, it's not an easy way to make money by charging people more then the card is worth, for example.
Re:Total chaos (Score:2)
Combine that with the UK government's dismal record on virtually every major IT project it has ever attempted, and you really have to wonder why our money is being wasted on this.
This is yet another example o
Re:Total chaos (Score:2)
There are a lot of good uses for near-unbreakable ID.
There are a lot of good uses for dog collars too...
Re:Total chaos (Score:2)
NHS (Score:4, Funny)
If this is the case I might try cutting an artery and running around the hospital foyer spraying projectile blood and taunting the doctors because they can't treat me, as I won't have registered for an ID card.
Re:NHS (Score:2)
Oh come on (Score:2, Informative)
If I pay with a credit card I have to show ID. Identity theft is extremly rare here, I never even consider it. Very little personal business involving identity is done without showing for instance a drivers license (which also contains the Personal Identity Number).
The UK system of showing a
Re:Oh come on (Score:2)
using the bill alone to prove identity AND residency... whell, then its plain stupidity. i can steal a bill from someones mailbox, get lots of credit cards and cash as much as i want on them. rinse, repeat.
Using bills as ID (Score:2)
In the UK at present, the usual standard of identification for something like opening a bank account is to provide two forms of ID from reasonably broad lists. One of these must show your photograph: a passport or photocard driving licence, for example. The other must show your current address and be dated within (IIRC) the past three months: a recent utility bill for your home or an electoral registration card would suffice.
Re:Oh come on (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, that's the problem. I quite like being able to go into the pub and get a drink without being forced to identify myself.
You're used to it - we are not. We like being able to get on a train anonymously.
I also imagine that your id cards don't cost you upwards of £100 (149 EUR, 181 USD) per annum!
Re:Oh come on (Score:2)
I think the discussion about problems with a national ID card completely miss the point. It is ok to demand that you can prove you are what you say you are in
Re:Oh come on (Score:2)
I find it an irony of immeasurable proportions that I right now feel so much free in a dictatorship like China, where this kind of system is unheard of.
It's the database that is the real problem! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's the database that is the real problem! (Score:2)
Seriously though, I simply do not see the purpose of this, except to raise money.
ID ? So What (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:ID ? So What (Score:4, Insightful)
Also given the notorious and consistent failure of UK government IT projects, I bet my left testicle that someone will crack it and freely distribute everything they find within five years. Goodbye witness protection etc. etc. This time Daily Mail readers will be able to find every paediatrician at their home address and call them ALL paedophiles.
Re:ID ? So What (Score:2, Interesting)
Just to be a pedantic asshole, but it was the The News of The World and The Sun that lead the hysteria around pedeophiles that lead to the type of incidents you describe.
The people that purpetrated the attack on the pediatrician were very, very unlikely to be Daily Mail readers; they can generally read and write, and know what a pediatrician is. The people who were attacking pediat
Re:ID ? So What (Score:2)
Re:ID ? So What (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:ID ? So What (Score:2)
Re:ID ? So What (Score:3, Insightful)
Do a keyword search for the court case "Willcock vs. Muckle"
www.statewatch.org [66.102.9.104]
Clarence Henry Willcock" [wikipedia.org]
The justification for ID cards is that they will prevent fraud, while experts have testified that ID cards will become "the master key" for identity thieves.
Re:ID ? So What (Score:2)
Interestingly enough, a lot of people aren't happy about the fact it could cost each person £93 (approximately $168) [telegraph.co.uk] for a card which will do little to resolve the very issues it claims to be required for.
18 billion quid for what reason? (Score:3, Insightful)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4590817.s tm
And none of the reasons the government has given for introducing them have stood up to any sort of scrutiny.
http://mrprecision.blogspot.com/2005/05/lets-sta rt-with-id-cards.html
A driving licence is a licence to drive a car. A passport is a document to allow you to go to another country. An ID card is a document to allow you to live. I already have that right thank you very much and I don't need the
Anglosaxon paranoia (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm quite impressed at how the anglosaxon world reacts to ID cards. They are present in most countries, and are a far cry from a fascist tool.
As far as my experience goes, in Italy you can get fined for loitering if you are found without "papers" and you are over 18. Yet nobody ever asked me papers without a good reason (airport, electoral office, and such things). Never seen an evil use of that, and can hardly conceive one.
In Norway, in order to do many things you have to be registered at the Forlkeregister. For instance, to open a bank account, have a job and the such. Banks and employers must in turn report on your savings and earnings to the tax office, so that your tax papers come into your mailbox already filled in, and you have to worry only about minor adjustments. If anyone accesses these data on a non-routine basis, you are automatically sent a letter notifying you of who asked (usually they need your permission).
Finally, it baffles me how people are so nervous about a stupid piece of paper or plastic. On the No2ID site I read taurinities like it would cause racial discrimination, fingerprint people like criminals (I have been taken fingerprints only once in my life, at the military draft visit), and will be useless against crime. Never mind there are heaps of experience in continental Europe of criminals caught because they provided a not-good-enough fake ID (one I remember was mafia boss Madonia). The claim that identity theft would not be affected is simply ludicrous: the very term "identity theft" is exclusive to the anglosaxon world, as identity theft is impossible with an ID-card system; in continental Europe, we don't even talk of it.
And last but not least, how can be that people are worried about ID cards when living in countries where the government has been given insane powers to detain people without trial and rights, like in Guantanamo?
Re:Anglosaxon paranoia (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re:Anglosaxon paranoia (Score:2)
But can you guarantee that will last forever? Dictators have risen from otherwise liberal democracies, and it's not inconceivable that it'll happen again. Once you have all that infrastructure in place, it's trivial for a malicious leader to use it to persecute.
How about the criminals that HAVEN'T been caught using fake ID? I wouldn't be surprised if there were ten times the number of criminals using well-forged ID or identity theft - once you have a universal
Re:Anglosaxon paranoia (Score:2)
But they *could* be used a a fascist tool right ? I mean its a possibility. If you think thats absurd then lets just look at what happens when good countries go bad.
Ethnic Cleansing, removing large swathes of the populace whom dont match the criteria for accectibilty. Currenlty most countries when this occurs have to physically react and this is something which so
Re:Anglosaxon paranoia (Score:2)
So, to recap: The anglo-saxon world (wherever the hell _that_ is) is being paranoid. In Italy, on the other hand, people realize that there's no reason to worry about fascism.
Heck, I guess you're right -- fascism could never take root in the freedom-loving soil of Italy.
Now, about this weird 'anglosaxon world' thing you have created in your mind...
Re:Anglosaxon paranoia (Score:5, Interesting)
Mandatory ID was introduced in the Netherlands this year. Things have quieted down a bit since, but at first a lot of outrageous and sometimes hilarious cases made the press. Right on the stroke of midnight on new year's eve, police arrested several revellers for not having ID on them. Old grannies, and a woman with a 5 month old baby have been detained for hours for not having an ID. If the police stops a person for, say, not having a working light on their bicycle, they often ask for ID so they can stick on another fine. If there's a protest going on that the powers-that-be don't like (such as protests during Euro summits or antiglobalist protests), simply have the police go around asking for IDs and take everyone without one into custody and off the streets.
My favorite is the old lady who, when asked to produce her, pulled out one she had had for a long time (and, being issued by Dutch authorities might even still be technically valid), with her name, her picture... and a 6-pointed star with the work "JOOD" (Jew) stamped prominently across the document.
Funny thing is, the mandatory ID does nothing to combat crime. Sure, people used to give false names when caught riding the train without a ticket, shoplifting, or defacing property, but the police already had the right to detain these offenders if they had doubts about the person's identity.
Yes, ask the people! (Score:2)
The problem with that is exemplified by the recent French vote on the European constitution, where the vast majority of government said they'd vote in favour, but in the actual referendum the motion was defeated by the majority of the people. In other words, sometimes if you ask the people what they want, you won't get the answer y
What's in it for them (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the reason they are proposing it is firstly so they can pretend they are taking serious steps to address terrorism, illegal immigration and benefit fraud and secondly because all the companies who may well be involved in providing an ID card system are telling them what a great idea it is.
Worryingly a lot of random people I talk to about this are in favour of a scheme which does all the things the ID cards will supposedly accomplish and so are broadly in favour of the scheme in general. However as soon as they think about the actual practicalities of the scheme, especially the bit where they end up having to pay for it, they begin to change there minds.
The trouble is that this ID card scheme is badly thought out with very few clear achievable goals and hugely expensive, the bottom line is that the money could be spent on more effective and more practical measures which do not end up in a giant IT fiasco and attempts to create all knowning databases on all of us.
Re:What's in it for them (Score:2)
Get the No2ID T-Shirt (Score:2)
Not being a UK Subject, I probably shouldn't buy the TShirt, but here in the US we've got our own problems with the RealID act giving us a real national ID card real soon unless we stop it.
Re:Get the No2ID T-Shirt (Score:2)
In 2 years when the Feds are ramping up readiness for RealID, and the states are starting to complain, you'll see some opposition. Such is the way in our country -- don't complain about something until it directly affects you.
i like (Score:3, Insightful)
They are now apparently to stop identity fraud, and terrorism is just a plus to that. I'm not liking it one bit, I'll have my civil rights back, please.
Future (Score:4, Interesting)
Time to leave the UK (Score:4, Interesting)
I've had enough of the UK following the US into wars, the new laws that have nothing to do with terrorism and more to do with monitoring citizens - and stupid expensive schemes like the ID cards. These are a couple of the tin foil reasons, a lot more is about the way the society in the UK is going; I don't want my daughter brought up here.
I've got my visa from my country of choice, I just need to sell up and move now.
BTW I've written to my MP, my MEP, about this issue and IP laws - have you other UK slashdotters?
Re:Time to leave the UK (Score:2)
Unfortunately this has made no difference whatsoever to the governments enthusiasm for the scheme - indeed we, the general public, love the whole idea and it's for our benefit they pushing this through.
Re:Time to leave the UK (Score:2)
kt0157, my country of choice is also Canada.
"I get these dead-eyed faces looking at me and there's an awkward silence.
I've given up saying "Britain is getting oppressive" and now just say "I want to go somewhere with lots of space and nicer weather" and people smile and say "yes, what a lovely idea.""
I know exactly what
Re:You'll get weird looks from people (Score:2)
This is Britain. It's like how we'll moan about the rotten service at the restaurant to everyone but the waiter - grousing about the country becoming a police state is pretty much the same thing. You moan privately, but never actually do anything. But when it's the weather that's driving you to consider emigration, well, that
My Neighbour... (Score:4, Insightful)
My Neighbour, Detective Constable, is very much in favour of ID cards. On explanation though the reason is this:-
If youve nothing to fear then why worry. If your not commiting crime then why are you worried about what peple know about you. He goes on to point out that many people in the UK have given up privacy with Store Cards, Credit Cards, Switch Cards, Loyalty Cards, Fast pay cards and not to mention Driver Licenses, Passports, National Insurance etc etc etc.
What he has not convinced me of though is that in having a national ID that it will in any way reduce crime or stop terrorism or halt fraud.
Indeed he made it quite clear that criminals do not carry id or generally assist in identification if they can avoid it.
It seems to me that a criminal is already beyond caring about legality and its very unlikely that they will carry any legitimate identifaction.
Ive heard it expressed quite well by a comedian who posed the question "What freedoms am i restricting other people to have by owning a ID card"
As I pointed out to my neighbour the money spent on this scheme and the on going resources and expense in deliveriing it might be better spent in equipping him and other support organisations ( Hospitals or Fire ) with more people and better training.
In the town where I live the paper seems to be reporting every week about a violent attack or robbery on local citizens by various "youths" will these attackers be showing their ID cards before robbing their victims ?
So now im off to rtfa
Re:My Neighbour... (Score:4, Insightful)
Perhaps you should suggest to your neighbour that he and all other police officers be fitted with webcam/microphone/3G phone combos so that the public can monitor them via the Web as they perform their duties. Of course, as a paragon of virtue with nothing to hide, he could have no objection.
Also, who cares what the identity of a defendant is. The important point is that the person who committed the crime is the one that is prosecuted. The "real name" of that person is irrelevant.
Changing the subject a bit, the ID card issue will be the poll tax all over again. Wait till the notices to attend a registration centre 40 miles away, on a work day, and the hand over £80+ start hitting door mats. Suddenly, an awful lot of people with suddenly be far less keen on ID cards.
Daaaaaaaghhhhhhhh!!!! (Score:5, Interesting)
I DO NOT WANT YOUR NEWSLETTER! DO NOT SPAM ME! I BELIEVE IN THE PETITION BUT I DON'T WANT JUNK POST OR JUNK EMAIL. I AM "SIGNING" A WEB FORM I CAN LOOK AT YOUR WEBSITE IF I WANT MORE INFORMATION!!!
Until recently I've been undecided about the whole identity card debate. I can see that it would be extremely useful to make something equivalent to the British Passport compulsory for British citizens - though I never fail to be amazed at the gross incompetence surrounding even that system. I was always deeply sceptical that the government could successfully pull off a project on the scale of national IDS - their track record is abysmal. Recently my opinions have crystallised by the most recent decision to track every motorist by satellite and charge by the mile - this proposal is, in my opinion clear evidence of dishonesty, cretinism - or possibly both. Given that the UK public transport system is, in all practical senses, unusable this proposal would give unprecedented levels of information on the movements of almost every member of society. While I once saw the purpose of being able to definitively identify those born in Britain I can only find underhand motives for these policies.
I'm yet to vote (having chosen to abstain in 3 general elections) - I would now seriously consider voting for a candidate who demonstrably opposes these malicious proposals.
Re:Daaaaaaaghhhhhhhh!!!! (Score:2)
This is quite a ridiculous statement. Millions upon millions of people use public transport in the UK every day. It is not perfect and definitely needs more investment. But to say it is "unusable" just boggles the mind....
I don't see the point in the ID cards - they would be able to do all the nefarious stuff with face recognition anyway - the ID card publicity is just to justify funding for a bound-to-fail effort at building
Re:Daaaaaaaghhhhhhhh!!!! (Score:2)
This is quite a ridiculous statement. Millions upon millions of people use public transport in the UK every day. It is not perfect and definitely needs more investment. But to say it is "unusable" just boggles the mind....
I concede that the London Underground provides a useful service (providing you only need to move around London) - and that a there is a much acclaimed "Tram" system in central Manchester. If these systems m
Perceived Safety (Score:5, Interesting)
I can't blame the Police for wanting this so badly. It must seem to the uninformed, or technically optomistic as some sort of panacea.
This would be greate if biometric evidence couldn't be planted or national databases couldn't be hacked.
It would also be good if they could come up with a card that can 100% identify you as who you say you are. Douglas Adams had great fun with this concept in Mostly Harmless. I'm sure organized crime will have even more fun. If it is statically stored on a chip it can be read, unencrypted and faked. The more faith that is put in a system like this, the more it can and will be abused.
I just can't see any way that this can help the British public. I work for one of the large computer projects that they are citing as a failure in the article. The problem here is that we take our job, keeping private information private, very seriously. This means that what could normally be a very simple application is often a megalythic nightmare. This results in slow development time and high costs, and perceived inefficiency. This is all well and good if application is essential to reducing our already expensive beurocracy, I can't imagine what would happen when they're creating a system to actively increase the it.
Bah (Score:3, Insightful)
No-one will want it, people will campaign against it , newspapers will argue against it and the government will stick their fingers in their ears, say "la la la I can't hear you" and implement it anyway.
Not that it means we shouldn't try and get Labour to see some sense, but given that they've been deeply unpopular for several years but still got voted in for another four years (on the basis that they might be bad, but the competition is even worse), they realise that they can get away with doing almost what they want with little recourse.
As such, I'm not holding out much of a hope on this one.
Re:Bah (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, the figures don't support that view. Almost 2/3rds of people didn't think the competition was worse. Problem is, they didn't agree on which of the competition was best. Thus, we are once more lumbered with a government which has got in despite being hated by the vast majority of the voters, never mind the electorate as a whole.
TWW
Re:Bah (Score:2)
Yes. If only there was a electoral system that resulted in governmental representation that was proportional to the number of votes cast. However it's clear that such a system doesn't exist, otherwise our freedom loving junta^h^h^h^h^h government would have implemented it already!
I want biometric identifiers (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course, we shouldn't kid ourselves: smartcards and biometric identifiers are not sufficient for improving security, and they will do little to stop terrorism. But, while not sufficient, they are a necessary component of any future system.
Support for UK ID cards dropping (Score:2)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianpolitics/story/
It seems that, like Australia, the more people learn about the true costs and problems in the system the less they like it...
From Private Eye (Score:4, Informative)
As British MPs wake up to the likelihood that ID cards may be a multibillion pound failure thanks to poor biometric trial results and big predicted increases in costs, warnings from the United States don't bode well either.
When the White House office of management and budget investigated 33 homeland security initiatives involving many firms that are potential ID card contractors, it found that only four of the projects had been effective.
Of the ineffective ones, a scheme called US-Visit is particularly relevant to the ID card debate here in Britain. The 10-year, $10bn contract for a computer network to screen foreigners visiting or leaving the US, recording their details and checking them against terrorist suspect databases, was won by Accenture. It promised a futuristic system with "biometrc" face and fingerprint recognition, but as the US general accounting office (GAO) found, costs would be well above the $7.2bn estimate and this "very risky endeavor" would probably cost "in the tens of billions".
Even less encouraging was its conclusion that "it is uncertain that US-Visit will be able to measurably and appreciably achieve the Department of Homeland Security's stated goals for the program".
Guess what! Accenture is a likely bidder for ID card work in Britain; and Ian Watmore, head of "E Government" here, is a former Accenture chief executive and ID card enthusiast. When he was appointed last year he suggested he would lead the project. So that's all right, then.
Re:Dont really care (Score:2, Funny)
Perhaps it's because you're a bad studnet? Perhaps if you're a better studnet you get more money?
Re:Dont really care (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The advantages (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The advantages (Score:2, Insightful)
The lack of ID cards is not the main cause of the administration inefficiency.
Countries with National ID cards have censuses, too.
That kind of information flow can be done with your tax ID.
Credit card fraud can easily be done in countries that have ID cards.
Re:The advantages (Score:3, Insightful)
ok your opinion but how? Hint: it won't as we (civil servants) already have government ID cards and someone else being able to prove who they are quickly will save all of 1 minute in the course of things
You can for once prove you are who you are in the UK
I can now with drivers license, bank cards, pay slip, utility bill, national insurance card ETC (ironically my government ID is not acceptable/recognized).
For the normal law-abiding citizen it will act
Re:whats the fuss ??? (Score:4, Informative)
"the government already knows who you are. you pay taxes dont you ? if you pay taxes the government knows who you are, how much you money you make, how much you spend, if you leave the country they know, when you return the customs records your entry in the country... "
As far as the tax authorities are concerned, someone calling themselves "titzandkunt"(!) earns so much money, and consequntly pays a certain rate of tax. Unless thay suspect that I'm under-declaring my income, that's the end of their involvment. They have no idea how much I spend - why should they?
"an ID card can be very usefull. we have them in brasil since... well, my grandmother still had hers RG (Registro Geral = general registry) from 1946..."
Useful for what? BTW, were ID cards introduced in Brasil during a democratic period, or during one of the dictatorships (1930-34, 1937-45, 1964-85).
"when someone have an accident here, the first thing paramedics do is check if the person is carying an RG card to know who he/she is, makes identification in case of death easier, proves that you are who you say you are when using a credit card or check."
I hope to God that this is hyperbole! If a patient is in a condition that they can't clearly state their identity, the paramedics ought to be checking the ABC's (airways, breathing, circulation) first.
When I'm presenting a credit card or cheque, I don't need further ID - both have got my name on them.
"a government issued ID only adds to convenience, IMHO"
Yet again, you don't say how.
The real problem that informed critics have with the proposed uk ID scheme is not the card per se, but with the database backing the card. Do you know what information the government proposes to hold on this database? Here we go:
- Name
- Other previous names or aliases;
- Date and place of birth and, if the person has died, the date of death;
- Address
- Previous addresses in the United Kingdom and elsewhere;
- Times of residency at different places in the United Kingdom or elsewhere;
- Current residential status;
- Residential statuses previously held;
- Information about numbers allocated to the applicant for identification purposes and about the documents to which they relate;
- Information about occasions on which recorded information in the Register has been provided to any person;
- Information recorded in the Register on request.
- Photograph
- Fingerprints
- "Other" biometrics (iris recognition);
- Signature
- Nationality;
- Entitlement to remain in the United Kingdom; and
- Where entitlement derives from a grant of leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom, the terms and conditions of that leave.
- National Identity Registration Number;
- The number of any ID card that has been issued;
- National Insurance number;
- The number of any relevant immigration document;
- The number of any United Kingdom passport (within the meaning of the Immigration Act 1971 (c. 77)) that has been issued;
- The number of any passport issued by or on behalf of the authorities of a country or territory outside the United Kingdom or by or on behalf of an international organisation;
- The number of any document that can be used (in some or all circumstances) instead of a passport;
- The number of any identity card issued by the authorities of a country or territory outside the United Kingdom;
- Any reference number allocated by the Secretary of State in connection with an application made for permission to enter or to remain in the United Kingdom;
- The number of any work permit (within the meaning of the Immigration Act 1971);
- Any driver number connected to a driving licence;
- The number of any designated document which is held by the ap
Re:whats the fuss ??? (Score:5, Interesting)
You'd be required to use the ID for public services, health services, to get a job, to travel, to use private sector services, like buying a book, a dvd, a newspaper, etc etc.
Now, each goverment agency will have its own database collecting relevant information about you. Private companies will also keep their own databases collecting information about you. Ok, you're gonna say, nothing new here. I already use a card for my bank, another one to drive, another one for my local library, another one for my local supermarket etc. So what's the difference?
The difference is that you'll only use *one* card. That is *one* database *key* able to be used to run queries across any databases that keep information about you. These queries can return results in seconds with almost no effort. While nowdays, to get a profile on a person you'd need too much resources and time. So they only do it for criminals and not for your average citizen. Things will change though. Combine this with statistics, a proactive policy and the export of ID data to the US [theregister.co.uk] and things get scary pretty quickly. Think of the unlimited possibilities for the goverment or corporations; they could built complete profiles on you. Something that is impossible today because even though you exist on many databases, they are not integrated.
For example, you receive a letter saying...
You think this is fiction? Yes, but for how long?
Re:The difference between the U.K. and U.S. (Score:4, Insightful)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4554827.st
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4551121.st
I think the common people in the UK do know about it, but perhaps not about all the consequences that we worry so much about here on slashdot.
Re:The difference between the U.K. and U.S. (Score:2)
Re:Only UK? (Score:2)
Re:Only UK? (Score:2)
Only UK? I think anyone entering UK might come under the database.
Aye, I'm a UK resident (NZ citizen; been in the UK since 1979) and my understanding is that UK *residents* would need to fork out for the ID card and the privilege of being listed on a centralised DB. Luckily Commonwealth citizens get the vote in the UK... unluckily I live in the Peoples' Republic of Glasgow, where we elect telephone boxes "because they're New Labour red".
Re:I have lived with them for ages (Score:2, Insightful)
Then you are white and middle classed. I spent many years living and working in Paris and was appalled to see blacks and arabs routinely pulled over for questioning and production of papers. Being white I was never asked once.
Friends of mine of Cambodian origin were unable to leave their home without ensuring they were carrying their papers, since they were routinely stopped.
If you choose not to make a fuss about