A National ID Card

[jaguar]

You can guess the structure and nature with which it will operate to a certain point. Objectives aren't that hard to ascertain. The fact that they haven't is worrying in itself.

Not really. The fact that they haven't could be an indicator that they're taking due time in designing a system to make sure there aren't many kinks to work out.

Anything that's worth doing is worth doing slowly.

[jaguar]

and transparantly?

I'm assuming that you're referring to the fact that we're not hearing much about it.

Yes, obviously they're going to draw up a plan and work on their argument for a little bit before it's presented to the public. Isn't that what you would do if you had something to pitch? Would you tip your hand right away, or come up with a plan?

Tony -

I think you should make a forum where Jag and I disagree over various things and just debate each other. He and I seem to do that everywhere - why not pull it all together?

Okay. I have real work I need to get done now. Will post after playing Amped when I get home. Whoo.

[jaguar]

*laughz
It'd make life slightly easier - no more rooting though every thred trying to find the last debate.

Dham i know - i'm nitpicking. I was just expecting them te take more advantage fo the terrorist paranoia and move fast.

[tw]

Originally posted by lisa
And the reason that this sort of thing could NOT be done with driver's licences or something similar on a local level is what?

Lets say your ID is registered in the CA database. I steal enough of your identity to register as you in the PA database. I procede to use your credit rating, your good name in every national pizza chain, and obtain credit cards on your identification. All because you had no Identification protection. To have protection, you would have to register in every state. If the ID verfication system is localized, then you have ID verification but no ID protection whatso ever.

As for a driver's license system - it is not designed for personal identification AND it is designed for universal, insecure access by law enforcement - nobody else. A driver's license system is not to serve you - it is to serve law enforcement. A National ID system is designed to serve and protect you - which, BTW, is another reason why it will never be a threat to your privacy and why it is optional.


Another does not understand why counterfeit IDs could not be used. The technology dates back to the earliest days of encryption. When ID A interfaces with the master system, both share an encrypted common number. When counterfeit ID B is used, then the common number does not match - rejection. If the criminal is resourceful, then ID A no longer matches the database number - the Identification protection system has kicked in.

Part of my problem - I assumed this was obvious. But then I also assume the rudimetary concepts of PGP are fully understood by all here. That assumption apparently also may not be correct.


There is the silly idea that any system can be cracked, therefore no such security system should be constructed. This is twisted logic. But we don't even have the rudimentary system, or any plans for one We should be addressing the problem that already exists today so that a basic National ID verification system exists in 10 years - and so that a National ID verfication and more functional protection system exists in 20 years. But criminal types and those who fear all law enforcement will call that unfair? Yes, they would deny others access to a system that honest people require - obviously.

But alas, it takes a WTC collapse and anthrax deaths to suddenly discover that no protection exists. Governments (except those like NYC) had no response systems to terrorist attacks nor biological attack information. Sound like the FAA's graveyard mentality? Notice so many that still claim ID theft just does not exist and never will?


A silly fear that law enforcement might not get a court order or your permission to access National ID information. So what. Nothing exists in that database that threatens anyone's privacy. But if you are so criminal as to fear law enforcement - then don't use the system. You have that option. No problem.

The fear of law enforcement illegally accessing data in a National ID system is the same as a fear of law enforcement accessing the data in any local system - identification, credit card, driver's license, IRS, court records, telephone, Social Security, SMTP and POP3, etc. Those other databases contain massively more information that is a threat to your privacy and are not designed to be as secure. A National ID system contains no threat to your privacy or security - especially if you don't use it. But alas, fear of new or innovative persist. Just another example of how too many fear innovation (the anti-innovtive also still use the long obsoleted Windows 9x/ME and FATxx disk filesystems).

If you fear a National ID system, then do not use; absolutely stay away from the Internet.

If you are an extremist, then fear a National ID system because extremists must deny others access to anything that extremists fear. Extremists fear to let anyone else use a system that they would fear to use. Straw man: fear of anything that you don't have to use.

[Undertoad]

Just one question:

If the majority doesn't want it, how can detractors be called "extremists"?

[tw]

Originally posted by Undertoad
If the majority doesn't want it, how can detractors be called "extremists"?

Do they not want it or have they been subverted by a lack of knowledge combined with hype and fear of extremist sound bytes.

Undertoad's question is well stated. However I find it irrelevant. Emotional fear associated with no knowledge of what a National ID really is demonstrates how quickly people fear before they first have knowledge.

It reminds me of Leno interviews where they ask something like, "Do you support the elimination of the Sacrospicas in Endenouw". People were strongly opposed. One problem. There was no Sacrospicas nor a place called Endenouw. For all they knew, Sacrospicas was a disease worse than the black plague. But emotional is how most make decisions - and opposed the elimination.

There is no effort to address the National ID system. It will take the equivalent of a WTC collapse to address the problem because, as we demonstrated, the intolerant and fearful entertain their fears before they engage logical thought.

Notice the so many who had no idea how an ID system would work, what its objective were, and yet were convinced it would threaten their rights and privacy. Notice the many who could provide zero reasons why such a system would be made mandatory but instead entertained their fears, as proof, that a National ID system would be mandatory.

Notice who opposed the concept without having the slightest idea what the system was. OK, if they first understood the system, and had fears, then yes - that could be a logical thought. But please review this thread to identify who is so driven by their fears (instead of logic) as to fear a system without even knowing what the system did, or how it worked. "Its government, therefore it must be evil" is illogical and emotional thinking.

If you choose not to use the system, then it clearly was no threat to your privacy. And yet look at who still feared it anyway. It again begs the question - do you think using a head on your shoulders or the one located between your legs? Do you think logically or do your emotions determine your actions?

No, a National ID system is not a possiblity because too many still think like a hormone crazed teen-ager or have strong opinions to a fictional Leno street poll. Too many people simply fear change. Too many court their fears rather than try to push out the envelope, boldly go where no man has gone before, and use logical thinking. A National ID system is not even being planned as best I can tell making the Undertoad question, in this case, irrelevant.

[jaguar]

What *was* irrelavent was your analergy. Whatever its final form the National ID card is nowhere near as ambigious as a couple of random names. WHile its true purpose is quesitonable and every detail still hidden then of course peopel will fear and question it. Its a bit liek haivng a big black shape flying overhead and you don't know whether its an airliner or a B52 with a tacticial nuke on board.

And you still havne't rebutted the post i made about 3 pagse ago which i'm now going to lay to rest out of frustration.

jaggy poo -

I think that the whole "opt-in" thing would go a long way to helping people accept it. Personally, from tw's assertions, I can see an opt-in National ID card as being a good thing. Now, how it is implemented will have a lot to do with whether or not it's widely accepted.

As far as people fearing it - there are those that fear free speech. Regardless, the latest polls I've seen still show people having pretty strong support for a strengthened national ID system. So, we'll see.

[jaguar]

SSNs are opt-in too, how optional itis depends on the width and bredth of the system, if its needed everyhwere like an SSn its not very optional is it.

Of course there is support right now, it'll make those evil terrorists go away won't it?

Well, that's a problem. Of course it won't. But tw hasn't really argued for a NID card based on terrorism and its deterrence/prevention - just for identity protection.

SSN really isn't optional. As far as I can remember, I never opted in for one. If you live in the country, you have either that or a tax payer ID, pretty much.

[jaguar]

In a sense its irrispective whats its used for - what it does is still the same. Optional - if it truely wsas - fine. but i doubt it would be for long if at all (in reality, not in legalese), i can't beleivel its being pushed so soon after the terrorist attacks etc for the government to be purely thinking - we need a new way to protect the "good name" of our citizens!

[Undertoad]

I've met people who believe that SSN is optional (probably), that driver's licenses are unconstitutional (probably not)... even people who believe that the federal income tax is entirely voluntary (definitely not). Some of these people have completely opted out of the system. Once in a while the system coughs one of 'em up and prosecutes the hell out of them to try to make a point.

From what I've seen, they work the system in their various ways, and mostly stay afloat by playing the bureaucracy against itself.

[jaguar]

Since (in the response to lisa's comment tw continues to use agruements while refusing to respond to my rebuttles ill ignore those on the basis they are already null and void but...

Another does not understand why counterfeit IDs could not be used. The technology dates back to the earliest days of encryption. When ID A interfaces with the master system, both share an encrypted common number. When counterfeit ID B is used, then the common number does not match - rejection. If the criminal is resourceful, then ID A no longer matches the database number - the Identification protection system has kicked in.

An unhackable system? Intersting, i've never heard anyone claiming anyhting is truely unhackable, merely harder. If this is such a good point why not mention it some time instead of such a roundabout way of rebutitng it. It seems your more interested in preaching than debating on a logical and through level. If data, any data is stored on the card and the card is checked ona machine modified to copy the data off the card (as is often does with CCs) i fail to see how the card is still secure.

Part of my problem - I assumed this was obvious. But then I also assume the rudimetary concepts of PGP are fully understood by all here. That assumption apparently also may not be correct.

Patronising again, aiaiai.

A silly fear that law enforcement might not get a court order or your permission to access National ID information. So what. Nothing exists in that database that threatens anyone's privacy. But if you are so criminal as to fear law enforcement - then don't use the system. You have that option. No problem.

This one iv'e covered before but this variant of its goes further so ill cover again. Considering what will be on the card or in the database behind it a "silly fear" this is not, i'd consider all my personal details, movement records, DNA? Fingerprint? Retina scan? and who knwos what else personal data, particulary records about my movements, purchases, etc extremely personal. If i was to stalk you it would be an invasion of privicy surely? This is the smae thing, the only difference is its remote. And the records permanant.

As for the scary "waht woudl you ever want to do in private" and "only criminals who have somehting to hide want privicy" i find truely scary, tw seems to have inadvertintly decided to live in a Brave New World indeed. For anyone who has not read the book it really is up there with 1984. Optional? How optional? Either you are relying on legalese or are making large assumptions with no factual base.

The fear of law enforcement illegally accessing data in a National ID system is the same as a fear of law enforcement accessing the data in any local system - identification, credit card, driver's license, IRS, court records, telephone, Social Security, SMTP and POP3, etc. Those other databases contain massively more information that is a threat to your privacy and are not designed to be as secure.

Most of which require warrants which the national ID you've decided will not. Together they contain more infomation, but they are distrubuted all voer the place to differnet authorities some of which will allow that data to be removed anyway.

If you are an extremist, then fear a National ID system because extremists must deny others access to anything that extremists fear. Extremists fear to let anyone else use a system that they would fear to use. Straw man: fear of anything that you don't have to use.

Or on the flipside - If you don't agree with us completely and entirely, you are an extremist, if you want your privicy you are some kind of extremeist, if you arne't liek us you are a terrorist and must be destoryed.

If you fear a National ID system, then do not use; absolutely stay away from the Internet.

I spose you have a point. If you disregarded proxies, firewalls, ip spoofers, temporoay webmail accounts, e-mail encryption and public access points.

Just another example of how too many fear innovation (the anti-innovtive also still use the long obsoleted Windows 9x/ME and FATxx disk filesystems).

Irrelavent as it is many sitl luse 98 beacuse well...I'ts better for games. And i keep my 2k partitiona fat because NTFS is harder to recover if something goes wrong. Seems to run slower too.

The question raises its ugly heard - will i actualy get a response or will i get the same silence of someone sitting up on high.

Barak - all interesting, legal action? Its that legally possible anyway? As for seeming to bait people myself i'm merely trying to raise a reply to rebuttles i put up, instead i jsut hear the smae agruements again. Least maggieL responds =)