ID cards rethink to be unveiled

[Osem]

Originally Posted by THESHAOLIN1

As my understanding of history reaches way past 1 million years of this planet.

Which planet are you referring to? The one you're on or the one we're on?

[Nugget]

Originally Posted by THESHAOLIN1

I assure i know history better than most. If you cant speak to me about sumeria i suggest its you who gets the history lesson.

As my understanding of history reaches way past 1 million years of this planet.

I'll speak to you about Sumer (capital 'S' by the way). I'm not too sure about Sumeria, what with the fact that it's never existed. 'Sumerian' would be the descriptive of someone who came from Sumer, so maybe you've got a little confused. What do you want to know?

Oh, and I have to admit that I'm impressed - your understanding of history appears to surpass the existance of homo sapiens by about 800 000 years. Quite a feat, although it does rather explain your inability to construct a coherent argument...

As my understanding of history reaches way past 1 million years of this planet.

So you know all of History, impressive.

Originally Posted by THESHAOLIN1

clearly not, im talking about back in rome, the purpose of a government leading all the way upto the modern day has been twisted.

Ah, the Roman government - do you mean the Roman Republic or the Roman Empire (which was a dictatorship)?

Originally Posted by THESHAOLIN1

We have been made to look upto authority as god of our reality while believing and being told we have freedom while they slowly take it away from us.

You may have been made to do this, old son, but most of us on this forum (imho) haven't / don't.

Originally Posted by THESHAOLIN1

I assure i know history better than most. If you cant speak to me about sumeria i suggest its you who gets the history lesson.

Better than most...
History professors?
History teachers?
Babies in nappies?
I think you may find that reading the National Enquirer and Conspiracies Weekly does not count as being qualified as a "history expert".
btw, did you personally know Sargon the Great? (see my comment below)

Originally Posted by THESHAOLIN1

As my understanding of history reaches way past 1 million years of this planet.

Oooooooookayyyyyyy, then - if I read this correctly, you are an immortal being or a deity/xenomorph walking amongst humanity, spreading your message (well, spreading something, anyway ) - or do you come from an race of beings with advanced technology, who have mastered suspended animation (but not spell-checking), and you just defrost for a couple of days every century to see how far mankind has advanced, in order to harvest us for our organs? (I wouldn't take Mr_love_monkey's if I were you, oh Great One - they have been mostly abused or unused).

[TheNorm]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

... or do you come from an race of beings with advanced technology, who have mastered suspended animation (but not spell-checking), and you just defrost for a couple of days every century to see how far mankind has advanced?

Sounds familiar. Apart from the spell-checking bit. Which book is that from?

[Stuart]

OK, the old ID cards thing again... Possibly time to re-iterate my views..

While what I do is legal, and mostly of no interest to anyone apart from me, my family and friends, I am uncomfortable with ID cards. For a couple of reasons:

1) I like the freedom to wander off somewhere and have no one be able to find out who I am without my permission.
2) This government hasn't been entirely successful at keeping the data they have secure. Bearing that in mind, I don't think it a good idea to give them more.

[TheNorm]

Originally Posted by Stuart C

... Possibly time to re-iterate my views....

I'm not disagreeing with you (not yet anyway ) but your points raise two further points:

1. If you wander off in a city you will be filmed by many, many CCTV cameras. Without your permission being asked.

2. The government already holds a great deal of data about you. I don't think ID cards will add to that.

[BBKing]

Rather overlooked in the whole grim farrago was a report, cunningly released yesterday when everyone was looking the other way, which completely undercuts the entire scheme. Basically it says there is a need for a voluntary ID scheme from a *consumer* viewpoint, to prove ID at banks etc., but this is incompatible with the massive compulsory centralised database idea which is what the Government are clinging on to and trying to force people into (e.g. you can't work in certain industries without one, which is as far from voluntary, consumer-led as you can get).

At an early stage, we recognised that consumers constitute the common ground between the public and private sectors. And our focus switched from "ID management" to "ID assurance". The expression "ID management" suggests data sharing and database consolidation, concepts which principally serve the interests of the owner of the database, for example the Government or the banks. Whereas we think of “ID assurance� as a consumer-led concept, a process that meets an important consumer need without necessarily providing any spin-off benefits to the owner of any database. This distinction is fundamental. An ID system built primarily to deliver high levels of assurance for consumers and to command their trust has little in common with one inspired mainly by the ambitions of its owner. In the case of the former, consumers will extend use both across the population and in terms of applications such as travel and banking. While almost inevitably the opposite is true for systems principally designed to save costs and to transfer or share data.

I think that counts as 'opening a can of whup-ass'.

http://p10.hostingprod.com/@spyblog....sby_repor.html

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by TheNorm

I'm not disagreeing with you (not yet anyway ) but your points raise two further points:

1. If you wander off in a city you will be filmed by many, many CCTV cameras. Without your permission being asked.

True, however, unless there have been great advances in face recognition (which, last time I checked was about 50-60% accurate), they still won't know who I am..

2. The government already holds a great deal of data about you. I don't think ID cards will add to that.

True. Beyond some biometric data, the card itself won't add much, although if the data is stored on the card, I hope they aren't RFID cards. Don't really like the idea of someone being able to steal my data just by holding a reciever near me (as has been demonstrated with the US RFID passport system).

However, the main objection I have is that we appear to be moving toward being a police state, because of some percieved threat from terrorism.

[TheNorm]

Originally Posted by Stuart C

...the main objection I have is that we appear to be moving toward being a police state, because of some percieved threat from terrorism.

The use of ID cards, by themselves, does not mean that Britain will become a "police state". Much more worrying is the eroding of rights of free speech and public assembly.

I'm all for it if means I only have to carry one card instead of passport, drivers licence, staff ID, security swipe card, Oyster card, etc, etc.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by TheNorm

The use of ID cards, by themselves, does not mean that Britain will become a "police state". Much more worrying is the eroding of rights of free speech and public assembly.

True, and I am concerned about the ID card as part of that.

I'm all for it if means I only have to carry one card instead of passport, drivers licence, staff ID, security swipe card, Oyster card, etc, etc.

I was going to say that you are in trouble if you lose it, but then if you carry all that stuff in your wallet, and lose your wallet, you are also in trouble.

[BBKing]

2. The government already holds a great deal of data about you. I don't think ID cards will add to that.

This, although it's not actually true*, is actually an argument against - why should the country pay £19bn to collect and store data it already has?

* The ID scheme requires a lot more compulsory information than currently provided voluntarily. I can get by without a driving licence and if I'm not driving (like I didn't from about 1994 to 2003) I don't bother keeping DVLA informed of house moves. Ditto I've moved twice since getting my passport and haven't felt the need to inform them, and it's perfectly good ID, I took it the bank the other day, in fact, along with a water bill.

However, if I get a card and don't keep the ID card people IPS informed when I move I get whacked with a £2000 fine. What's in it for me, then, if on the rare occasions I need to prove who I am the other party is perfectly willing to accept my existing ID?

That's before getting onto the government repeatedly lying about the system anyway (biometrics are secure because they won't be online? How do you check the person in front of you has biometrics that match the database?). I don't trust them and don't think the scheme is necessary, although I'm prepared to accept that a free card for particularly low-paid people who find it difficult to prove who they are is actually positively beneficial.

---------- Post added at 12:34 ---------- Previous post was at 12:31 ----------

I'm all for it if means I only have to carry one card instead of passport, drivers licence, staff ID, security swipe card, Oyster card, etc, etc.

Since the scheme doesn't actually include any of that stuff (although the ID card would be a passport equivalent within the EU, but not outside), what's the point here? Your staff ID and security swipe card are part of a private contract between you and your employer, Oyster is a way of carrying cash around, open anonymously to anyone, particularly tourists, and solely intended to make using public transport simple. Do you really want all those run by the incompetents at the Home Office? They'd ruin them.

[TheNorm]

Originally Posted by BBKing

This, although it's not actually true....

Sorry, I should have clarified...

I'm referring to the general idea of an ID card - one card that securely identifies the owner, and carries some personal information. A bit like a passport and drivers licence combined. Not compulsory, but extremely convenient.

I'm NOT supporting the specific, ill-conceived and very expensive plan the government had in mind for ID cards. It looks like they aren't supporting it either.

By the way, are you sure you want to admit that you didn't tell the DVLA about a change of address?

[BBKing]

By the way, are you sure you want to admit that you didn't tell the DVLA about a change of address?

They'll never take me alive.

The key thing is that it didn't actually harm anyone - I wasn't using the licence at the time, since I didn't have a car. As soon as I did start driving, I dug it out and sent it off (IIRC I'd moved from Suffolk to Manchester to Hamburg to Manchester to Birmingham to London and three times within London too in the meantime). No harm done and paperwork avoided all round.

Originally Posted by me

biometrics are secure because they won't be online? How do you check the person in front of you has biometrics that match the database?

The Register has spotted this, I'm glad to say. Where I lead, others follow :P

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03...atabase_gaffe/

[TheNorm]

Originally Posted by BBKing

They'll never take me alive....

They might not care if they take you alive or not! I'm sure I've seen a poster about this, be suspicious of people who have several addresses. Or was that mobile phones?