Re: Ping Howard
- From: "Jim Webster" <Jim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2006 12:52:10 -0000
"Charles Francis" <charles@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:0a7am9eiic7DFwoL@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thus spake Jim Webster <Jim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>down
2) Duplicate ID would show up, but you then have to hunt both holders
to check them.
Hunting is not so difficult, if scanning is ubiquitous.
Depends on how ubiquitous it actually is, but collection will still require
staff to go out and do the collecting, and if this database is as goosed as
most government databases it is going to take a lot of staff to do the
collecting
By definition the easy one to get is going to be the honest
one. Also why should you only have one duplicate? Also why not invent an
entirely new ID.
It's not just a chip. You have to get your fake id onto the central
database. That is likely to be tricky.
Not really, there will be errors on the database, readers will regularly
mis-read chips. When you present your fake id the system might assume it is
a real ID miss-read. Indeed your fake ID could well be close enough to a
real one to make this seem likely.
Also transit reading' of ID, monitoring passing motorists, pedestrians who
are passing by a certain bollard in a shopping centre is different from
'access reading'
In access reading, if your number doesn't work, you cannot get in.
In transit reading, if your number doesn't work, you drive on and the
authorities then have to track you down and deal with the problem. It might
be that an automated system will send a warning message to your known
address, which will work for honest citizens whose chip was misread, but not
with the illegal
Given the standard of accuracy of government databases, if
they arrested everyone whose ID wasn't recorded on the database, then we
would need far more police.
One imagines it would proceed through stages, chipping at birth, then
the system would not be fully implemented until everyone already alive
dies out.
Can you imagine any politician or civil servant happily letting their pet
scheme take 50 plus years to start up.
of
3) Identity theft might become more common. And more worrying. How do you
prove that it wasn't you who committed the crime? You just steal the ID
someone going abroad for a few days holiday, or even just use their ID at
night when they are in bed.
Actually that could be so.
For a terrorist you could get round even those risks by just killing the
person whose identity you have stolen. Just chose your victim someone who
lives alone, and you would probably get the week or so you needed.
Point. It makes one wonder if any ID system can do more than control
compliant citizens.
I would suggest not. By definition non-compliant citizens are non-compliant
and tend to survive by doing things the state does not want them to do,
therefore they will continue to flout any system imposed.
with
I suspect that this government is more interested in controlling theI don't think any government should have that in its power. I agree
compliant citizens.
ityou, the idea is alarming.
more than alarming. I would suggest that any government that introduced
has just given the populace the right to destroy it.We always have the moral right to pull down government. Practice is
another matter.
I do wonder at what point a system crashes under its own bureaucratic
inertia. I suspect that some of the Chinese dynasties have effectively
experimented with this. Effectively the system would make life not merely
miserable but virtually impossible for a large proportion of its citizens.
Thus they actually have little left to lose.
We see the first shadows of this with a lot of livestock ID and animal
movement regulations, in that they are creating criminals, and setting up a
system where you can only live if you bend the system
--
Jim Webster.
Pat Gardiner, Five years raving about bent vets and still no result
.
- References:
- Ping Howard
- From: Tim Lamb
- Re: Ping Howard
- From: Howard Neil
- Re: Ping Howard
- From: Tim Lamb
- Re: Ping Howard
- From: Howard Neil
- Re: Ping Howard
- From: Tim Lamb
- Re: Ping Howard
- From: Howard Neil
- Re: Ping Howard
- From: Tim Lamb
- Re: Ping Howard
- From: Howard Neil
- Re: Ping Howard
- From: Hamish
- Re: Ping Howard
- From: Howard Neil
- Re: Ping Howard
- From: Charles Francis
- Re: Ping Howard
- From: Howard Neil
- Re: Ping Howard
- From: Charles Francis
- Re: Ping Howard
- From: Jim Webster
- Re: Ping Howard
- From: Charles Francis
- Ping Howard
- Prev by Date: Re: Ping Howard
- Next by Date: Bird Flu - Italy and Greece
- Previous by thread: Re: Ping Howard
- Next by thread: Re: Ping Howard
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|