U.S. Considers Microsoft Passport as National ID 764
An anonymous submitter writes: "Ladies and gents, the endtimes have begun. The Seattle Times is reporting that Mark Forman, associate director of information technology at the White House (or 'America's CIO', as he bills himself) has said the feds are considering the use of Microsoft's Passport technology to ID every citizen and every business seeking access to government services online. This is about as scary as it gets." To be fair, it looks very preliminary. Read the article. So many companies have tried to assist the government in providing services over the Net... but I guess if your lobbyists are good enough, you can be heard at the top.
That's it! (Score:2, Funny)
Re:That's it! (Score:3, Informative)
OK guys, for real now... (Score:5, Informative)
sPh
Re:OK guys, for real now... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:OK guys, for real now... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:OK guys, for real now... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:OK guys, for real now... (Score:5, Informative)
It's fairly well known now that email is mostly ignored by Congresscritters. They can't tell for sure if the email is coming from one of their constituents, it's too easy to do, and they get too many of them. Faxes are better, stamped snail mail is best.
Actually cold hard cash is best, but we're talking above the table methods here.
Re:OK guys, for real now... (Score:3, Funny)
I'm not a US citizen (or resident). I'd like to sit around pointing and laughing at how stupid the US government is being, but since our goverment is probably stupid enough to follow your example with added cockups of its own, I'm going to sit around and gripe instead....
Re:OK guys, for real now... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:OK guys, for real now... (Score:5, Informative)
- Be civil. Nobody likes to hear flaming, and your representative will almost certainly toss flames in the trash.
- Be brief. These are busy people you're writing to. Heck, even the person hired to read your letter is a busy person, since he gets whole sacks of these things.
- Don't use someone else's words. It's easy to rely on others to write letters for you. But the more identical letters they receive, the more likely it is that they'll feel this is an organized lobbying campaign instead of something from the grass roots. You want people to think your letter is genuine, so proceed accordingly. A relatively small number of sincere, well-written, DISTINCT letters are going to be as effective as hundreds of identical screeds.
- Proofread. This should go without saying, but, judging by what I see on Slashdot, many of us have lost the habit.
- Write a paper letter. They know how easy it is to bat out an email, so they don't give them much weight. In any event, nobody has time to wade through the millions of emails they get, so they sit unread.
- You may even want to hand write it instead of using a computer. That will make it more of a novelty, and it will be obvious you are
/really/ willing to put in an effort. Perhaps "I have to write in longhand so Microsoft's goons won't get me if I do it in Word their spies in Redmond will get it." Okay, that was a joke, but you get the idea.
For this issue specifically, it might be worth checking out how controversial Microsoft Government has been elsewhere. If you want an idea of what this is going to look like, check out this article in The Register (UK) [theregister.co.uk]. You may also want to do a few more searches over there since there's lots of meaty material.Hope that helps.
D
Re:OK guys, for real now... (Score:4, Informative)
Quickest way to get their attention is for them to know that they are YOUR representative!
Dear Congressman Bob... (Score:5, Funny)
Thank you for taking your valuable time away from being wined, dined and brainwashed by lobbyists to read this letter. I strongly oppose the U.S. Federal Government setting precedent in support of a known and guilty monopolist. Please insist upon an Open Standard, arrived at by a broad spectrum of those with strong experience in the areas of Preservation of Individual Privacy and Integrity & Security of Data. Do not allow this perceived opportunity to lock the people of the United States of America into a closed standard which has proven non-secure in the past and the goals of the provider so transparent.
Regards, {Insert Your Name Here}
What idea exactly are you opposing? (Score:3, Insightful)
Do you oppose the govenment making private information, such as tax info available to people through the internet?
Do you oppose the use of a outside (non-government) authentication system?
Do you oppose an authentication system which doesn't have a proven track record of good security and prompt effective responses to security issues?
Do you oppose Microsoft being the provider of the system.
Or all of the above?
Try not to be overly vague in what you write to your Congressmen. They often have little grasp of technical issues, and likley get vague complaints about just about everything the government does. You don't want to confuse them with too much detail, but you need to tell them what you don't like, and why. Alternate solutions might even be helpful.
Re:OK guys, for real now... (Score:2)
Similarly, Congress does have to authorize the money for schemes such as this.
So while writing Bush would be good, it wouldn't hurt to tickle your congresspersons.
sPh
Re:OK guys, for real now... (Score:3, Informative)
Interestingly enough, none of the people who prosecuted the Microsoft case (the DOJ) are elected either.
It was bad enough when I couldn't get into MSDN (Score:5, Funny)
Re:It was bad enough when I couldn't get into MSDN (Score:5, Funny)
Worst Idea Ever (Score:4, Insightful)
So they're going to trust the information of every single citizen to a corporation that has a known criminal track record? That's intelligent. What next, find a crack dealer to handle international trade?
Yes, I realize the offenses are different... but this is still stupid. It federally mandates giving Microsoft business. Well, not really... if an alternate ID is available, they should accept that.
Re:Worst Idea Ever (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Worst Idea Ever (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Worst Idea Ever (Score:4, Insightful)
Er, the government has a known criminal track record...
This is the usual way to get things passed (Score:4, Insightful)
It's the method, not the implementation stoopid (Score:2)
I'm a UK citizen, and we live under the shadow of the beast here with the UK government gateway being developed by/with Microsoft, so I have sympathy.
However we will need to access government services online, and we need to do it somehow.
I'm not suggesting we use Passport (christ no!), but we will need to use something!
Re:It's the method, not the implementation stoopid (Score:2)
Every person bourn, or Leagally entering the UK to work is given an NI number that is unique.
The govt. issuses plastic NI cards with a magnetic strip on them.
I can rember my NI number and my bank PIN.
Can't we use this info. and tec. to access govt web sites.
passport.com (Score:2, Funny)
wonder where this is going... (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course, the scariest part about all this is that anyone right now can get a MS passport. If something like this was adopted, referencing the above paragraph from the article, then you'd likely have to supply MS with *legitimate* information before being granted a passport. I dunno...something doesn't sit right in my mind when I think about giving my real SSN and/or other sensitive data to Microsoft (or anyone online, for that matter).
The article does say that it's thinking of using MS technology, not MS itself, in creating a passport such as this. But once the gov't requires such info for a legit e-passport, do you think that corporations would follow suit? Would the whole online identity issue become suddenly more legal and legitimate?
Not necessarily good for Microsoft (Score:2)
But the company may ultimately decide it's not worthwhile to boost the service from a tool of convenience for consumers to a verification service relied upon by businesses and government.
"Once you start vouching for identity, that makes you liable for fraud, that makes you liable for identity theft," Litan said.
[/quote]
A company with loads of cash, that's already a high-profile target for crackers, might not want the inevitable stream of lawsuits. If they did have liability exposure, you might see a spectacular concern for security.
Unless of course they demanded legislation preventing suits against them for doing government work. There's already a "government contractor defense".
Canada, here I come!! (Score:2)
Welcome to the United State of Microsoft. (Or maybe President Bill prefers the Microsoft States of America).
Re:Canada, here I come!! (Score:2)
Ah, no, I think the official term will be the United Oracle of Microsoft.
Re:Canada, here I come!! (Score:2)
if it's anything like windows XP... (Score:3, Funny)
So, uh.. (Score:2)
So, how do we get this guy out of public office? This is sickening. The government pursues them for monopolistic practices, and then we still this this gross conflict of interest arising..
but..... but.... isn't the government still SUING? (Score:3, Interesting)
Guess it's time to emigrate. (Score:3, Funny)
New Zealand?
Iceland?
The Netherlands?
Microsoft: Where do you want to go^H^H flee today?
Re:Guess it's time to emigrate. (Score:2)
imigrate = to enter a country.
That is all.
Re:Guess it's time to emigrate. (Score:2)
intr.v. emigrated, emigrating, emigrates
To leave one country or region to settle in another.
Immigrate means to move _into_ a country.
Emigrate is the opposite.
Every immigrant emigrated from somewhere.
http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=emigrate [dictionary.com]
I wouldn't make comments on spelling, IIWY.
Oh, well... (Score:2)
You know, I've known lots of people who have said, "If so-and-so gets elected, I've moving to another country." Well, so-and-so *did* get elected, and they are still here. But if the government adopts a privately-owned system as a national ID, I *will* be moving elsewhere.
What was the phrase? (Score:2)
One Spam-Happy Day! (Score:2, Insightful)
Does the passport == hotmail address? or msn email?
Does it become a legal address?
I can just see it now... one passport is assigned to each U.S. citizen, to provide a single email address through microsoft that not only will have possibly one's bills, and tax information, and any normal legal correspondance but also a single point of spam with very poor filtering options.
I'd love to see how they implement it... Hotmail?
"We're sorry your inbox is full (4,231 messages) Please upgrade to MS Premium E-Mail service"
... check check check
"1,242 messages filtered into 'Junk Mail' folder"
... click click
'Oh my, its still all spam!'
... click click click click
...
you get my point....
Change your name :D (Score:2)
OK, take a deep breath... (Score:4, Insightful)
I just payed my federal and state taxes online. (Score:5, Insightful)
* pay local traffic tickets,
* renew driver's licenses,
* renew vehicle registrations,
* pay property taxes,
etc.
Once a federal online ID becomes pervasive, it'll be used for every state and local online transaction also, just like SSN's filtered down to the state and local levels. And personally, I don't want M$ having all that info.
Re:OK, take a deep breath... (Score:3, Informative)
Hey (Score:2)
The president could have the ID: CmndrTaco
Vice president ID: Hemos
Homeless people: Anonymous Coward
Blackout losers: -2 (can't be seen)
Karma Whores: Spackler
This will be great!
Read. The. Article (Score:4, Informative)
The article mentions that is is for online services three times.
Quotes, with revelant words bolded for those of you who haven't finished 5th grade English yet.
"Microsoft's Passport is being considered as a way to authenticate users of the Web sites, said Mark Forman, associate director of information technology at the White House."
"The White House is instead pursuing an "e-identification" initiative, an effort to develop ways to authenticate people and businesses online who already have government identification numbers such as Social Security, business-registration and employer-identification numbers. "
"At the government-leaders conference, attended by representatives of 75 countries, Microsoft presented a blueprint for its "e-government" strategy that suggests they use Passport to verify the identity of visitors to their Web sites. It also suggested that its bCentral business Web site could be used to process business tax payments and that citizens could use its MSN Web site to handle address changes and voter registration"
---
Yes, its an amazingly laughable idea -- but its not the Big Brother in cahoots with Evil Bill Gates to steal all our privacy that the orignal poster makes it out to be.
Re:Read. The. Article (Score:5, Insightful)
It is not a long step (in fact, it is a very very short step) from there to having employers say to you "Ready to start work? Sure - just step up to that HR kiosk, fire up Internet Explorer(tm), and use your Federal Passport(tm) to authenticate who you are.". What? No Microsoft Passport(tm)? Sorry - no paycheck for you. And so on for other "optional" services that allow you to do optional things such as eat.
sPh
Re:Read. The. Article (Score:3, Insightful)
Additionally, again -- the government is considering it, not sure-fire definitly using it.
Man, moutains out of molehills.
Re:Read. The. Article (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes they are, and they currently have ways of being authenticated. This would just be changing the method in which the government determines those companies are who they say they are.
It is not a long step (in fact, it is a very very short step) from there to having employers say to you "Ready to start work? Sure - just step up to that HR kiosk, fire up Internet Explorer(tm), and use your Federal Passport(tm) to authenticate who you are.".
Actually this is a very huge step. Why would your employer want to use passport to authenticate who you are? Passport just requires a password. The current method of a Social Security number and a valid drivers license works much better.
The government is trying to make more information available to it's citizens over the web. They have a responsibility to make sure they aren't giving that information out to the wrong people. Therefore they need a system to authenticate users of the system. This is not the same as requiring one ID for all online transactions, that can be used to track everything you do. You can have multiple MS passports. I have two myself. One I need to access some stuff for work, and it is based on my work email. I use it for nothing but work. My other passport is for Asheron's call. I use that passport only for Asheron's call.
There is a lot of information that the govenment keeps that we as citizens should have easy access to. Much of that information should only go to the person it's about, such as tax or social security info. They need some way to authenticate users. In my opinion, the current form of MS Passport isn't a good solution. THe servers go down, and there are too many serious security flaws. Microsoft claims that they are addressing these problems, and expect to have a rewritten version available next year. I'll believe that when I see it.
Authentication is a real issue that the government many, many other online entities face. There are many good reasons not to like passport, but writing your congressmen that passport is the evil spawn of Microsoft isn't going to be that convincing. It still leaves the govenment with the same problem. The govenment is is going to solve the authentication problem, if you don't like MS Passport, suggest a better solution.
Remember that people got really upset about Social Security numbers. They claimed they were the mark of the beast. We still ended up with SS#s. If you don't like the proposed solution, lobby for a different solution.
Re:Read. The. Article (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh hold it... what's that "please bring your social security card and a picture id or your passport" bit that I go through everytime I change jobs?
Yes, this is all very preliminary. But I don't think it's an absurd concept to think that should the government move this way that a MS Passport would become the defacto electronic registration method for, well, everything. Legally, nobody is supposed to ask for your Social Security Number except the Social Security Administration and the IRS. Realistically it has become a form of national ID, particularly in the credit and financial sector. I know. I worked with credit data for four years.
Given that, ensuring that it does not happen is entirely reasonable.
"only" voter registration, address changes, etc.?! (Score:2)
And never underestimate the damage that even small changes can do. Change someone's address right before an election and there's a good chance you've disenfranchised them (think Florida). Or another change and you have full participation from the precincts located in the Shady Acres Memorial Park. Use the handy "write your Representative" feature and you can create another bogus grass-root support for protecting Microsoft's right to innovate.
If there's a need for such user authentication, and I think it's worth considering, then it should be handled by exactly one of two organizations. Either the US Postal Service, or the individual states existing voter registration service. Probably the USPS because resident aliens can still use government services even if they can't vote.
Re:Read. The. Article (Score:2)
There's also lots implied meanings in the article that people seem to be taking at extreme literal.
For example, the Government is considering using Passport Technology. That's a gigantic difference from using Passport itself.
Microsoft would like to see itself as the provider of these services through its existing applications. Considering the openness of these services, do you really think the government would consider a straight-foward integration? No; I can guarantee every single reader on this board that even IF a deal should develop, it will consist of Microsoft building the government its own service. Perhaps this new service will be based upon the technology, but it's highly doubtful that it'll be based upon the existing service.
In short -- Microsoft Passport does not, and would not equal U.S. Passport; despite what nearly every single foaming-at-the-mouth Slashdot reader thinks, and what Microsoft would like to see.
Re:Read. The. Article (Score:2)
In case you haven't noticed, we all have social security numbers.
"suggests they use Passport to verify the identity of visitors to their Web sites."
... and access to our government should be restricted because...?
Which is worse here - Microsoft or Goverment ? (Score:4, Insightful)
But what exactly is going on here? I already see people worrying and having heart palpitations. The story submission says "Microsoft Passport technology" not Microsoft Passport.
In priniciple this just means that Goverment is going to start tracking people as they access goverment online services... kinda like they already do using our Social Security numbers in meat-space - and/or cookies set by goverment servers in cyber-space. (I think it would be foolishly naive to imagine that people aren't already being tracked.)
This is just a logical extension of what is already going on.
Good questions to ask: "Can a user opt out?" "What about users from other countries and locales?" "What is going to be done with the info?".
Who was it who said "Privacy is dead already - all we have anymore is obscurity." (Or something like that.) Obviously this is the direction we've been heading for quite sometime. Now we see clearly - before we saw through a glass darkly...
Solution? (Score:2, Insightful)
The community would be well served to either design and endorse an open-source passport system, or alternatively design another means of identification in our hyper-paranoid electronic universe. Once we have done that, then we can seriously fight to keep our internet passport free!
We can only hope what the article states is true.. (Score:2)
But the company [Microsoft] may ultimately decide it's not worthwhile to boost the service from a tool of convenience for consumers to a verification service relied upon by businesses and government. Company name added for clarity.
Please God, we can only hope that they do not use this service. One would hope that micorosoft knows when they are out of there leauge. Having passport be the primary source of government identification online would be horrible.
If anything were to be done on this scale, it would need to be a new system, (it could be based on an existing standards compilant one) it would need to be regulated, and tightly controlled. Passport is none of these. How many hotmail accounts can you think of that are fake, fake name, fake address. This would be a mess.
And yes, I am purposely staying out of the microsoft will steal your info and use it against you business :)
Nothing to do with the UK government protal? (Score:2, Informative)
The Register has a far better
Write up [theregister.co.uk] then I could ever do.
Is this the same government... (Score:2, Interesting)
so, instead... (Score:4, Insightful)
But, the idea that you'll need to register in order to read government documents, now THAT is interesting, and somewhat troubling. But I couldn't care less what technology they use.
Unfortunately, all the Microsoft-hating government pawns around here seem to have missed the real point of the article.
Re:so, instead... (Score:3, Informative)
Balance (Score:2)
Mark? (Score:2)
It then became clear to me, that come the apocalypse, the mark of the beast would be Alice 32367@hotmail.com and Bob8217@msn.com.
Some information (Score:3, Informative)
If you're going to write, you should write Mr. Forman and his boss, in addition to your Congresscritters. Be sure to mention that by requiring Passport, the government is effectively forcing its citizens to use Microsoft's technology in order to access the public information. What happens if MS decides to start charging for Passport use? Will citizens then have to pay Microsoft to access public information? This is especially disturbing considering that the government is currently in ligitation against MS. I think part of the problem is that some government departments think it doesn't matter if some OTHER government department is in ligitation with MS. Make sure the people you write understand that you don't make that distinction. Try to equate MS with Enron, by asking if they would be so quick to adopt any of Enron products. After all, both companies used donations to affect policy, both companies have broken the law, and both companies are under investigation by the DOJ.
Yuk (Score:2)
After the Sept. 11 attacks, some politicians and business leaders have called for a national identification card, but Forman said that's not in the works. "We don't have any plans for a national ID card," he said.
translate:
If we would have used MS software the world would have been a safe place
I should have put some witty comment here but this whole story is just too stupid. Aren't I glad I'm not an american. (although, according to Passport I am, and 108 years old. Living in Beverly Hills. Brilliant)
But then Passport would have to be open sourced. . (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:But then Passport would have to be open sourced (Score:2)
It could be analogous to Office, which the government is a customer for. The government does not get the Office source code.
Opt out? (Score:2, Interesting)
- Want news? Tell us who you are so we can send you spam.
- Want to try a free demo? Tell us who you are so we can send you spam.
- Want to buy our product? It only costs $XXX.XX but you have to give us your personal information if you want it to be activated.
Blah, blah, blah. How about a web site that links to other web sites in various categories that DO NOT demand personal information (including email)? And a "hall of shame" of sites and products (or vendors) to avoid.
- The IRS can force me to get a MS Passport only when they outlaw PAPER.
Cheers,
Wind
Good. Now what? (Score:2)
(Not bad for a company under investigation!).
Somebody hack Passport, quick! Before this madness becomes reality and before "ID theft" takes on a whole new kind of meaning.
Even then, there is a sardonic part of me that relishes in possibility #3 above... =)
In related news... (Score:3, Funny)
In the year 2020... (Score:4, Funny)
After a recount of all votes, Gates received 89 percent of all votes, leaving oponents Arnold Schwarzenegger and Tom Hanks with 3 and 2 percent each.
"It's hardly a surprise", said Steve Ballmer, campaign manager for Gates, "Bill has showed great leadership skills and built the greatest company in American history".
Ballmer then made a turnaround in his position about the infamous "Mother's Day documents", and admitted "there might be some truth to them".
The documents were published by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, an underground group that has been described as the political arm of hackers and ciberterrorists, and wer purported to have been obtained from Microsoft's internal servers. Gates and Ballmer denounced them as a fabrication.
"I guess we can tell you the truth now", said Ballmer, after Gates' voctory was official, "there might be something there".
The documents include a series of emails in which Gates, Ballmer and Microsoft's VP of legal affairs, John Ashcroft, discuss several courses of action in they won the election. Among them were: Change the countrys name to Microsoft States of América, change Gates's title from President to Chief Architect of Everything, and outlaw the use of any software not certified as "secure" by Microsoft Corp.
Critics have pointed to the posibility of electoral fraud, but the governmente has refuted the posibility.
"It's ridiculous. Preposterous", said a spokesman from the Electronics Elections Office. "We used Windows CE doubleplussecure 2018 for the polls machines, and Microsoft XXP Security-Above-All Server for the counting. These are the most secure systems in the world, and they're incapable of errors".
After being questioned on the possibility of a bug in the system, the spokesman refused to answer, pointing out that the recently passed Corporations Antidefamation Act expresely prohibits the discussion of any possible flaws in software products, lest they be used for ciberterrorism purposes.
I can't wait... (Score:2)
... to see Bruce Schneier's take on this.
I've never seen his face turn puple, but this'll do it for sure.
This will never happen (Score:2, Insightful)
At least it won't with Microsoft's technology. I can't say that I like the idea. Perennially it could have some benefits, but the possibility of having your ID stolen, having the database stolen, etc and the privacy concerns will kill it. Also, if they did this with $M technology, I wouldn't allow my ID to be placed in it, and I wouldn't use it. The government isn't stupid enough to do this. Yes, the government is stupid, but not this stupid. To many politicians would get roasted, so it will not happen.
Sooner or Later (Score:2)
I hate to say this (Score:2, Insightful)
Sure glad I don't live in the US .. oh wait... (Score:2)
World Domination in progress
I like this idea... (Score:2)
But only because the very discussion of the idea causes Ellison and McNealy to fall to the ground writhing with convulsions. :)
Only 17 days late. (Score:2)
Glad not to be an American at the moment
Then IE will be the "National Browser"? (Score:2)
Maybe it's a good idea... (Score:2)
</evil>
Good job! (Score:5, Funny)
Passport is good and bad (Score:2)
I'd like to be able to use my MS passport on websites like Slashdot, arstechnica, planetunreal, porn sites, etc. but for government websites, it's another story.
How to participate in a representative government (Score:3, Informative)
Uh, is there *any* good option? (Score:3, Insightful)
OK, let's assume that we do want access to government services online. Taxation, benefits, voting even. I want that. That's going to require fairly robust identity validation. Note: fairly. Right now, it's absolutely trivial to scam the benefits system, or to steal someone else's vote if you really care enough to do it. An online solution only needs to be as good as the ones we've already got, which (let's face it) aren't that great.
Further, while I'm as cynical as the next guy (if the next guy is a bitter, twisted conspiracy freak), I really doubt if any company is going to be able to buy this contract without providing a genuine solution, and most importantly, a credible promise of long term support. Not the best solution, or the cheapest solution, but a reliable solution.
So, who does that leave? Oracle, most likely. Microsoft are actually the wild card outsiders. IBM, maybe. Sun at a stretch.
Can you think of anyone else? Note that we're not talking about a development house, we're talking about a solution provider with a track record (even if it's a criminal track record) and thousands of techies available to patch and nurse the system for years ahead.
If we want the online services (and I do), we're going to have to accept that it will be a big Dark Side company that's running them.
So I suggest that in this case you don't go off at half cock writing to your elected representatives (I use both words loosely) demanding that Microsoft not be given this contract. At least not unless you can suggest a credible alternative. Perhaps the most productive thing you can do is to try and sell her on championing legislation to ensure transparency and openness in the running of the system, and most importantly, ensure that it's universally accessible, that the information is actually held in confidence, and that it's not mandatory.
I'm tempted to suggest that it follow the pattern of recent bill and be called the "Enduring Patriotic Freedom of Just Federal Freenessness Bill", that would be reverting to cynical type. So I won't. ;-)
Goodbye America (Score:3, Interesting)
Goodbye America, It's been nice knowing you.
I cannot help drawing parrallels between this and the National Socialists, in German using IBM equipment used to manage the census, in the runup to the final solution during WW2.
The direction the US is moving is starting to get really scary from the outside.
UK Giovernment heading the same way (Score:3, Interesting)
Just when you think GW can't do anything more stupid...*sigh*. Anyone in favour of founding an independent state for geeks?
Re:Um (Score:2, Insightful)
Nationalizing Microsoft (Score:3)
If I recall correctly, laws cannect be passed to benefit only one person or company. (although there are ways around this by clever wording)
I'll believe it when... (Score:2, Funny)
heh =)
Re:Um (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure, you're not worried now, but you always need to think about the next step.
Re:Um (Score:2)
A troll posting with a +1?. Let's see what's wrong with your theory:
1) To force online voting every citizen would have to have a computer and an internet connection. Either that or every district would have to have terminals available for voters.
2) An absolute secure system would need to be built. An online voting system would be priority one for most hackers.
3) A system for insuring that people are who they say they are would be needed. Bioinformatics would have to be involved. Otherwise what is to stop somebody from selling their votes?
This is a topic that has been discussed over and over since the last Presidential election. Most of the same problems arise with forcing online tax payments. It will be a very long time before you see paper tax forms disappear.
Re:Um (Score:3, Insightful)
sPh
Re:Um (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Um (Score:2)
Re:Um (Score:2, Interesting)
Oh, BTW, Microsoft recently imposed changes to the Passport user agreement. They now own your tax return and all the information contained in it.
Re:I can see it already.... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:No way this can go through (Score:2)
These days you don't even have to be able to read or have an I.Q. above that of a coffee table to vote.
So basically, there is no hope.
Even when you try to have a simple reading test implemented in order to grant a license to vote it gets shot down by the Supreme Court (aww, the poor people can't vote because they can't read).
In my opinion, the only way to change the system is to force people to pass three simple one-page tests in order to get a voter registration card. First would be a simple history test. Second would be a simple math test. Third would be a simple test on the U.S. Constitution (perhaps just make 'em read the darn thing!!!).
Only after an educated voter base is established can these truly idiotic laws not get through.
Re:No way this can go through (Score:3, Insightful)
What on EARTH makes you think you live in a direct democracy like that?
You don't.
You live in a democratic republic.
Want to know what that means?
You vote for the people WHO YOU WANT TO MAKE DECISIONS FOR YOU. Then *THEY* make decisions FOR YOU.
At this point, other than prodding them and saying "Hey Over Here!", the voting public have ZERO control over the system, until the next election.
Simon
Re:revolt? (Score:2)
Geeks get head held down toilet bowl and flushed by non-geeks!
Re:clarification (Score:2)
sPh
MS Navy (Score:5, Funny)
Re:MS Navy (Score:3, Informative)
You're almost correct. Here's the story, at least how I remember it. I wasn't on the Yorktown itself, but I was on a similar ship and read some of the 'Lessons Learned' reports.
The USS Yorktown, CG-48, was to be the testbed for the 'Smart Ship' program. A major part of that program was converting the engineering plant (propulsion, electricity, water, etc) from manual to automatic control and monitoring. Most of the important sensors were wired into a central server, and control actuators were driven off of the same server. All other sensors would be read at periodic intervals into a portable computer and then downloaded into the server. The tools for doing this was a pen-based computer with a serial dongle. The idea was for the Engineering Officer of the watch to be able to control the entire plant from in fromt of a terminal, with minimal assistance.
Windows NT 3.5.1 was chosen as the computing platform because it was more mature and secure at the time than NT 4.0. A bunch of custom apps were written to control the various systems, and the back-end was a Microsoft database (I can't remember if it was SQL server or Access. Probably the latter, since most of the apps were written in Visual Basic). So not only was this system monitoring all of the engineering systems, it was also controlling them. Unfortunately, there wasn't much in the was of a 'manual bypass' on some of these system; they only took their input from the server.
Trouble came on a routine trip off of the coast when the guy who was collecting the period measurements accidentally entered an illegal value for one of the readings. When that value was uploaded to the server, no sanity checks were done, and as the server cruched through the data, a divide by zero occurred. Not only did this crash the software, it hopelessly corrupted the database. After several reboots, the technicians realized that the server was not coming back online on it's own, and started trying to do recovery efforts. All of this time, though, the ship was dead in the water because it's engineering control system was dead. There was emergency power, of course, and some systems were able to be brought up though manual means, but main propulsion was dead. After a while of fruitless effort to bring the server back up, the ship radioed to shore for tugboats to come out and haul it back in.
For everyone who is not in the Navy, having your ship towed into port is the biggest embarrassment that you can have. As a funny side note, one of the reports states directly that they should have been using Unix, not NT (Unix meaning Solaris or HP-UX, not Linux).