Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Mexico Will Shut Down 25.9 Million Cell Phones

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the sort-of-thing-governments-tend-to-do dept.

Cellphones 370

Several months ago, as a way to prevent the use of cellular phones in criminal activities, the government of Mexico started a program to require all phone owners to register cell phones in their own names. The registry associates each phone with the listed owner's Clave Unica de Registro de Poblacion (CURP) [CURP, in English], which is supposed to be a unique ID for every Mexican citizen. Now, as nanahuatzin writes, Yesterday the timeline to register the cell phones expired, and there are [approx 26] million cell phones yet unregistered (English translation of the Spanish original). While the procedure is simple, sending a text message with the CURP to a special number, most people do not want to register: some are wary of the uses to which the government will put the data; others did not understand or did not know the procedure. So far, only 69% have registered, most of them in the last few days, while the system to register has been oversaturated. So in an unprecedented move for any country, the Mexican government is announcing the shutdown of 25.9 million cell phone lines. Meanwhile, as a measure of protest, hundreds of people have registered their cell phones in the name of the president of Mexico, Felipe Calderon Hinojosa, to show how pointless is the registry."

cancel ×

370 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Jews for Nerds! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31810310)

Jews, also known as kikes, hebes, hymies, yids, gold niggers, oven magnets, hook noses, sheenies, swindlers, criminals, "firewood", and Arabs in denial are a subhuman species of reptilian extra-terrestrials and adherents to one of the world's oldest major religions, called "Judaism", otherwise known as "The Worship of Money" or "Eating Arab Babies".

Judaism was the world's first master race theory. The Jew religion teaches that Jews are the Chosen People of God and that there is a sacred mystical quality to Jew DNA. In olden times, Jew prophets would, under the command of YHWH, frequently lead the Jews on genocidal rampages against neighboring populations, and even today Jew leaders often cite Jewish religious ideals to justify their ongoing genocide of sandniggers. Judaism ironically found its mirror-image inversion in the anti-Jew Aryan racialism of the Nazis.
Despite only being 0.22% of the world's population, Jews control 99% of the world's money. Not only do the Jews control the world, but also the media, the banks, the space program, and LiveJournal's porn communities and Gay communities. All Jews possess the following features: an extremely large nose, fake boobs, curly hair that reeks of faggotry, one of those gay hats, a love of coke, a law practice, a roll of money, a small cock, or shitty taste in dental hygiene.

Jews invented both Communism and Capitalism. Karl Marx, of course, was a Jew, which was why he understood money so well, and in fact he was converted to Communism by another Jew, Moses Hess, the actual founder of Zionism, who ghost-wrote Marx's The German Ideology. Capitalism was created when Christian Europeans threw away their morals and decided to embrace Jewish practices like usury (see: John Calvin). Jews were the first group to create a sophisticated banking system, which they used to fund the Crusades in order to pit Christians and Muslims (both adhering to religions derived from and controlled by Jews) against each other to kill as many people as possible in a macabre human sacrifice to YHWH.

The Jew banking system was based on fraud and lies, so when it inevitably collapsed, the Jews just pwned as many people as possible by unleashing the Black Plague on them. Later, Jews economically controlled medieval Venice (the first modern maritime trade empire), and then crypto-Jewish merchants economically controlled the Spanish Empire, including the slave trade. Openly Jewish bankers orchestrated the Dutch Empire and founded Jew Amsterdam (later Jew York). Later the Dutch Jews moved to London because they thought it would be a better base for a global empire, and actually brought a Dutch nobleman, William III, with them, who they installed in a coup d'état (more like Jew d'état, amirite?) as new King of the British Empire. For hundreds of years, Jewish bankers controlled global trade through their bases in Jew York City and London. European colonialism was, through its history, essentially a plot whereby Jews could gain control of gold and diamond mines in poor countries and increase their stranglehold over the global economy.

Jews also enjoy slicing up baby penises for fun, some even enjoy sucking them. See below.

Jews also created Jew search engine Google, so now they can find all Jew information on Internets.

Some suggest that we should use Jews instead of dogs to sniff out large amounts of concealed cash or anything else worth smuggling at airports due to their sensitive Jew noses. Obviously, this is a horrible idea, because the pay is bad, and the dirty Kikes would probably form a union and demand moar money, thus increasing the burden on taxpayers everywhere.

Re:Jews for Nerds! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31811008)

Meh. Jews. We know all about them. [viddler.com]

:spit.

Torn (5, Insightful)

Xacid (560407) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810340)

I'm a little torn on this. I'm all for freedom of just about everything - but only in stable societies. I'm not too much of an idealist to believe military states don't also have their usefulness.

Considering the grip the drug cartels have on the balls of that place I'm not too terrible surprised though. As Mexico's next door neighbor I really can't blame them for trying new tactics to deal with this situation.

Re:Torn (5, Interesting)

Mindcontrolled (1388007) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810432)

Where I live, you gotta register your cellphone (or rather your SIM card) on purchase, using your national ID card. I am generally fine with the idea - under one provision: a decent constitution in combination with a functional constitutional court that regularly kicks the arse of some politico who wants to abuse the data for the sake of "anti-terrorism", "anti-childpornography" or whatever the buzzword of the day is. Thankfully, this seems to work around here, at least for now.

Mexico has cellphone serice? That IS news! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31810508)

Holy smokes! I never thought that, the sleepy towns in mexico, has cell towers. I see man with a mule walking under such tower. Laugh a lot!

Re:Torn (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31810676)

I suppose you're in Germany, where this registration requirement is both a farce and a nuisance. You can roam with an unregistered card from a country without a similar requirement and thanks to legislation limiting roaming fees in the EU, this isn't even particularly expensive. You can buy a SIM card at a discounter and register it online, giving fabricated information or, like the mexicans, real information of another person. You can buy used and already registered prepaid SIM cards at flea markets. Let's face it, this is an "if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns" kind of situation. The flipside of the registration requirement is that tourists will be turned away by clerks who don't know how to enter information from a foreign passport and that selling SIM cards entails a huge overhead. I envy your optimism about the constitutional court being able to stop the barrage of attempts to record as much data about every citizen as possible. The "Vorratsdatenspeicherung" law has been sacked, yes, but ACTA is coming and the reprise of the data retention law will certainly arrive via the EU too, and then the constitutional court will simply not have a say in the matter. Fascism will not arrive in jackboots, it's nice and clean and agreeable, until it's too late to stop it.

Re:Torn (2, Informative)

Mindcontrolled (1388007) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810892)

You are right in localizing me. I suppose it can indeed be a nuisance to foreigners, and I could very well go without it. As to the rest of your post - first, ACTA will not have any effect on cellphones, as far as I can glean from the leaked text. Regarding data retention laws coming in via the EU - the constitutional court has made it very clear that it has the last say on any matter which has a stronger constitutional protection in Germany than in the EU, so, after the last ruling of the BVerfG, data retention cannot be slipped in via the EU without first taking away power from the constitutional court. If that happens, I'll be on the streets and will protest with all that I have.

Re:Torn (1)

zero.kalvin (1231372) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810926)

Not only in Germany, but in France as well. Though I am not sure about the prepaid ones, but for the plans it's the same. When I first came to France 2 years ago I went through the same thing, I had to register my number with real data providing real documents. I don't think this is a wrong idea. As long as it's protected as the grand parent post indicated.

Re:Torn (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31810858)

That you don't tell us what country this is doesn't help your argument.

This is pointless and will fail. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31810942)

Registering phones accomplishes nothing. All the criminals have to do now is borrow someones phone, make an anonymous call and then return the phone back to the original owner. Hell they could pay people a fee to use their cellphone for 10 minutes and it would be completely random and untraceable.

Once again it's stupid to force people to register phones, it's no more reliable than making people register for slashdot. Any determined individual can be an anonymous coward. Even if you make people register any determined individual can borrow someone elses password.

Re:This is pointless and will fail. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31811102)

Don't be naive. Criminals don't borrow nor pay for your phone. They take it.

Re:This is pointless and will fail. (2, Insightful)

Asclepius99 (1527727) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811224)

Borrowing someone's cell phone is probably the luckiest you'd get with a law like this. What if you are planning to do something dangerous? You're not gonna borrow a cell phone and have them remember asked, you might just kill them. Not to mention that this just creates a huge black market for faked phones/phone faking equipment. It seems like this isn't going to do much but create a more dangerous situation that feeds money to people doing illegal things. If someone is going to get caught because of this system, I'm sure they're stupid enough that they would have been caught anyway.

Re:Torn (3, Insightful)

vlm (69642) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810462)

I'm not too much of an idealist to believe military states don't also have their usefulness.

You know how some people "just don't get it" that in the USA, corporations and the government have merged?

Well, in .mx, drug cartels and govt/military have merged, and some folks just don't get it.

I fail to see how the average peasant benefits by giving the milgov/cartels access to their phone records, although it probably makes kidnapping/extortion marginally easier. Just find a peasant with some money, then use the phone records to find their closest young relative, or closest female relative, etc, etc.

Re:Torn (5, Insightful)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811146)

Well, in .mx, drug cartels and govt/military have merged, and some folks just don't get it.

You have to be wildly ignorant to suggest that the cartels and government/military have merged.
The cartels have started to openly attack military bases/outposts to block or draw away military resources from being able to intercept smuggled shipments.

Mexico's problem is endemic corruption, not a military state or a corporatocracy.

Re:Torn (3, Informative)

cdrguru (88047) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811378)

Mexico's biggest problem has nothing to do with the drug cartels. It has to do with the separation of Castillian (Spain) heritage people from the Mexican Indian heritage people. There are few real "landowners" that are of an Indian heritage. The government is of the Castillian heritage people, and nobody else counts. Period.

As long as the Indian heritage people get bribed and killed it is OK. The real power in the country stays on their nice estates and nobody bothers them.

The only way to "fix" this would be a "regime change" or a civil war. Neither of which would be much fun to watch from up north. Besides, they have already had such a civil war and it didn't take even 100 years for it to go back the way it was before. I'd say a civil war wouldn't solve the problem - it would just make life hell for the Indian heritage people because there would be reprisals.

Until this problem is resolved, nothing that happens in Mexico is going to fix anything.

Re:Torn (1)

Santana (103744) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811342)

Stop spreading non-sense.

There's no such merge and I challenge you to prove it otherwise.

Corruption in the other hand, is a cancer that no country can say it's free of.

Re:Torn (2, Insightful)

Threni (635302) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810562)

> As Mexico's next door neighbor I really can't blame them for trying new tactics to deal with this situation.

I'd imagine that legalising drugs would be a more successful policy than:

1) trying to stop millions of people from growing/making, selling and using drugs
and
2) trying to force millions of people to fill forms, provide personal/identifying details to the government for permission to own a phone

Perhaps Terry Gilliam named his movie after the wrong country after all...

Re:Torn (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810600)

Perhaps Terry Gilliam named his movie after the wrong country after all.

Technically, he didn't name it after any country, he named it after a mythical island. The fact that there is a country with the same name is coincidental.

Re:Torn (1)

hibiki_r (649814) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811096)

It's not the legal status of drugs in their country that is the problem. It's their next door neighbor that they sell the drugs to.

Re:Torn (1)

Asclepius99 (1527727) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811258)

Legalize drugs? You sir must be the devil! The only things that could possibly lead to stopping much of the violent crime surrounding the cartels, cut costs while generating revenue, and allow people the same choice that we've given them with alcohol and tobacco! Won't you think of the children?

Re:Torn (2, Interesting)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810864)

Considering the grip the drug cartels have on the balls of that place...

You don't know nuthin'. The cartels are financed by American dollars, and run by American bosses. The corruption is equally bad on both sides of the border. And despite all this the murder rate is still worse in the states. And most of Mexico is perfectly safe.. So shitcan the bigotry. You don't want freedom. You want control.

Re:Torn (1, Flamebait)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811126)

(Score:0, Flamebait)

Oops, I forgot.. This is supposed to be the Mexican bashing thread..

just a weeeeee bit less than unstable down there.. (4, Informative)

dAzED1 (33635) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810936)

a few months back I was driving along in TJ with a group of women and refrained from pointing out the two bridges in a row that had a person (each) hung from them. It wasn't until the next day when they read about it in the news, knowing we went down that road, that a few of them realized they had seen something, but didn't think about it. Sometimes that's the best way - to not think about it. Another of our volunteers got separated once from the caravan, having decided that day to drive their own car - they got lost, and ended up passing a man being burned alive by a gang. She never drove her own car there again, that's for certain...

So yeah..."essential liberties" that we get upset about up here north of the boarder really aren't that essential. For a place that's so close to us, it's...very, very far away.

Re:Torn (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31810958)

What I find interesting is that when push comes to shove, many Mexicans realize that the technological boon isn't worth the loss of privacy. So when the government says "give us your identity or lose your cellphone" they say, "Here, take my cellphone." Would Americans do that, or just lay down and take it, for love of convenience?

Re:Torn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31811164)

I'm a little torn on this. I'm all for freedom of just about everything - but only in stable societies. I'm not too much of an idealist to believe military states don't also have their usefulness.

And you don't think the drug lords can bribe officials for genuine fake id?

Re:Torn (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31811200)

Considering the grip the drug cartels have on the balls of that place I'm not too terrible surprised though. As Mexico's next door neighbor I really can't blame them for trying new tactics to deal with this situation.

I think you have to look at how the drug war is handled overall, though, and realize that increasing militarization of Mexico is probably not as effective as other means of stopping gangs (i.e. changing policies to interfere with the multi-billion dollar black market that funds them).

To put it more plainly, the U.S.-led drug war is the only reason the drug cartels can amass so much money and power in the first place. As long as the DEA keeps seizing *part* of the supply of drugs, the remaining market will increase price due to the imbalance of supply and demand. Al Capone made it big because of alcohol prohibition, by running the drug (alcohol) from areas of production (Canada and other countries) into profitable markets with insatiable demand (US). Pablo Escobar made it big because of cocaine prohibition, by running the drug (cocaine) from areas of production (Peru, Bolivia, Columbia) into profitable markets with insatiable demand (US, Puerto Rico).

The markets are positive feedback loops because the drugs are addictive, and the money is dirty, so it is spent in a decentralized fashion by gangs to buy weapons. We have seized, AK-47s, AR-15s, M203 grenade launchers, hand grenades, IEDs, from these guys. They have indiscriminately attacked Mexican police and military personnel. They produce cannabis and methamphetamine with slave and child labor.

But the question of legalizing cannabis, and thereby slashing gang funding and gaining tax revenues by selling their product, that idea is off the table. Instead, we make more of the guns that may well end up in enemy hands, we spend a few billion dollars to fund the latest narcowar, and we tell the kids that it's a gateway drug, and to just say no, and then we loosen our ties and step down from the podium and have a cold brew, or a stogie.

And why don't we consider converting the black market into a taxed, regulated one? Because we wouldn't be able to handle the societal harms that would come with another legal drug. Because it's in Gil Kerlikowske's job description that he must oppose legalization of currently illegal drugs. Because there are lobbyists for the military industries, for alcohol, for tobacco, for fiber producers and processors, for pharmaceutical industries, but there is no weed lobby.

All I'm saying is if maybe this relatively (to alcohol and tobacco and caffeine) safe recreational drug WASN'T forced onto the black market, if the difference between the cost to grow and the street price per gram funded education and interdiction of harder drugs, instead of the gangs we then must spend tax dollars to fight, maybe then we would be facing some "societal harms," but maybe they wouldn't be as bad as having thousands die from gunshot wounds and god damned decapitations.

I hate politics so much.

A desperate solution (3, Insightful)

WiiVault (1039946) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810364)

Things in Mexico have gotten bad lately especially along the boarder. This is killing their tourism industry which is a key component of their economy. Americas especially are fearful to visit, and the days of a weekend in Tijuana are all but over. The Mexican governemnt has failed time and time again to combat this problem, in no large part thanks to their massive curruption problem. Despite some material wealth I fear that Mexico is sliding into a true third-world economy. If the choice is between bribing cops/ possibly getting murdered and spending a few extra bucks to go to say Miami then the choice seems clear.

Re:A desperate solution (1)

WiiVault (1039946) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810390)

i just want to add since I never adressed it that because of the way this system is structed, and the pervasive corruption this is nothing more than a gesture to the locals to show that Calderon "on the job".

Re:A desperate solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31810486)

Canada: in the summer it's almost as hot as the middle of winter of California!

Isn't it aboot time you took your next vacations to Canada, eh?

Re:A desperate solution (1)

WiiVault (1039946) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810754)

That would be a great tourism ad. "Come to sunny warm Canada, where you won't be shot or attacked. " Sign me up!

Re:A desperate solution (1)

tzot (834456) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810876)

What's the news on the climage-changing front? Perhaps Canada has only to wait a couple of decades, then it will be the California and Florida of the future. Just like Sweden and Norway will be the mediterranean-climate countries :)

Re:A desperate solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31811196)

That's untrue. Where I live in southern Ontario (where we get the same weather as western NY), summer is hot and humid.... so it's actually much hotter than summer in California (where it's dry).

This is also true in Montreal, which is just a little north of VT.

Re:A desperate solution (0, Offtopic)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810514)

...the days of a weekend in Tijuana are all but over...

Ah yes. But who will forget the Donkey Sex Show. She took it ALL! A Tijuana classic that can not be had in The States.

Re:A desperate solution (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31810744)

Things in Mexico have gotten bad lately especially along the boarder. This is killing their tourism industry which is a key component of their economy.

Tourism is in 3rd place when you look at Mexico's economy:
#1 Drugs
#2 Remittances from Mexicans working in America

You know what would kill the drug cartels in Mexico?
Legalizing in the USA.

Re:A desperate solution (1)

WiiVault (1039946) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811204)

Agreed. However I think right now the economy of Mexico, and even things like taxes are so reliant on the trade of drugs that a collapse of that system could lead to anarchy.

A worthless solution (1)

elucido (870205) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811002)

If the cartels just pay complete strangers to make phonecalls on their registered phones, the majority of complete strangers would accept the money, and if they don't then they'd just be robbed and the registered phone taken and once again anonymous phone calls.

Registering phones is as pointless as registering guns. Criminals don't register, so this will only effect the individuals who aren't in the cartels. The cartels will just go deeper underground, and will be even more anonymous because they'll start using random phones registered by random strangers. At least before they could perhaps trace the calls back to the same physical device, now they can't even do that.

Lets face it, if someone wants to be anonymous they will be. Just like if someone wanted to be anonymous on slashdot they could go and pay individuals for their username and password and bypass the registration system no matter how complex it is. The only thing the government can do is monitor ALL phonecalls from ALL phones, and through datamining hope to find the needle in the haystack.

Re:A worthless solution (1)

WiiVault (1039946) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811188)

Agreed. It seems so clear that the narco-industry could easily skirt this.

Just as Spain did but... (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31810370)

...but in Spain, you (the phone number owner) had to go with your "DNI" (National Identification Document) to your TC to register it and not be shut down.

Old news? (0)

chrb (1083577) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810392)

TFA is dated 13th April 2009.

Re:Old news? (-1, Troll)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810472)

TFA is dated 13th April 2009.

You *did* see more than one linky up there, right? Like the one that references a *very recent* article? Yes? Moron... Lay off the video games and sugar, and your attention span might get longer.

Sounds more or less succesful to me... (2, Interesting)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810400)

So far, only 69% have registered...

So, the *majority* have registered, and a large number of the remaining know about it but don't trust the system? Sounds more or less succesful to me...

Re:Sounds more or less succesful to me... (1)

nospam007 (722110) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810454)

What about the 10 million tourist phones?

Re:Sounds more or less succesful to me... (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810494)

What about the 10 million tourist phones?

The antics of the drug cartels are rapidly eliminating that "problem".

Re:Sounds more or less succesful to me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31810900)

Yes, but 42% (see, I can make up statistics too) have registered in fake names.

Whoops.

Re:Sounds more or less succesful to me... (2, Interesting)

wisnoskij (1206448) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811108)

While 69% is a majority, it is still far from 100%.
Their is still 25 Million phones unregistered

How would you feel, if for example the US power suppliers ungraded their system and they had a few problems but 69% of Americans still had power afterward.
more or less successful, right? The majority of Americans have power.

A majority is not even close to success in many endeavors.

Paving the Way to a Brave New Future (0, Flamebait)

Blue Stone (582566) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810426)

Coming to a 'liberal western democracy' near you, soon!

Re:Paving the Way to a Brave New Future (4, Interesting)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810998)

Any self-respecting "liberal western democracy"(not a terribly long list), would skip the inefficient-but-highly-rabble-rousing step of forcing people to register themselves and do it the probably-at-least-as-accurate-but-so-much-quieter-and-we-get-to-cut-our-private-sector-buddies-in-on-the-action way instead.

Ok, here's the deal. Running a modern cell network, or an electronic payment system, automatically generates large volumes of useful and annonymity destroying data. Further, entities like Telcoms and credit card companies tend to be few in number, large, relatively opaque, and fairly cooperative, if given the right incentives(*cough*AT&T/NSA*cough*). Given that this is so, only a lazy, second-rate putz would design the program around trying to force individuals to manually provide data. Hell, even if the program was "We give you $100, absolutely free, no strings attached!" you'd get a response rate of well under 100%, because of ignorance and laziness and paranoia. When your intentions are, in fact, bad, of course you are going to get a worse response rate.

Here is how you would do it "right": Some fairly large percentage(conveniently, this is the percentage that includes virtually all the people who matter, politically) of cell lines are paid for with credit cards that have real names and real billing addresses attached, either of individuals or businesses. If they've been paid for thus for more than a few months, you can even be largely sure that the credit card used isn't stolen. With the cooperation(easily secured, if history is any indication) of the telcos and banks, assigning identities to these lines should be a fairly simple exercise. Even better, it will be completely transparent to the owners of those lines. No friction, no pain, no hassle, absolutely nothing for the sort of respectable citizens who might write a letter to their congressman to get worked up about, or even notice.

This leaves you with the tricky cases, prepaids that have never been paid for with traceable means(or have a very unstable payment history that isn't sufficiently informative). Conveniently, though, you still have cell location information and calling records. Various spook-infested-but-ostensibly-private-sector data mining outfits would love to draw some useful correlations, for the right price. Plus, it isn't as though there is much stopping you from, say, writing down Joe Scumbag's IMEI when the cops stop him on unrelated business. Except in cases of downright horrific brutality(and sometimes even then) public opinion will let you get away with a whole lot, as long as you are dealing with those perceived to be undesireable. Making IMEI(or even locally stored data) retrieval a fairly routine part of the "patting down the undesirable" process should give you a fair number of identities to attach to your web of cell location and call log data.

That is how the pros would do it. No muss, no fuss, nobody but the tinfoil hat brigade and a few security/civil liberties researchers that nobody listens to would even notice; much less get seriously spooked about it, and the data produced would be as good, or better, than what you'd get from a clunky and scary manual registration effort.

Re:Paving the Way to a Brave New Future (1)

aplusjimages (939458) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811130)

In the USA we just bypass this step with wiretaps.

Does anyone actually belive this would work? (5, Interesting)

alvinrod (889928) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810434)

This'll just spread the crime to include cell phone theft. Then the government will need to set up some program to keep track of stolen phones and make sure they're deactivated and all the mess that comes along with that.

Even outside of the privacy concerns and other issues, this is a terrible idea that doesn't even approach solving the problem. It's a stupid ploy so that some asshat can claim they're trying to crack down on crime without really cracking down on crime.

Re:Does anyone actually belive this would work? (5, Insightful)

fearlezz (594718) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810570)

If you steal a phone, it'll be blocked before you got to call your criminal contacts. However, if you take the owner along, you may have a few days before it's blocked. So instead of stopping the crime, this is a perfectly good excuse for abducting (and possibly killing) any person that could supply a phone.

Great move!

Re:Does anyone actually belive this would work? (1)

Omniscient Lurker (1504701) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811088)

More likely beige boxing will become more common. Why bother with cellphones, just plug into the lines of any nearby building.

Re:Does anyone actually belive this would work? (3, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811106)

You'd have to be doing fairly serious crime before adding abduction or murder to your rap sheet for the job becomes practical(and even if you are, it is probably cheaper to use corruption, or apply smaller quantities of violence more strategically. A nice fat "tip" to the guy making minimum wage to man the counter at Juan's Cellphone hut can probably get you a phone registered to anybody he has sold a phone to in the last couple of weeks, and no questions asked. If you do steal a phone, displaying your gun and informing the former owner "I will need this to be working for the next week. Should it stop, I'll be back to express my displeasure." almost certainly works 90% as well as just abducting the guy, while being far less conspicuous, and a rather less serious crime.)

There probably will be a tiny number of statistically nonrepresentative; but rather ghastly and mediagenic, cases of what you describe; but I strongly suspect that the vast majority of real criminal work will either be done within the time constraints of basic pickpocketing/mugging(grab the phone, you probably have at least half an hour before they notice it is gone/pull themselves together and get to another phone to start calling their telco and their bank and so forth), with theft+intimidation("I'll be taking this. Your story is that you 'lost' it and spent several days looking everywhere for it. If I hear otherwise, I'll be sure to tell your children, so to speak."), or with basic corruption(just as with IDs, there will probably be a large and fairly easily accessible market for phones registered to just about anybody, available at a modest premium over the underlying service contract).

Re:Does anyone actually belive this would work? (1)

mr exploiter (1452969) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811316)

This is probably one of the more moronic things I read in Slashdot. Don't you think that police would start looking for the cell of the kidnaped/murdered person and arrest the criminal using it when they find it (and it's not that that hard to do it)?

I think this is an excellent idea except for those countries that have a really low crime rate.

Of course it wont work. Thats not the point. (2, Insightful)

elucido (870205) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811042)

Fascists don't make laws on the basis of whether or not it will work to solve a problem. Fascists make laws to control human behavior. It's as worthless as national ID cards with DNA built in. It's as worthless as the laws that make it a crime to possess certain drugs or information. These laws aren't designed to solve a problem, they are designed to control and regulate human behavior.

Usually these laws create even more problems or turn small problems into a big problem, which is then used as a convenient excuse to pass even more draconian fascist laws which give the government even more authority to regular behavior.

This process will not stop until we are all chipped government robots with no free will. That is the end goal/final solution of fascism.

Phone theft isn't even necessary, just go to a safehouse and use their phone. Or just pay a random individual $100 to use their phone for 10 minutes and I can pretty much guarantee if the price is right you'll find some individual somewhere who will let you make a call for $10 a minute.

In fact I'm sure most people on slashdot would accept that deal, and there would be no need to rob anyone.Of course when it's time to explain what happen to the police then of course the money isn't mentioned and it was a robbery.

Re:Does anyone actually belive this would work? (1)

mr exploiter (1452969) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811228)

This'll just spread the crime to include cell phone theft. Then the government will need to set up some program to keep track of stolen phones and make sure they're deactivated and all the mess that comes along with that.

Even outside of the privacy concerns and other issues, this is a terrible idea that doesn't even approach solving the problem. It's a stupid ploy so that some asshat can claim they're trying to crack down on crime without really cracking down on crime.

Why is this a terrible idea? This is exactly what have been done in Argentina and it works (except that there are some work arounds to make a stolen phone work but I think this could be fixed).

Nice protest. (2, Insightful)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810460)

Meanwhile, as a measure of protest, hundreds of people have registered their cell phones in the name of the president of Mexico, Felipe Calderon Hinojosa, to show how pointless is the registry.

Wow. 25.9 million cell phones get turned off, and out of all of them, only a few hundred flip the government the finger to this useless piece of legislation? I'm disappointed.

It would be easy to jump all over Mexico on this.. (2, Insightful)

siphonophore (158996) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810476)

But what they're going through is really a civil war. And in the US, we took quite a few liberties with civil rights during our civil war.

Will it help? Maybe--it will at least require drug gangs to go to the trouble of stealing cell phones that only have useful lives of a few days

Re:It would be easy to jump all over Mexico on thi (2, Informative)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810544)

Most "Drug Lords" use sat phones.

Re:It would be easy to jump all over Mexico on thi (1)

elucido (870205) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811054)

Most "Drug Lords" use sat phones.

Another good point. But honestly they don't even have to use cellphones at all, they could use the radio.

The same is gonna happen here too (2, Insightful)

Gri3v3r (1736820) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810542)

Here = Greece. On June every unregistered cellphone number will be deactivated by the providers who are obligated to do so by the authorities. I wonder how this can halt criminality. They can just get accounts from other countries, can't they? Or, simpler, they can steal accounts from others and use them till they get reported. it will generate more illegality like stolen account information sales or customer databases hacking. And of course, there is the privacy issue and how the information will be treated by the providers.

Avoiding the issue. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31810564)

While this 'might' disrupt some criminal activity, any success will be short-lived, and the cartels will get around this issue in a very short time frame.

The real issue here is the US' continued avoidance of the failure that is 'War on Drugs'. Why Mexico, and most of Central America isn't bringing this to the U.N. or doing anything within their power to shove this right back in the US' face is beyond me. Maybe certain people in the US are biding their time, but with Cartels willingly violating US and Texas airspace w/ helicopters, and the open killing of US families on both sides of the border, how is this not on the forefront of news media? Are these really not international incident as far as Mexico-US is concerned?

Would the heads of prominent Texas, or US business-men on the steps of the Capital building get there attention? At what point do US politicians consider this topic to be of immediate national interest, and immediate attention?

Re:Avoiding the issue. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31810688)

Why would they kill off prominent U.S. citizens. The drug lords don't want legalized drugs. If they kill anyone it will be people who are pushing for legalization and they will try to make it look unrelated to the drug trade.

Eventually one cartel will be in charge of the country and then things will settle down.

Yeah, FTA (fick those americans) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31811120)

FTA. The FA are behind all the world's ills. I say, FTA. FTA now!

(no my country is not a gnat, i do not live under a bridge, and my countrymen do not steal everything in sight that's not bolted down)

So fick the americans! fick them now!

Re:Avoiding the issue. (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811138)

Have you seen the UN's official stance on how wicked drugs are? That should give you some idea as to why.

that's easy to answer (2, Informative)

zogger (617870) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811306)

There are several reasons why the goons in most countries love to keep some drugs illegal, here are the five largest reasons, and this would more or less apply to mexico as well as the US right now:

1) They make a shitload, I mean just truckloads of cash more money at it, and all governments have insiders who are corrupt and in the drug trade, top to bottom to sideways. Look, they can't even keep drugs out of prisons, this is a major clue how corrupting all that huge cash money is. Illegal drug money funds from street cops all the way to judges, prosecutors, a lot of dotmil smugglers, spooks of various nations, and so on, all the way to major funding banks and real estate funds..that money is being transferred around "in the system" as well as under the table. Legalizing it would knock those cash profits down immensely, to those people and to the other "civilian" smugglers and dealers. Really, dealers are the last people to want it legalized. And the government simply does not want to lose all their "war on some drugs" gravy train. And gives pols some TV talking points about being "tough" on..drugs, whatever. They are always "tough"...lookit their ads during election cycles

2)Gives them a wonderful excuse to keep building the police state. They have people completely conditioned now to accept no knock raids, roadblocks, cameras, wiretaps, legions of "undercover" goons, etc..stuff that was taught to me was only done in evile places like east germany, back when I was a kid. Now..common. Plus, they got all the cops and paramilitary conditioned that it is all "legal and proper".

3)Takes more and more people out of the official "you are cool to vote" pool, and makes felons out of them, so they have legal obligations that go to forward point 2 above (the goal is for all citizens to be criminals so the governments can pwnz ur azz

4)creates a ton of unnecessary jobs in the criminal justice system, including building private for profit jails and running inmate slave labor factories and shops, supplying the hardware for the surveillance and command and control big bro state, etc. A lot of people make a lot of money off of big brother action now, and the war on terra and drugs are the two big reasons for them to do that.

5)then there's stuff like medicinal marijuana and industrial hemp..cheap to grow, effective for a lot of purposes..threatens a lot of established old big money interests.

I remember when Norway did this too (4, Informative)

Nichotin (794369) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810568)

This is was not unique for Norway at the time, but I remember what happened: Many criminals started using other peoples social security numbers... Let's say you want to register with certain operators, all you need to do is get a prepaid package with a new number, then send a text message with "REG firstname surname socialsecuritynumber". Nothing but automatic verification. I don't know what is worse, let criminals have anonymous phones or have them use other peoples ID.

Afraid of anonymous cowards (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31810614)

Pretty shocking that so many countries are afraid of anonymous speech.

Re:I remember when Norway did this too (5, Interesting)

TheGavster (774657) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810818)

The criminal use of another person's ID is by far the more terrifying. I would much rather have someone set up an unlicensed druggist's 2 doors down than for the police to batter down my door in the dark of night, with rules of engagement for dealing with a supposedly violent criminal. Much rather that someone else be given the opportunity to destroy their own life through drug abuse than for the police to either destroy me professionally with drug charges or physically with excessive force.

Re:I remember when Norway did this too (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811194)

I would much rather have someone set up an unlicensed druggist's 2 doors down than for the police to batter down my door in the dark of night, with rules of engagement for dealing with a supposedly violent criminal.

How about a foreign secret service stealing your identity, and performing a hit in your country? And you just happen to have a vague resemblance to the hit man in the security video . . . ?

Try to get *that* straightened out.

I fear that all these systems give government folks a false sense of security. And they don't realize that anything that comes out of these systems, can only be as good as the validity of the data that went in.

Re:I remember when Norway did this too (1)

Nichotin (794369) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811338)

Yes, after a second look at the issue I must agree. What I was originally thinking about in the first post was basically how it turned out: You have a fair share that uses their own social security number, because they don't have other peoples info for some reason. Then you have the other gang that uses other peoples info. Luckily, the police tend to do legwork enough to know wether the number they have matches the registered owners. Police in Norway is usually unarmed, except in cases where they suspect firearms. And even if they come armed, people/police rarely get shot. To be under telephone surveillance, it requires a crime that has a ten year penalty or more here. By Norwegian standards that is a pretty harsh sentence.

A new ad ... (1, Offtopic)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810626)

hundreds of people have registered their cell phones in the name of the president of Mexico, Felipe Calderon Hinojosa, to show how pointless is the registry

"Hey, Felipe, CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?"

This just in (1)

aplusjimages (939458) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811166)

Felipe Calderon Hinojosa wants his hundreds of phones that were registered in his name.

unintended victims a bit, too.. (5, Informative)

dAzED1 (33635) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810632)

My wife and I help run an animal rescue group down in TJ (http://www.friendsofhstj.org) and several of our members have Mexico phones so we can call people while there, and not pay international roaming :P

I didn't even know about this, and since only Mexican citizens have one of these CURP numbers...apparently non-Mexicans have to do a bit extra to have a working phone there.

Re:unintended victims a bit, too.. (1)

Oyvino (832494) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810730)

You don't have to be a Mexican citizen to get a CURP number. As long as you have a residentship you can get one.

Re:unintended victims a bit, too.. (2, Interesting)

dAzED1 (33635) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810774)

We don't live there. As I mentioned, we have these phones to prevent international roaming - meaning, we don't live there. I'm not going to move to Mexico just to have a cell phone there.

Re:unintended victims a bit, too.. (1)

Skapare (16644) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810974)

So please do post and explain, and do not ignore this, telling how all the rest of people (e.g. those without residency, such as those who visit on business) who may use a Mexico cell phone can get them properly registered.

Re:unintended victims a bit, too.. (1)

dAzED1 (33635) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811112)

google search: mexico cellphone foreigner.

If you're not a resident, or a citizen, you have to register in person according to this article. [mexperience.com]

If you are a foreigner visiting Mexico and don't have a CURP, but currently use a local Mexican mobile phone, you cannot register your existing cell phone online or by text message. Instead, you need to visit your mobile operator's customer service center and present your passport as identification. The attendant will take your personal details and you may also be fingerprinted as part of the procedure. Mexicans and foreign residents are routinely fingerprinted here; for example, finger prints are already on file for all Mexican citizens under the CURP scheme.

The person above was semi-correct, though only on a technicality ;) To have a CURP you either have to be a Mexican citizen, or a non-citizen resident with a VISA. Which means if you're neither a citizen nor a resident, and merely just someone who travels there frequently enough to have a Mexican cell phone, you have to go through quite a few more hoops now to have a cell phone. Or, I suppose, you could just find a resident there that doesn't have a cell phone, and pay them to register it there for you...

Re:unintended victims a bit, too.. (1)

gringofrijolero (1489395) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811226)

Didn't use my CURP. They just used my IFE and my birthdate.. and they did it through my phone. Just take your passport to the store.

slashdot (2)

alexdt100 (1500241) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810658)

I think this is a neccessity for MExico because the drug war/border violence is REALLY bad. I'm not saying I've been there or could coneive what it would be like but I do follow up on it in the news it is seriously out of control. Another comment I'm really glad slashdotters are so more open minded. Had I read the same article on Fox News I would of heard about outcrys like that the government is trying to implant mind control chips in our brains and the New world order will finally rule us all.

Re:slashdot (2, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811158)

The trouble with your comment is that it assumes that the measure will be even slightly effective.

The situation in Mexico is untenable, and threatens to get even zestier as time goes on. Something must be done.

However, not all "something"s are created equal, and choosing one that doesn't work doesn't count as doing something.

I wonder how effective it will be? (4, Insightful)

FrozenGeek (1219968) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810714)

So, the stated goal is to prevent criminals from using cell phones. Since we are talking about criminals, what prevents them from registering under a stolen identity? Or what prevents them from stealing cell phones? Or what prevents them from paying $1000 to Juan (who earns $50/month) over there to register their cell phone in his name? I understand the desire, but it won't work (even if government corruption does not undermine the plan). It will become another pointless government bureaucracy.

Re:I wonder how effective it will be? (2, Informative)

Ranzear (1082021) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810862)

pointless government bureaucracy

This is redundant in three different ways.

Re:I wonder how effective it will be? (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810928)

It will become another pointless government bureaucracy.

What if the point is to open a new market in fake-id cellphones? I think this HIGHLY likely.

Both govt and criminal orgs benefit, and coincidentally they have merged to run .MX. So the folks that run .mx will make money. No surprise?

It could be even worse. (1)

elucido (870205) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811082)

The criminals could actually get smart and stop using cellphones entirely, or use some sort of internet phone which would basically kill this entire idea overnight.

It's not pointless, fascism is the point. (1)

elucido (870205) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811072)

Believe me it's not at all a pointless idea. If they can control who you can talk to and how, they can control you.

Re:I wonder how effective it will be? (1)

jdigriz (676802) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811154)

No, the stated goal is to make a requirement that criminals will have to violate in order to conduct their business effectively.Then, when you catch them on something else, you have an additional charge to stick them with, which is especially handy if the main charges can't be made to stick. Once the criminal is caught, they can look up the falsified cell phone quite easily to see who it's registered to and charge them if it's false. They nailed Al Capone on tax evasion and mail fraud. Also, it segregates the country into law-abiding and suspicious quite neatly. Take the example of the hundreds of people who registered as the Mexican President. Finding them is quite easy. Shut down all the phones registered as such, take the President's EMEI and reactivate just his. All the others are lawbreakers, at least of the registration law: get a warrant for the billing records, or in the case of prepaid use cell-tower triangulation to track them down, and bam you're filling the arrest quotas and prisons!

what is this crap (1)

luther349 (645380) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810810)

really whats going to stop them from using a phone any phone. most criminals dont even use cell phones due to the fact they can be tracked. they eyhter use prepaid phones or a frigging phone booth. at least in the usa. as someone said its a stupid way of saying where fighting crime wile not doing a dam thing.

25.9 Million? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31810872)

I think that's around the number of Canadians with cell phones (out of a total population of around 35 Million). It's like they're shutting down Canada.

Just FYI.

if you do not shy the cost (2, Funny)

kubitus (927806) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810882)

I will sell you anonymous SIM cards from several countries usable in Mexico.

Of course you need to pay the roaming bills *g*

Re:if you do not shy the cost (2)

Skapare (16644) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811128)

How about some SIM cards registered in the names of Mexicans ... even if they are recently killed by drug cartels ... so there are no roaming bills?

Bummer (1)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 4 years ago | (#31810980)

to see so many people willing to go along with this in light of how fraudulent the whole idea behind it is.. I guess the kool-aid is super sweet these days..

Re:Bummer (1)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811368)

Please explain in detail how requiring the registration of cell phones to their users, thereby allowing the police to trace the owner of cell phones, to prevent the use of said cell phones in crimes is fraudulent.

travelers? (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811010)

So lets say i want to go on vacation to Mexico ( not that i would, don't have a death wish ) but if i did, how would i be able to get cell service now? Im not a citizen so i don't have one of those numbers.

Same Old Story (2, Interesting)

Low Ranked Craig (1327799) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811020)

In an attempt to curb [Type_of_Crime] the government of [Country] has [Required_Registration || Restriction] of [Device || Devices]

The net result of which has been to inconvenience and annoy honest citizens and not affect criminals at all since they don't follow the laws and working around [Required_Registration || Restriction] is trivially easy.

Re:Same Old Story (2)

Skapare (16644) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811150)

Ah ha! ... so that's where the {RI,MP}AA got the idea of DRM. If you outlaw X, then only outlaws will be using X.

Just the start? (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811044)

And after cell phones what if they force their citizens to register other things.
and then the obvious things is, "hay, if we know where all are citizens are and what they are doing at all times then it will be near impossible to get away with crimes"
Seems to me this is a very slippery slope, ending in absolute tyranny.
It is not even that long of a slope, even just using cell phones, all they need is some required software or hardware in all of them with some sort of GPS and the government can know what you are doing and were you are in real time.
And , of course, this is all in the name of reducing crime.

And in other news ... (1)

Skapare (16644) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811056)

... there has been huge rise in the number of stolen phones and SIM cards in Mexico, especially from the few tourists that still come to Mexico.

Mexico has zero interest to destroy the drug carte (1)

yooy (1146753) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811078)

Mexico has zero interest to destroy the drug cartels. http://fabiusmaximus.wordpress.com/2010/04/10/mexico-14/ [wordpress.com] Only the US could destroy the cartels. Putting drug dealers in prison? Millions of dollars Fighting the war on drugs? Billion of dollars. Legalizing drugs and putting the cartels out of business? priceless. There are some things money can't buy. For everything else there is matercard.

Re:Mexico has zero interest to destroy the drug ca (1)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811326)

executing all drug traffickers, drug dealers, and drug users, thereby ending drug the drug trade and putting the cartels out of business? Priceless.

Makes as much sense legalizing drugs.

In Soviet Russia (0)

bennomatic (691188) | more than 4 years ago | (#31811334)

In Soviet Russia, your cell phone registers you!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?