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!

Interpol Wants a Global Identity Card System

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the yeah-good-luck-with-that dept.

Government 349

Orome1 writes "The head of INTERPOL has emphasized the need for a globally verifiable electronic identity card (e-ID) system for migrant workers at an international forum on citizen ID projects, e-passports, and border control management. INTERPOL Secretary General Ronald K. Noble said: "At a time when global migration is reaching record levels, there is a need for governments to put in place systems at the national level that would permit the identity of migrants and their documents to be verified internationally via INTERPOL." Issuing migrant workers e-ID cards in a globally verifiable format will also reduce corruption and enable cardholders to be eligible for electronic remittance schemes that will foster greater economic development and prosperity in INTERPOL member countries."

cancel ×

349 comments

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

One world government (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35734822)

of commie Nazi fascists!

Re:One world government (1)

click2005 (921437) | more than 3 years ago | (#35734872)

FTFA:

"The ID WORLD forum heard that such a card required developing a mechanism whereby the biometric identity features of migrants, such as fingerprints and DNA, would be checked systematically against global databases."

A global DNA database?

At least they wont be able to lose that data on a couple of CDs...

http://www.alertboot.com/blog/blogs/endpoint_security/archive/2010/05/13/disk-encryption-us-army-reserve-has-laptop-stolen-cd-causes-data-breach.aspx [alertboot.com]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_of_United_Kingdom_child_benefit_data_(2007) [wikipedia.org]

It'll be DVDs or a flash drive for that much data.

Re:One world government (1)

postbigbang (761081) | more than 3 years ago | (#35734972)

From "show me your papers" to "put this swab in your cheek, low-life" in a single step. How droll.

Join the opposite (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735496)

Sorry to sound like a broken record, but... there is an attempt to do the opposite. Reference: http://www.metagovernment.org/ [metagovernment.org]

Yes, it is going to be difficult and perhaps a long-shot. But do you have a better idea? One that you personally can work on today?

Metagovernment needs programmers and other nerds to help get it off the ground. If you help, it just might work.

P.S. Metagovernment is an open community. If you have a problem with how it is being implemented, you can change it!

Re:One world government (3, Insightful)

nschubach (922175) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735022)

Control is the only reason I can see for something like this.

Why can't we live our lives in a matter of micro-transactions without everyone knowing what you are doing? I mean, do I really need a global ID to buy a loaf of bread or visit the someone (say, a doctor) and pay them in cash?

The only benefit to IDs are to people getting services from governmental bodies. (ie: so people don't cross the border and obtain medical care on the local citizen's bill.) The more I hear about global/national IDs, the more I hate socialized services because that's the only "valid" reason to have them. If people lived their own lives to the extent that they, as an individual, can afford there would be no need for IDs to make sure you are getting your fair ration.

Re:One world government (2)

Edzilla2000 (1261030) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735100)

"You really can't afford that chemotherapy... Too bad, you die!!"

Re:One world government (2)

nschubach (922175) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735152)

Yeah, and? Sure, it may suck... but if you can't afford something what makes the next guy responsible for you or your mistakes? (Not saying cancer is a mistake... but what if you go jumping off a roof? Do they have to pay for your stupidity?)

I also get tired of the "Oh the humanity!" arguments like the one you just presented. One day you have to realize that people die. You have to be prepared for it. There are simply not enough resources in this world to allow people to be careless with their own health.

Re:One world government (1)

Edzilla2000 (1261030) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735238)

So, getting cancer, getting in a car accident where you're not responsible, or getting alzheimer is being careless? I mean, Why do we support prisonners? Why shouldn't we just kill them? After all, they are sucking up ressources, right? And yet socialised health care works for many countries...

Re:One world government (1)

nschubach (922175) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735260)

So, getting cancer, getting in a car accident where you're not responsible, or getting alzheimer is being careless?

I never said that. You are reading too much. However, I did say that you have to accept that you will die. That's the end of my argument with you.

Re:One world government (2)

scot4875 (542869) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735558)

That's the end of my argument with you.

It's just as well. "Sucks to be them" isn't much of an argument to begin with.

--Jeremy

Re:One world government (2)

badboy_tw2002 (524611) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735566)

You didn't answer his question. Let me recap:

You: Socialized/Community medical care sucks
Him: What if you get cancer and can't afford it?
You: Sidestepping cancer, throw up strawman of roof jumping. I shouldn't have to pay for your mistakes.
Him: Bites on strawman.
You: You will die.

But you never answered the cancer situation. If we have the technology and resources (and in a first world country, we DO have the resources) in our society to cure the sick, aren't we morally obligated to do so? Sure, there is that ever present threat of health care sucking roof jumpers, but I feel like that's somewhat in a minority.

Re:One world government (1)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735394)

So, getting cancer, getting in a car accident where you're not responsible, or getting alzheimer is being careless? I mean, Why do we support prisonners? Why shouldn't we just kill them? After all, they are sucking up ressources, right?

Well, its tough, but am I truly my brothers keeper? Should that not be my choice rather than forced on me by the government?

And we DO kill prisoners, if the crime fits the punishment. Remember, prisoners are being punished for crimes, and the death penalty isn't justified for most crimes.

But in nature, bad things happen to good people, it sucks but that's the world we live in. It shouldn't, however be forced to be my problem when it does, I don't mind handing out cash and resources voluntarily, especially to relatives or good friends...but I don't need or want the government (especially on the federal level which does NOT know my living needs as good as local govt) forcing me to do so.One is freedom, the other is not.

Re:One world government (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735592)

Yes, like it or not, you are your brother's keeper. You can bellyache all you want but in healthcare alone there are myriad things we do, as a civilization, that benefits the whole far more than an individual (vaccination is a great example of this). This extends, of course further than healthcare, but since that's the typical US libertarian bugaboo I thought I'd use that one. So unless you want to go back to the days of Polio and other horrid diseases that were common, for you and your kids, and go back to that "simpler time" of life expectancy of around 30 years, you can pull your head out and realize you aren't an island.

I swear, people like you have remarkably little sympathy for those who aren't so fortunate. For every time you've "worked hard" to earn what you have you've probably benefitted 10 times simply from good fortune. The thing about social good fortune is it tends to rain over and over on the same folks due to privilege, but people like you, who without exception hold themselves as intelligent, are remarkably blind to something like social good fortune, even though it's fairly obvious.

Re:One world government (1)

Edzilla2000 (1261030) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735628)

Thankfully, I don't live in a country that has the death penalty.
And our daily lives are made possible by the pooling of ressources. I don't have kids, and yet some of my taxes go to school districts.
My neightboor doesn't have a car, and yet some of his taxes pay for the roads I use.
I'm not sick, and yet some of my taxes go to someone who is.
Right now I have a job, and some of my taxes go to someone who doesn't. And when i didn't have a job, that guy was probably paying for my appartment. That's called living in a community.
Your community happens to have around 300 million members, and mine around 60. Why should your community be reduced to your few friends and family?

Re:One world government (1)

Tiger4 (840741) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735400)

So, getting cancer, getting in a car accident where you're not responsible, or getting alzheimer is being careless?
I mean, Why do we support prisonners? Why shouldn't we just kill them? After all, they are sucking up ressources, right?

And yet socialised health care works for many countries...

We *should* just kill them. They *do* suck up resources out of proportion to their productivity. And they aren't likely to get any more productive as time goes on, recidivism being what it is. Convict them, then dump them on the waste heap ASAP is the most economic solution.

But most people have this thing about reciprocity, and seeing things from the other guy's point of view, and walking in his shoes, etc. Keeps them from killing people that are not immediately threatening their life, or going to threaten them later, and whose death would not serve some other higher purpose.

But of course those same people are probably also opposed to stealing the resources of others who never agreed to it. Sneaking over borders, taking what they need, then leaving the mess to be cleaned and the bills to be paid by others. That pesky "Doing unto others as you would have them do unto you" thing again. Humanistic morality is a mess. Better to leave it on an economic level. Easier to know what to do and what to expect.

Re:One world government (1)

El Torico (732160) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735526)

So, getting cancer, getting in a car accident where you're not responsible, or getting alzheimer is being careless?
I mean, Why do we support prisonners? Why shouldn't we just kill them? After all, they are sucking up ressources, right?

And yet socialised health care works for many countries...

Indeed, why are we supporting convicted criminals? Bring back exile! There are plenty of isolated islands that are suitable for permanent exile. I'd rather pay for college scholarships and medical care for law abiding citizens than for kenneling criminals. Offenders who currently get life sentences or the death penalty would get a one way ticket to an island somewhere far away (the Pacific Ocean is a very big place). So much for the hand wringing over the death penalty.

Seriously, most countries simply don't have the money for the luxury of attempting to rehabilitate criminals. Save a person early through education instead of wasting them (and other people's money) in prisons.

Re:One world government (2, Informative)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735276)

Yeah, and? Sure, it may suck... but if you can't afford something what makes the next guy responsible for you or your mistakes? (Not saying cancer is a mistake... but what if you go jumping off a roof? Do they have to pay for your stupidity?)/blockquote?

Because we're human beings and not vile repugnant inhuman anti-social Libertarian monsters.

No World Order (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 3 years ago | (#35734926)

Nihilo Ordo Seclorum

Re:One world government (1, Troll)

Catbeller (118204) | more than 3 years ago | (#35734942)

One world corporation. Interpol is a private company.

Re:One world government (1)

Martin Blank (154261) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735560)

It is not a private company. Interpol is an international organization that fosters coordination and mutual assistance between law enforcement organizations. Its TLD is .int, and that is only provided to international organizations after a strict vetting process proving that it was formed by way of international treaty.

Cue Mark of beast comments (0)

Red Weasel (166333) | more than 3 years ago | (#35734878)

in 3...
2...
1...

Re:Cue Mark of beast comments (1)

Atriqus (826899) | more than 3 years ago | (#35734894)

A mark of the beast this is!!!!!!!

Re:Cue Mark of beast comments (1)

trollertron3000 (1940942) | more than 3 years ago | (#35734918)

Cue ideas spinning in my head about hacking these and creating fakes.

Cue Mark of beast comments (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35734950)

Actually those comments will be in 663 minutes.

Re:Cue Mark of beast comments (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735028)

Look, religion/faith in a supernatural god is obviously dumb, but not everything in the bible is stupid, lots is pretty good advice. Be nice to people, stop murdering and generally being assholes, etc. And warnings, even if they are couched in hallucinatory crazy prophecies towards the end, about the evils of "papers, please? Vere are you papers?" are also fair enough.

Re:Cue Mark of beast comments (1)

Catbeller (118204) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735094)

"Be good to each other" takes one sentence. The rest is rubbish.

Re:Cue Mark of beast comments (2)

Abstrackt (609015) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735146)

"Be good to each other" takes one sentence. The rest is rubbish.

Personally, I think Bill and Ted said it best: "be excellent to each other".

Re:Cue Mark of beast comments (1)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735204)

The somewhat more long-winded version is Rabbi Hillel's summation of the Torah:

Do not unto your neighbor what you would not have him do until you; this is the whole Law; the rest is commentary.

Re:Cue Mark of beast comments (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735224)

So dietary/animal care laws that prevent your segment of the population from getting the plague is rubbish?

Re:Cue Mark of beast comments (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735192)

Mark of the beast hell...

Oh lets start with oh sovereign rights of countries?

How about a one stop shop for criminals to forge identities? Make it nice and easy for someone, oh lets say Russia, to pretend to be me. Yeah an excellent idea lets do it.

These arguments are simply a way for 'the man' to track who you are. Why do they want that? To protect me? It doesnt protect me. It makes my life a pain in the ass. Criminals do not fucking care. Waste of time and money.

Sing along (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735360)

Track me, hack me,
no database can lack me...

as long as you protect me, it's all right...

I think I heard of this somewhere before... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35734886)

And he causes all, the small and the great, and the rich and the poor, and the free men and the slaves, to be given a mark on their right hand or on their forehead, and he provides that no one will be able to buy or to sell, except the one who has the mark, either the name of the beast or the number of his name.

Re:I think I heard of this somewhere before... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735030)

I thought someone had to say it. So me be the first! YEH! Epic Wins!

Re:I think I heard of this somewhere before... (1)

osu-neko (2604) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735058)

The amazing thing is, despite this not being a mark on the right hand or the forehead, there are people out there who will see this as fulfillment of that prophesy. Seriously, why bother even having a sacred text if you're going to just ignore what it actually says...

Re:I think I heard of this somewhere before... (1)

rbollinger (1922546) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735214)

So far the only people here saying that this has anything to do with 'The Mark of the Beast' are people that are mocking Christians. Is this irony or just bigotry?

Re:I think I heard of this somewhere before... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735218)

The whole prophecy thing is actually a big fat told-you-so.

Re:I think I heard of this somewhere before... (4, Insightful)

Catbeller (118204) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735076)

Revelations was a political tract railing against Emperor Nero. It was a capital crime to dis the emperor, so they wrote in code - seven hills, three heads, yadda yadda. The "Beast" was Nero. The "Whore of Babylon" was Rome. It was a political/religious pamphlet.

Any sufficiently nebulous set of metaphors can "predict" anything, if you want it to. What would impress me? St. John of Patmos saying, "In 2011, Interpol sets up an international ID card system." If you can see the future, there is no reason to obfuscate.

Re:I think I heard of this somewhere before... (1)

DanTheStone (1212500) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735374)

Read Foundation sometime.

Re:I think I heard of this somewhere before... (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735432)

Revelations was a political tract railing against Emperor Nero. It was a capital crime to dis the emperor, so they wrote in code - seven hills, three heads, yadda yadda. The "Beast" was Nero. The "Whore of Babylon" was Rome. It was a political/religious pamphlet.

Any sufficiently nebulous set of metaphors can "predict" anything, if you want it to. What would impress me? St. John of Patmos saying, "In 2011, Interpol sets up an international ID card system." If you can see the future, there is no reason to obfuscate.

Nostradamus predicted your post...

Re:I think I heard of this somewhere before... (1)

MozeeToby (1163751) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735476)

As much as I hate to defend religious nutjobs, asking St John of Patmos to make clear predictions isn't really fair. Imagine someone from the first or second century really was magically transported to the present (or rather, the future if this international ID thing were to go through). Saying, "There will be this thing-y that you have to have, because if you don't have it you won't be able to work or sell things" seems like a pretty reasonable description for someone from that time period to come up with for a system that requires migrant workers to register for an ID before they're allowed to work.

And now this is coming off as if I really think this card is the mark of the beast or something. For the record, I don't. I just think that your particular argument that valid predictions must be obvious ignores the fact that the predictor might not have understood everything that he 'saw'.

Re:I think I heard of this somewhere before... (2)

cobrausn (1915176) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735126)

The problem with broadcasting how the bad guy will behave before the bad guy does it is that when the bad guy gets around to doing it, he just does something slightly different from what you previously said and suddenly it's not the same thing and all is well.

I think Peter should probably have taken Time Travel 101 before writing Revelations and been a bit more vague.

Re:I think I heard of this somewhere before... (1)

GNious (953874) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735170)

I can appreciate that Roman Bureaucracy can be slow, but this is silly

Re:I think I heard of this somewhere before... (1)

El Torico (732160) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735618)

What have the Romans ever done for us?

And INTERPOL wants to be in charge of it. (4, Insightful)

khallow (566160) | more than 3 years ago | (#35734904)

This sounds like a bad case of mission creep to me. INTERPOL doesn't need global ID capabilities for its job. So why should we put them in charge?

Criminal Activity is IMPORTANT!!! (4, Interesting)

mlwmohawk (801821) | more than 3 years ago | (#35734920)

Sure, theft and murder are bad, but a mass global ID means that anonymous existence will become impossible. Just think what access to such a system will mean to governments that run by dictators. Even the oh so sweet and trustworthy "democracies" will abuse this. Sometimes, it is important for the good of mankind to disappear into a crowd.

Re:Criminal Activity is IMPORTANT!!! (3, Insightful)

Catbeller (118204) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735010)

The usual majority laugh at privacy and point at illegal immigrants and drug traffickers. "You have nothing to worry about unless you're doing something wrong", they giggle. They watch as the world police state clicks on. We're all safe behind the police walls, they agree.

Then the masks drop and our real bosses appear, and they ain't governments. And there is no where to hide. Forever.

Re:Criminal Activity is IMPORTANT!!! (1)

nschubach (922175) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735090)

In a way, it's true today. If you do nothing wrong you won't have a police record. It's been working out fine... Pushing it to mandatory IDs though is a very... very bad idea.

Re:Criminal Activity is IMPORTANT!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735454)

If you do nothing wrong you won't have a police record.

That you know about. You don't think the government has a database of everyone? Every time I go to the airport I get screened because I must be "on the list" yet I don't have a single mark on my record.

Re:Criminal Activity is IMPORTANT!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735510)

If you do nothing wrong you won't have a police record.

Incorrect and has been incorrect for a long time. Police abuses of records keeping procedures are extremely common. The most recent example off the top of my head is New York's stop and frisk data retention policy. You can read more at: http://www.nyclu.org/issues/racial-justice/stop-and-frisk-practices

In this particular case, between 87% and 90% of the victims of this abuse that had their records retained by police were completely innocent.

Re:Criminal Activity is IMPORTANT!!! (2)

tukang (1209392) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735530)

If you do nothing wrong you won't have a police record.

Police records are created the moment a person is charged with a crime. There are plenty of people who were found not guilty but still have police records.

Re:Criminal Activity is IMPORTANT!!! (1)

lgw (121541) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735684)

If you do nothing wrong you won't have a police record. It's been working out fine

If the government is honest and acting in your intrest, this is true. We try to protect certain rights so that the government can't screw us too badly when they're dishonest and out to get you.

Madison said it best:

If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.

I'm stunned by the number of /.ers who both complain that the US government has been corrupted by corporations, and avocate systems where we trust the government implicitly, often in the same post!

Re:Criminal Activity is IMPORTANT!!! (0)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735522)

The usual majority laugh at privacy and point at illegal immigrants and drug traffickers.

And there is such an easier, straightfoward way to take care of much of this.

We pay a lot of money to train our military snipers...why not do rotations of them along our borders to help keep their skills honed?

I mean, set up an area of the border that is a DMZ...nothing human should cross into it...anyone that does, is a criminal, and BANG...taken care of....

I'd think that would put a bit of a stop to people crossing illegally to carry themselves or illegal drugs or weapons across the borders.

I agree we should decriminalize most drugs...that would stop a lot of the traffic, but I see nothing wrong with defending our borders.

Hell, it is one of the FEW enumerated powers/responsiblities the constitutions gives the Feds....so, why not make use of an effective resource we already have at our disposal?

I wouldn't mind setting land mines at the border either...again, there is NO legal reason to be crossing there, and not at a legal border crossing. If you do otherwise...BANG/BOOM

Re:Criminal Activity is IMPORTANT!!! (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735696)

Other countries do that, I think the reason we don't is simply that we consider ourselves better than that. We have a constitution which doesn't allow for individuals to be judge, jury and executioner. The closest thing to an exceptions are forcable felonies and certain cases where law enforcement is authorized to use lethal force. But in both cases it's a matter of practicality and the individuals have a clear ability to avoid it.

it's not the card, stupid... (1)

spectrokid (660550) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735138)

...it's the database behind the card. Being able to prove who you are is actually a very comfortable luxury. But what data will be held apart from your name and date of birth? And who will control that rules are obeyed and data gets deleted on time?

Re:it's not the card, stupid... (1)

nschubach (922175) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735216)

Why do you need to prove who you are? Honestly. What services do you benefit from that require a global ID card?

Re:it's not the card, stupid... (1)

Obfuscant (592200) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735504)

Why do you need to prove who you are? Honestly. What services do you benefit from that require a global ID card?

You know, if there were only some form of identification that would allow migrants and others to travel across national borders while allowing those nations the ability to identify criminals who want to enter their country ...

Wait a minute. It is called a "passport". We already have a reasonably global system in place. It appears that Interpol is looking for a system that is common enough between states that they can also check interpol records for criminal histories, as well as the individual country.

Did we miss the part about "migrants" and "border control"? If you don't want to be in someone's database, you probably don't want to travel to another country where they control their borders anyway because they'll be keeping a record of you entering, and that border is where you'd need this card.

Re:it's not the card, stupid... (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735728)

I think the issue is that while in places like the US, and the EU, the reliability of the documents as proof of identity is pretty good, there are other parts of the world where it's basically just proof that they paid their fee or bribed an official. Some places for a nominal bribe they'll put whatever name you like on the documents.

That being said, I'm not sure this is the correct solution. And I'm positive that this solution scares me.

Dear Interpol, (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35734930)

On behalf of humanity; "fuck off"!

And I want (1)

0racle (667029) | more than 3 years ago | (#35734932)

I want a Porche and Interpol to go fuck themselves. Unfortunately, Interpol will probably get their way first.

Re:And I want (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735044)

Here's your Porsche [tinyurl.com] . What? you wanted a new one? Oh, that's gonna cost quite a bit more.

At birth (1)

bugs2squash (1132591) | more than 3 years ago | (#35734964)

everyone should be forced to surrender one kidney. The government will keep it preserved to permit detailed DNA identification, and will of course swap it for your other kidney if it turns out you need it at any point in your life. It's not just a cure for terrorism, it's a vital safety net for people who are feckless with their kidneys.

Re:At birth (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735082)

What use would an adult have for a baby's kidney?

Re:At birth (1)

swanzilla (1458281) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735636)

Several baby kidneys wired in parallel could prove to be useful.

Re:At birth (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735338)

Or better yet, removal/destruction of a vital part of the endocrine system, so that use of government supplied supplements is required to simply live. Behave or else. No going off-the-grid. Or some wonderful disease that is suppressed by gov issued drugs - same thing - misbehave and we cut you off.

Ummm... (2)

Even on Slashdot FOE (1870208) | more than 3 years ago | (#35734976)

But all of the pastor's I've listened to told me the Beast was going to come from the USA!

Re:Ummm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735052)

But he will need his e-ID to prove it!!

Re:Ummm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735646)

Those sound like some under-educated pastors.

Re:Ummm... (1)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735674)

That can't be right, Snooki was born in Chile.

Hmm - never gonna happen (2)

Stormthirst (66538) | more than 3 years ago | (#35734984)

This reads like Interpol want more funding. Global ID cards will not effect illegal immigrants - they'll still be brought over to wherever in container ships etc.

If anything it will create a market for illegal ID cards in countries with less scruples - INCREASING the level of corruption.

What's wrong with the passport system we have already?

Re:Hmm - never gonna happen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735110)

What's wrong with the passport system we have already?

It's not under the control of a world wide stasi? Papers please!

Got One Already... (0)

mholve (1101) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735008)

It's called a "passport."

In theory... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735104)

Facebook is good too.

But we're a few hundred years away from the star trek world where we don't need anonymity.

-AC

Re:In theory... (1)

nschubach (922175) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735250)

As far as I'm aware, the Star Trek world is anonymous. There is nothing in any of the shows where they connect to a local satellite and zoom in on someone taking a crap because they know precisely where they are or what they bought at the store.

In fact, I'd say that the ability to sustain oneself through technology would lead to more private lives where people could settle on a distant planet and enjoy whatever they like.

Re:In theory... (1)

drsmithy (35869) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735384)

There is nothing in any of the shows where they connect to a local satellite and zoom in on someone taking a crap because they know precisely where they are or what they bought at the store.

Er, what ? They snatch people off random places on the planet (or in space) with transporters all the time !

Yeah... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735140)

'Cause nobody will have the motivation or resources to crack them and make fakes.

Social Media (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735150)

So like a FaceBook/Twitter account then?

Well isn't that special (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735168)

And citizens want their privacy.... It's nice to want things, huh?

Passports? (1)

molo (94384) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735172)

Isn't this what the current passport system already provides? Passports already have unique numbers, and there are existing standards about reading the mag printed strip and RFID tags in there now.

-molo

Re:Passports? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735300)

Yea but that's an existing system. Nobody can use that grab a few billions from various governments to implement something new. That's the purpose of most new systems: make somebody with connections to decision-makers even richer (and make them pass a few millions along to said decision-makers).

Re:Passports? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735450)

The current system is run by each individual government.

That can itself cause problems, as there's no back-end to it.

Re:Passports? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735688)

Passports don't have a mag strip and they don't have RFID tags either. Maybe you are confusing the US passport *card* with real international passports. Passports generally do have an RF enabled processor chip in them with an ICAO 9303/ISO 7501 standardized Logical Data Structure on them, including a signature over the data.

PS had to log out to post anonymously - slashdot system can sometimes really suck

Not to put too delicate a point on it, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735176)

INTERPOL can go fuck themselves.

It's not good for me. It's not good for anyone I know. It's certainly not good for the refugees and other migrants this claims to help, who are often already fucked because they don't have a nation to call home and issue them a passport. This is a great idea for bureaucrats who want their jobs to be easier at the expense of everyone else's rights, and a terrible idea for pretty much everyone else on earth.

Republicans conflicted (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735208)

On the one hand they want a universal ID

On the other hand they want to tell other governments to fuck off.

Oh well, back to trying to pound down the states' rights to do things republicans don't like with REAL ID.

Re:Republicans conflicted (1)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735298)

No, Republicans don't want a universal ID in the US, if you look at Real ID adoption by states, Republican states generally oppose along with Democrat majority states.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/REAL_ID_Act#State_adoption_and_non-compliance [wikipedia.org]

Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and Washington have joined Maine and Utah in passing legislation opposing Real ID.

Thats a good mix of Red and Blue states

Alaska, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Washington, D.C., West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

Again, good mix of states.

Let me be the one to say it (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735212)

On behalf of all the forgers, ID-theives and other people who have to hold a damn lot of different forms of ID creation and their various security schemes at hand to satisfy all their customers:

PLEASE! MORE POWER TO YOU!

And while you're at it, at least condense it all into one big database, too. Hacking hundreds of national ones is really cutting into profits.

I was once naiive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735292)

enough to see only the legitimacy of such things. Sure, in the right hands this could be used to verify that people from overseas are who they say they are and have the qualifications they should have etc. but in the wrong hands...

- could be used to hijack or at least blackmail, and hence eventually hijack all records so that THEY decide who is legitimate.

- could lead to an alarming increase in "misplaced" laptops as more personal information is sold and traded

- believe it or not, there are people in this world that don't really want you moving anywhere. It suits them to demonise migration, and have open borders so they can bring this stuff in. A place for everyone and everyone in their place. You won't be able to go anywhere as you'll be fried by body scanners and if you do go somewhere, it will be if they allow you too - via these id's.
Families could be broken apart with this, like a Berlin wall.

- Who runs interpol? I don't know, can't know, and won't know..in any way that I'd care to ...

- It's indoctrination. You have to fill out a entrance form when you fly in, and an exit form going out, customs declaration form, passport, body scanner, and now this. It will teach you not to travel, and of you do travel, to remind you the perils of doing so, not unlike getting onto one of the sailing ships of old only to be gobbled up by a big giant squid.

- it could be all pervasive in your life, like a key you can't afford to lose, or afford to keep.

- and you could slowly be deftly conditioned to accept it, with the threat of "terrorism" looming in the background.

- Please help us lord. Please. Help us all, all of us.

Just tattoo it on their foreheads.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735296)

...cards are too easy to loose.

Against corruption? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735368)

Since the founding of interpol, the corruption in the eu, especially in the uk and germany, has grown to levels unbelievable - and they want to put in the argument that this would lower corruption?

That's already corrupt in itself.

All interpol is really used currently is to suppress political opposition through international means.

Interpol cares about undocumented workers now? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735396)

I wonder why? It's not like the United States does.

Interpol and other stupidities... (1)

eprparadocs (992983) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735468)

It seems that you only need to track migration to make sure no one sneaks into a country, so one has to wonder why do we need countries? We don't need Nato, we don't need the UN. And we don't need any damn universal ID card. What we need is a world with a single government that works for the benefit of all the world's inhabitants. Countries seemed so important when we needed to protect the resources I own from others. But no a days no single country owns enough to be self-sufficient. We all need what others have, and to do so we need to cooperate.

Today We Laugh it up. (1)

Neptunes_Trident (1452997) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735488)

And what of tomorrow?

see? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735502)

what have i told you? next come RFID implants and we are all fucked!

Work (1)

jimmerz28 (1928616) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735508)

I'd be up for having an international form of identification (card) if it meant I can work wherever I want.

Re:Work (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735678)

I'd be up for having an international form of identification (card) if it meant I can work wherever I want.

Arbeit macht frei: I too would be up for a worldwide fascist police state as long as it's of short term benefit to me. /sarcasm

Cards get lost or taken away (1)

ThatsNotPudding (1045640) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735596)

how about something more permanent like a tattoo?

...what?

Re:Cards get lost or taken away (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735690)

tattoos are for wimpy girls....

Branding or cutting it into your flesh with automated knives is more permanent.

Re:Cards get lost or taken away (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735712)

How do you correct a compromised tattoo ID? If someone's copied it, you're stuck with a bad ID you never wanted, that you cannot get rid of without a significantly painful procedure of one sort or another. This adds injury to insult, honestly.

Police wants to track everyone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35735632)

This is news? Really?!

Yeah and... (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735680)

I want a pony...

Is interpol going to PAY for this?

self interest (1)

DaveGod (703167) | more than 3 years ago | (#35735740)

Why I am always even more sceptical of any claims that "greater access to information and control is needed" (to paraphrase) when they then state it should be themselves doing it?

I keep finding myself wondering "needed by whom?", and why wasn't a relatively independent observer saying the same thing?

Wait, "enable cardholders to be eligible for electronic remittance schemes"... Soooo, Interpol wants unhindered access to all your international bank transfers? Oh I see.

Anyway, I imagine most of the participating governments would fail to implement the large IT system required, nevermind Interpol connect them all in a usable way.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>