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!

Biometric Database Plans Hidden In Immigration Bill

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the you-can-trust-us dept.

Government 365

Doug Otto writes "Buried deep in the bowels of a bi-partisan immigration reform bill is a 'photo tool.' The goal is to create a photo database consisting of every citizen. Wired calls it 'a massive federal database administered by the Department of Homeland Security and containing names, ages, Social Security numbers and photographs of everyone in the country with a driver’s license or other state-issued photo ID.' Of course the database would be used only for good, and never evil. 'This piece of the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act is aimed at curbing employment of undocumented immigrants. But privacy advocates fear the inevitable mission creep, ending with the proof of self being required at polling places, to rent a house, buy a gun, open a bank account, acquire credit, board a plane or even attend a sporting event or log on the internet.'"

cancel ×

365 comments

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

Counter strike (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684597)

Create a distributed database of all politicians with current (hours old) photos, locations, sound captures, etc. Give them hell. Film them in their homes. I don't care if it's illegal.

Re:Counter strike (5, Insightful)

pixelpusher220 (529617) | about a year ago | (#43684757)

Version Control. We should know WHICH politician(s) added this clause. If no one owns up to it, it gets stripped from the Bill. We need names on this type of crap.

Re:Counter strike (4, Interesting)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#43684833)

If we are going to version control, then lets do it correctly and rewrite laws with some sort of pseudocode. That way there can be no argument about what a law means or could allow someone to do.

Re:Counter strike (5, Interesting)

dmbasso (1052166) | about a year ago | (#43685007)

They're already written in a 'sort of pseudo-code', legalese. Problem is it is very hard to debug and really easy to insert malicious code. But if what you really meant was a language without ambiguity, that seems to be impractical.

Re:Counter strike (3, Informative)

pixelpusher220 (529617) | about a year ago | (#43685033)

Laws have to be somewhat abstract because if you try to to make it cover everything possible, you get the US Tax Code spaghetti crap.

Rand Paul? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684599)

Hey, buddy... are you up for another filibuster?

Re:Rand Paul? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684853)

+1

Re:Rand Paul? (1)

pixelpusher220 (529617) | about a year ago | (#43685131)

Watch Rand conveniently NOT filibuster this. Maybe that will teach the Libertarians that he ain't one of them...

so... (4, Interesting)

bobaferret (513897) | about a year ago | (#43684609)

What's wrong with this? I know it's all George Orwell and stuff, but really. We've moved so far past having any real privacy anymore, who cares? I like the idea of people not being able to pretend to be me, not that anyone would really want to.

And doesn't this already exist? (3, Funny)

mozumder (178398) | about a year ago | (#43684677)

When you get your drivers license.. don't they already store your photo in a database?

The simple solution to this is to just NOT get a drivers license. You know that's a perfectly fine thing to do. Build your life around that fact, instead of lazily building your life around the need to drive a car on a taxpayer subsidized highway system.

Use public transportation. Or hitchhike and ride on the back of freight trains and take photographs of it, like what this guy did: http://mikebrodie.net/ [mikebrodie.net]

What's that? You want to drive your own car on taxpayer funded roads, but you DON'T want to follow the rules set by the people that built that for you? HAHAHA... I didn't know we spent tax-money on an interstate system so that you can do whatever YOU want with it.

Re:And doesn't this already exist? (5, Insightful)

Rob the Bold (788862) | about a year ago | (#43684821)

When you get your drivers license.. don't they already store your photo in a database?

The simple solution to this is to just NOT get a drivers license. You know that's a perfectly fine thing to do. Build your life around that fact, instead of lazily building your life around the need to drive a car on a taxpayer subsidized highway system.

These days, no ID = no vote. Opt out of a driver's license (or non-driver ID card), you opt out of voting, too. You also opt out of having a bank account. There's more, but I'll leave completing the list of opt-outs to others . . .

Re:And doesn't this already exist? (4, Informative)

iONiUM (530420) | about a year ago | (#43684989)

Maybe in America you can't get a bank account without photo ID, but in Canada there's an old law that mandates you must be able to get a basic account with no photo ID. Now, if you actually try, banks will make a fuss, but it is possible.

Re:And doesn't this already exist? (4, Informative)

Doug Otto (2821601) | about a year ago | (#43685041)

These days, no ID = no vote.

Not in my state. They cannot legally ask for ID at a polling place (not that it'd do any good if they did as you don't even need to be in the country legally to get a DL in New Mexico).

Re:And doesn't this already exist? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43685105)

Political system, banking system, ... etc., they are all the facets of one and the same Machine. They couldn't operate without each other. If you are serious about freedom and want to opt out of it, you have to be ready to take the red pill... and to reinvent civilization and society from the bottom up. But it is not a recommended thing to do before you investigate and learn why things are the way they are, when and on which precedents they became such, and what could fill their empty spaces for you if they were removed from your life. Don't think you can jump right out and learn as you go. Or, try an experiment - live as a homeless or as a slum dweller for, say, a couple of months, or even a full year (one seasons' cycle) if you are adventurous.

Re:so... (4, Insightful)

khallow (566160) | about a year ago | (#43684681)

What's wrong with this? I know it's all George Orwell and stuff

You answered your own question.

Re:so... (3, Interesting)

i kan reed (749298) | about a year ago | (#43684815)

That's really kind of an emotional reaction. There's a lot of value in having a way to undeniably prove your identity in the eyes of the law. It could help a lot with identity theft and identification wipe-out(like your house burning down). I don't think the benefits outweigh the costs in this case, but not everything that represents more information is bad.

Re:so... (5, Insightful)

Sarten-X (1102295) | about a year ago | (#43684829)

The surveillance isn't the scary part of 1984. The surveillance is just a tool being used by an oppressive government. The warning of the story is that we must ensure our government exists to serve the people, and not the other way around. Sure, that might mean the government must serve the paranoid folks clamoring for theatrical security, but it's still trying to serve the people. In 1984, every aspect of life was controlled and manipulated by the Inner Party to serve the Inner Party.

Giant facial recognition databases are a powerful tool. That technological power can be used for good or evil, but the risk of evil is no reason to fear the technology itself.

Re:so... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684869)

Sure, that might mean the government must serve the paranoid folks clamoring for theatrical security, but it's still trying to serve the people.

Dystopian novels work both ways, though. The government blindly serving the people's whims against the people's best interests was the root cause behind Fahrenheit 451.

Re:so... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43685123)

That technological power can be used for good or evil, but the risk of evil is no reason to fear the technology itself.

Huh? Then what is? Wait until the evil happens? No, we should ALWAYS fear the evil in technology. Not that that should prevent implementation necessarily, but your comment is similar to the "fools rush where angels fear to tread" idea.

Re:so... (1)

Nutria (679911) | about a year ago | (#43684685)

Exactly. My county has required photo ID for voting since at least the early 1970s.

Re:so... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684793)

So has the US. It just depends on your skin color...

Re:so... (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#43684799)

Exactly. My county has required photo ID for voting since at least the early 1970s.

What country is that?

Re:so... (2)

Nutria (679911) | about a year ago | (#43684997)

County, not country.

Re:so... (1)

Rob the Bold (788862) | about a year ago | (#43684827)

Exactly. My county has required photo ID for voting since at least the early 1970s.

Serious question: do you have to have a photo ID and register in advance to vote, or is the photo ID sufficient?

Re:so... (2, Informative)

smooth wombat (796938) | about a year ago | (#43684933)

You have to register before you can vote but since each state has their voting registration laws, it varies. In some states you can register and vote on the same day, others you have to register a month or two in advance.

As to the photo ID issue, the claim that one needs to show ID to vote comes from the vast amount of voter fraud that occurs in this country. For example, in my state of PA, we had four cases over the last decade of voter fraud. Granted, none of these cases involved anyone actually voting for someone else, but the rampant amount of voter fraud has caused the Republican party, the party of smaller government, to force everyone to prove who they are before they can vote. If you don't have an ID, and there are many who don't for various reasons, the taxpayers get to foot the bill to get you one.

Re:so... (4, Insightful)

Joce640k (829181) | about a year ago | (#43684703)

Facebook can just give them the data if they ask.

Re:so... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684717)

I have no social media accounts and never have. Go shoot yourself in the face or get the fuck out of my country.

Re:so... (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684761)

I have no social media accounts and never have.

Yes you do. Facebook has a 'shadow' account for you (which you have no access to of course).

Re:so... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684719)

I'm all about privacy and such, but I really wonder how I'm supposed to prove I am who I say I am without the government having some record of my existence to back me up.

So maybe there is a birth certificate. How does that prove I'm actually me? Maybe there should be regulations on how the information is allowed to be used (as if they'll follow them), but still. I wouldn't really have a problem with them taking a tiny bit of the blood they draw at birth, and affixing it to the birth certificate record so you can prove you are that person with a DNA test later.

Re:so... (1)

crakbone (860662) | about a year ago | (#43684951)

Does not include the possibility of switched blood at birth. or chimera http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimera_(genetics)#Human_chimeras [wikipedia.org] or even artificial change of blood dna via bone marrow transplant or some miracle type event http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hDSMTLf9ZPhxPRc0vqBgvc9NEFRw [google.com]

Re:so... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684721)

And when this database is breached and suddenly you find that YOU aren't you?

Re:so... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684811)

And then you must first prove that you are you.

Who are you?

Re:so... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684919)

What do you want?

Re:so... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684725)

but the "the computer is never wrong" mentality will mean that if someone somehow somewhere puts in the wrong picture by accident, malevolence, hacking, identity theft, etc, you'll have a bitch of a time being you. And that's putting aside the fact they could do something crazy with all the pictures ala minority report advertisements.

Re:so... (1)

pixelpusher220 (529617) | about a year ago | (#43685015)

There was just a case of a Maryland woman who was ticketed in DC for driving with expired tags.

The problem? Someone in Maryland fat fingered a DELETE action and deleted her tags instead of the ones they meant to delete. Since she was deleted she got no renewal reminder.

Now we scale this up to, no I'm sorry Mr. Smith, you don't exist, therefore you must be trying to subvert the system.

Re:so... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684727)

What's wrong? The entire principle of the darn thing.

Re:so... (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about a year ago | (#43684743)

What's wrong with this? I know it's all George Orwell and stuff, but really. We've moved so far past having any real privacy anymore, who cares? I like the idea of people not being able to pretend to be me, not that anyone would really want to.

"Sorry, citizen, but according the the Department of Love, you don't have the proper clearance to travel on this stretch of highway."

"Our facial recognition software has identified you as one of the suspected bank robbers 3 states away. Come with us for questioning."

"On 4/18/2020 at 3:20P, our surveillance network captured your image outside the local porno theater, when you were scheduled to be at work. Care to explain yourself, Mr. Anderson?"

"Check it out: I hacked into the government citizen tracking database! Now we will know exactly who has what that's worth stealing, and when they won't be home to defend their property!"

"Tango 1-9, this is Echo base; our surveillance drones captured the citizen suspect entering the Home Depot on Blagablarg Drive... Deploying armed Dredd model to 'apprehend.'"

Alright, maybe I'm grasping, but I will say this - if government officials think it's necessary and proper to put citizens on constant surveillance and place our information into a monolithic database, then would it not stand to reason that they should be subject to the same? After all, they are public officials, and if a person has done nothing wrong, they should have nothing to hide, correct?

Re:so... (4, Insightful)

RabidReindeer (2625839) | about a year ago | (#43685147)

Alright, maybe I'm grasping, but I will say this - if government officials think it's necessary and proper to put citizens on constant surveillance and place our information into a monolithic database, then would it not stand to reason that they should be subject to the same? After all, they are public officials, and if a person has done nothing wrong, they should have nothing to hide, correct?

Problem is, Orwellian also includes doublethink. As in "Innocent people have nothing to hide", but "we cannot do our job effectively if people can watch what we are doing".

Re:so... (1)

Antipater (2053064) | about a year ago | (#43684747)

I was going to say this as well. Names, ages, faces, social #? This is all stuff the government already has. You tell them more on your tax return than this database would have (at least according to TFS; Wired bugs out on my work comp for some reason).

Moreover, I wouldn't believe all the "mission creep" fuss. We've had Photo IDs for how long, now? This is literally the exact same thing. It's just on a centralized database instead of a card in your wallet. Any concerns of Big Brother database-tampering to frame you for a crime are equally weighted with the benefits of fewer fake IDs.

Re:so... (5, Insightful)

pixelpusher220 (529617) | about a year ago | (#43684839)

Any concerns of Big Brother database-tampering to frame you for a crime are equally weighted with the benefits of fewer fake IDs

No they aren't. Our founding principles are that we let some guilty people go free precisely because that's preferable than to possibly imprison innocent people. People using Fake IDs are an acceptable condition of not doing 'Papers please' checks on every law abiding citizen on every street corner.

Re:so... (1)

Antipater (2053064) | about a year ago | (#43685057)

Any concerns of Big Brother database-tampering to frame you for a crime are equally weighted with the benefits of fewer fake IDs

No they aren't. Our founding principles are that we let some guilty people go free precisely because that's preferable than to possibly imprison innocent people. People using Fake IDs are an acceptable condition of not doing 'Papers please' checks on every law abiding citizen on every street corner.

This isn't a "papers please" check on every law abiding citizen on every street corner, though. This is centralized photo ID. This is "leave your papers at home, please; we've got a copy." Nobody's checking anything when they wouldn't check your driver's license already. The potential for misconduct just...isn't there. You've got the physical documents yourself, so there's redundancy enough to provide a reasonable doubt in court should anyone actually get the bright idea to hack it and tamper. I really don't see the issue.

Re:so... (2)

cheekyjohnson (1873388) | about a year ago | (#43684901)

We've moved so far past having any real privacy anymore, who cares?

Let's just install cameras in your bedroom, then. We've moved so far past having any real privacy, after all.

Re:so... (2)

redmid17 (1217076) | about a year ago | (#43684921)

If I could call you a complete moron and downvote you at the same time, I would. However I have no mod points left for the time being. You're a complete moron.

No sir! (1)

ze_nexus (1123017) | about a year ago | (#43684625)

I am not about that life.

Ending with? (2)

Rob the Bold (788862) | about a year ago | (#43684637)

' . . . ending with the proof of self being required at polling places, to rent a house, buy a gun, open a bank account, acquire credit, board a plane or even attend a sporting event or log on the internet.'

Ending with? I think in my state (plus federal laws/reg) we've got at least 4 of those already. And that's not counting opening an account with the gas company.

Re:Ending with? (1)

RNLockwood (224353) | about a year ago | (#43684695)

' . . . ending with the proof of self being required at polling places, to rent a house, buy a gun, open a bank account, acquire credit, board a plane or even attend a sporting event or log on the internet.'

Ending with? I think in my state (plus federal laws/reg) we've got at least 4 of those already. And that's not counting opening an account with the gas company.

It's so hard to craft sarcasm in writing so that it's recognized for what it is.

Re:Ending with? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684999)

Proof of self is required for all those now except attending a sporting event (bearable ticket) or logging on to the internet (only from a free Wifi, my home account has to be authenticated against my ISP).

This is just a federation of all the state DMV images, accessible from the DHS terminals. It is going to happen sooner or later, I am sure the NSA already has this, and the DHS wants one too.

Papers please (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684641)

Why does this sound like every old WWII depiction of the SS coming to life?

Already Slipped (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684643)

ID is already required for 6 or 7 out of 8 on the list (depending on where you live).

"proof of self being required at polling places, to rent a house, buy a gun, open a bank account, acquire credit, board a plane or even attend a sporting event or log on the internet."

Mission Creep? SSN (5, Insightful)

ArtemaOne (1300025) | about a year ago | (#43684647)

Mission Creep is a ridiculous thing to worry about. Just like your Social Security Number, which the SS Administration has declared from the begining that it is NOT to be used as a form of identification.

Utility (1)

daveschroeder (516195) | about a year ago | (#43684789)

It turns out that having a universal unique idenitifier is really handy. There are reasons you WANT to be able to be affirmatively and uniquely identified as "you", but you want that capability under your own control. Even with PKI (a system that could be trusted, anyway), someone has to hold a central database. Guess who that would likely be? And if it shouldn't be "the government", then who?

Re:Utility (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about a year ago | (#43684937)

And it's a whole lot of fun when you go to open an account with a company and find that the record of a previous customer - one whose account was terminated for non-payment - erroneously had that universal unique identifier tied to it.

Not that I'm speaking from recent personal experience or anything...

Re:Mission Creep? SSN (1)

lcam (848192) | about a year ago | (#43684841)

Really?

Next mandate, fixed IPv6 IP addresses for all devices. Your devices and their IPv6 addresses get added to the definition of "who you are".

No more internet anonymity except when using a proxy.

Which proxies do you trust?

Re:Mission Creep? SSN (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684987)

uh, the OUI and serial number of your IPv6 connected device is already part of the IP address.

Re:Mission Creep? SSN (1)

Martin Blank (154261) | about a year ago | (#43685133)

The OUI can be used for part of the address, but doesn't have to be. Microsoft by default does not use it when generating the IPv6 address as of Vista and instead generates a random address to make it harder to track a device across connections.

I don't know where you got the idea that a serial number was used at all.

Re:Mission Creep? SSN (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684875)

TEH EVIL GOVERNMENT CONSPIRACIES.

First they start with the SSNs, then the biometrics, then the New World order takes your guns! Fear libertarians fear!

Re:Mission Creep? SSN (1)

ArtemaOne (1300025) | about a year ago | (#43684977)

Fear libertarians fear!

Is that supposed to be: Fear, Libertarians! Fear! Fear Libertarians' fear! I can't quite figure out what you're trying to say. And which conspiracy?

You already need proof-of-self to buy a gun. (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684683)

Two, actually. Yes, even from dealers at gun shows.

For some reason it's racist to ask for ID to vote.

Vote early, vote often!

Re:You already need proof-of-self to buy a gun. (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684755)

For some reason it's racist to ask for ID to vote.

Vote early, vote often!

Have you ever actually darkened the door of a polling place? They've got a list of the registered voters. You vote, they check you off. Try again, and they see you've already voted. And no, the ID requirement isn't racist per se, it's just a happy coincidence of generally disenfranchising the people who will (statistically, speaking) vote against you.

Re:You already need proof-of-self to buy a gun. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684845)

In Virginia, IDs are now required. Strangely, the minorities in line with me had IDs too.

And no, the ID requirement isn't racist per se, it's just a happy coincidence of generally disenfranchising the people who will (statistically, speaking) vote against you.

You mean dead people?

Re:You already need proof-of-self to buy a gun. (1)

tompaulco (629533) | about a year ago | (#43684895)

For some reason it's racist to ask for ID to vote.
Not in my state. ID is required. And you can only vote once. They cross your name off. I know several people who were not allowed to vote even though they had ID because someone had shown up earlier than them at the poll and voted using their name.

Re:You already need proof-of-self to buy a gun. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684955)

I know several people who were not allowed to vote even though they had ID because someone had shown up earlier than them at the poll and voted using their name.

And their ID?

Re:You already need proof-of-self to buy a gun. (1)

Nutria (679911) | about a year ago | (#43685055)

It's possible to know people in other states.

Re:You already need proof-of-self to buy a gun. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43685149)

How could they have used their name if they required ID?

Somewhat redundant (1)

ThinkWeak (958195) | about a year ago | (#43684687)

But privacy advocates fear the inevitable mission creep, ending with the proof of self being required at polling places, to rent a house, buy a gun, open a bank account, acquire credit, board a plane or even attend a sporting event or log on the internet.

Don't you sort of already have to do this for everything above, minus "attend a sporting event" or "log on to the internet"?

Re:Somewhat redundant (1)

Lemmeoutada Collecti (588075) | about a year ago | (#43684745)

Actually, some sporting events also require a photo id to validate that you didn't buy your ticket from a secondhand reseller (scalper). That leaves logging on to the Internet - and while I don't have to have an ID to log on, I do have to provide ID to get service of my own.

In the UK we have been through this already (4, Informative)

Chrisq (894406) | about a year ago | (#43684689)

The Identity Cards Act 2006 [wikipedia.org] mandated national ID cards. In October 2006, the Government declared it would cost £5.4bn to run the ID cards scheme for the next 10 years, and by November 2007 this estimate was revised to £5.612bn. The Identity Documents Act 2010 [wikipedia.org] cancelled this with at least £256 million already spent [independent.co.uk] .

It is generally acknowledged that this scheme would not have delivered any increased security, as applications would be verified against passport and driving license databases that were already known to be inaccurate.

Re:In the UK we have been through this already (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#43684913)

It is generally acknowledged that this scheme would not have delivered any increased security, as applications would be verified against passport and driving license databases that were already known to be inaccurate.

So? What makes you think that the point of taking yet another step towards a police state is to provide any benefit for citizens?

There's a part of "1984" that makes this point very well. O'Brien is interrogating Winston, and asks him why the Party does what it does. Winston comes up with the standard lines about it being necessary for Oceania, or for the benefit of the people, etc. Finally O'Brien stops him and essentially says: "No Winston. We do it for power. It is solely power for the sake of power."

why so scared? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684691)

You mean like everything that's already on a national ID Card? Something that has existed in other countries for years and years? I really don't understand why this sounds like something you should all be afraid of.

Re:why so scared? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43685117)

This is the United States of America, and was originally formed when a number of independent States agreed to form a federal government with a very limited set of powers. The issue here is that the federal government has been and is continuing to expand WAY beyond the powers which the states granted it.

So probably a lot of the things you see in the news about U.S. politics would make more sense if you look at it that way. We're not afraid of I.D. cards for any reason. We're afraid of National ID cards. We already carry State ID cards with all the same data.

Little tidbit (1)

bytesex (112972) | about a year ago | (#43684701)

"Employers would be obliged to look up every new hire in the database to verify that they match their photo."

Are employers officials of the state now? This sounds very un-American, and very un-doable too.

And they'll call it the... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684711)

DMV

Papers (1)

AdmiralAl (1136661) | about a year ago | (#43684729)

Papers, Please.

Re:Papers (1)

Fnord666 (889225) | about a year ago | (#43684773)

Papers, please.

Ihre papiere, bitte.

Mark of the beast (1)

tepples (727027) | about a year ago | (#43684775)

by AdmiralAl (1136661)

Your user ID brings to mind something that we could exploit to get the right-leaning fundies riled up about this. John of Patmos wrote in Revelation 13:16-17 [jw.org] :

And [the Beast] puts under compulsion all persons, the small and the great, and the rich and the poor, and the free and the slaves, that they should give these a mark in their right hand or upon their forehead, and that nobody might be able to buy or sell except a person having the mark.

I can see how fingerprints could be spun as "a mark in their right hand."

Holographic UPC tatoos... apk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684947)

Ever look @ UPC's? 1st, middle, & last bars are EOF terminators (they're also 6's) - otherwise known as "trailer records". Each section says/does a different purpose/contains different information on the "product" concerned, and, they're FAR MORE COMPLEX that simple product ones @ times too (often 'stacked' as in the back of your drivers license, and you can put a TON of information into 1 of those types).

Moving on with that concept in mind: So, essentially - The tech's been there for it for a LONG TIME now, & it "fits the bill" on that quote you use, perfectly -> http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DVdY5ghcnaw0&sa=U&ei=PAaNUZH8O8Tl4AOuxoDQDg&ved=0CCMQtwIwAQ&usg=AFQjCNGiNzcrX3klL5xH4lJNyu7imVpjtg [google.com]

You wouldn't NEED a card, only what I note in my subject-line above... that's all. You wouldn't even be able to see it, but a laser scanner, can.

* Unbelievable as that seems, I find it difficult to dispute or disprove (impossible in fact) - & yes, I did quite a bit of work using those codes in a business/retail environs for inventories & such for various companies over time during my professional career as a programmer-analyst/software-engineer... how long until it's "human inventory information" I wonder? Not long, already done (see license).

(Keep in mind: I don't like 'spouting' this kind of thing, as yes, it actually scares me to a degree & seems "conspiracy theory"-like, but, there 'tis above... so, you decide!)

I'd wager, strongly in fact, that THAT is the basis behind folks resisting the "National ID" card & what-not. I don't blame them. Making what seems like potentially horrendous prophecy happen would do that, easily.

Sometimes, I've questioned some of the work I've done over time in the computer sciences, because it empowers morons and sociopaths... imo, they aren't after only money. They're about POWER, & CONTROL (satisfying something 'missing' in their psyche, like drug addicts use drugs for example). It's their only "fix"...

APK

P.S.=> "No one will be able to buy or sell without the number"... apk

Re:Mark of the beast (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684975)

The right-wingers don't give a damn as long as its Cheney or Chertoff taking billions in tax dollars to do it "privately".

And to get a job! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684733)

I know this is true. My first job out of college required a DoD security clearance. My fingerprints are forever in the FBI databases.

Most jobs that I would consider in IT also require background checks. That means paying an agency to search local, state and federal databased PLUS run credit reports looking for flags. The reports usually are not provided to the job seeker - which seems wrong to me. I don't have an issue if they get the reports, but I want to get a copy of the data too so I can correct incorrect data - not just if I'm refused employment - that will never be stated - the job offer just will not come. It is a form of discrimination without reason - at least that is how it appears.

Re:And to get a job! (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#43685013)

Fingerprinting for a DoD security clearance seems reasonable. It's a special category and is hardly required of everyone.

However the credit check thing that has become so popular for employment is ridiculous. No one has ever shown a correlation between credit rating and risk of employee theft or other dishonesty. Hell, credit ratings aren't even a very good measure of how much of a credit risk you are! Using it for employment is just a way for HR and the credit ratings agencies to make a buck and pretend they're doing something useful. It can also create a vicious cycle. Maybe your credit rating is bad because you've been out of a work for a long time, but that bad rating may prevent you from getting a job.

To buy a gun? Never? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684737)

The data base might be used to track every person, and be used for any function such as renting a home, but _never_ to prevent anyone buying a gun!

Bally's Health club (1)

deodiaus2 (980169) | about a year ago | (#43684759)

I got pissed off when Bally's Health Club and Sam's club required a photo ID. Might as well take a thumb print too. Now, with hi resolution cameras and sound imaging, this will happen at every traffic stop, ATM, or government facility. RFID tags embedded in everything can be tied to everything too, and provide a more error resilient method. If you go to a protest against the next war, I am sure you will be kept on an enemy list. I fear that next, they will require a blood / saliva / sperm sample as in the movie Gatica?

Re:Bally's Health club (1)

Rob the Bold (788862) | about a year ago | (#43684925)

I fear that next, they will require a blood / saliva / sperm sample as in the movie Gatica?

"Gattaca". There's no "i" in DNA, so to speak. Clever, huh?

"Proof of Self" already largely required (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684765)

> proof of self being required at polling places, to rent a house, buy a gun, open a bank account, acquire credit, board a plane

None of these are a bad idea, IMO, and they are largely already happening. (Except the polling one - nice to see that one getting fixed, though.)

> even attend a sporting event

Many high schools are already enforcing this. Some really picky venues have also done this with premium tickets, especially if VIP access if part of the package.

> log on the internet

What do you think is happening as people switch over from desktops to phones as their main Internet device?

Conservative Sell Out (1)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | about a year ago | (#43684769)

Stuff like this really pisses me off. Doubly so because the people who normally run around talking about preventing government interference in business seem happy to create programs like this (and the already existing e-verify) that boil down to having to get permission from the federal government in order to work.

It is hard to imagine a more pervasive and intrusive control over society than having to get President Obama's permission in order to feed and clothe your children. And yet the people who should be howling at such things are happy to embrace them because their xenophobia trumps their patriotism.

Re: Conservative Sell Out (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#43685063)

boil down to having to get permission from the federal government in order to work

That requirement has existed for a very long time. You have to be a citizen or have the proper visa in order to legally work in the US. That hardly seems draconian. E-verify helps solve a real problem, but the big biometric database is a wet dream of KGB wannabees.

Keep going America ... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684771)

Enjoy the decline of your society.

All of your braying about your freedom and awesomeness is a sad, pathetic joke.

You're becoming a parody of everything you used to stand for. The empire is failing. You're becoming worse than the Soviets ever were.

Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of assholes.

Manifest Destiny my ass.

lets see your DL (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684819)

nearly everything listed in the summary except the Log On already requires an ID.

So we'd go from a state system to a national system. Got a passport? guess what, you are in the official national DB already. Yes I know they'd be redundant but I've already got 3 pieces of picture ID in my wallet and my passport at home.

We need to be focusing on all the activities that require or may require an ID, not on that the ID exists. ID has long been a fact of life. no DL you are a non-person.

You already have to have that for many of these (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#43684823)

You already have to have proof of self to rent a house, buy a gun, open a bank account, acquire credit, board a plane.

It may not be by law, but those folks already want to see id. I am 99% sure the gun one is a law.

Re:You already have to have that for many of these (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about a year ago | (#43685065)

It may not be by law, but those folks already want to see id. I am 99% sure the gun one is a law.

100% - it's part of the BATFE check process.

Re:You already have to have that for many of these (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#43685129)

Yeah, I remember handing over drivers license last time I bought a gun. Had to fill out a bunch of paper work too that was totally pointless. They should have been able to scan the card and get a response way faster. I think it was faxed or something instead.

centralized databases completely unnecessary (1)

stenvar (2789879) | about a year ago | (#43684867)

Neither citizenship verification, employment verification, or any of these other functions for which these databases have been proposed actually need centralized government databases. All that you really need is a reasonably secure way of identifying yourself and proving your citizenship. You should be able to store your credentials (physical or electronic) in some secure way if you like, but that should be your choosing. The traditional thing to do is to store your birth certificate, passport, and similar documents in safe or in a bank lock box.

This just in... (1)

GPLDAN (732269) | about a year ago | (#43684941)

The DHS and TSA will be going to class to say "Papers, please" with a thick Russian accent.

They've also been given Commodore 64 emulators for Linux and a copy of the classic game: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QP5X6fcukM [youtube.com]

Not only the Netherlands (1)

vikingpower (768921) | about a year ago | (#43684963)

The USA are turning into this weakened version of a police state which is the surveillance state, too.

Polling (1)

Saethan (2725367) | about a year ago | (#43684991)

ending with the proof of self being required at polling places

You mean I won't be able to vote as Tom Cruise anymore?

X-files (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43684995)

didnt that show , say its already been done......from you rmedical files.

Total and ultimate control! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43685017)

America!
Fuck Yeah!
What you gonna do when we come for you!

We're already there. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43685021)

"ending with the proof of self being required at polling places, to rent a house, buy a gun, open a bank account, acquire credit, board a plane or even attend a sporting event or log on the internet."

Have you tried to do any of these things without an ID recently? I might be able to get into a local high school football game without ID, but major sporting events, with ticket prices higher than most people's rents, will require some form of ID to purchase and claim your ticket.

Classic strawman flamebait (1)

Gothmolly (148874) | about a year ago | (#43685029)

You already have to show photo ID for most of the things listed. Tagging on "and logging onto the Internet" at the end is just sensationalist trash.

Hint: if you have a driver's license, the Gubmint knows who you are.

Is This Data Not Already Available? (1)

LifesABeach (234436) | about a year ago | (#43685079)

I think of the $60,000 hammer comment made in the movie, "Independence Day" [wikipedia.org]

Does anyone here *really*think that... (1)

Nutria (679911) | about a year ago | (#43685107)

such a huge system will *ever* get implemented? The Feds have a long and sucky track record of managing huge IT projects that explode in budget and go down in flames a decade later.

Thus, I'm not worried.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>