Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

Homeland Security Offers Details on Real ID

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the always-been-at-war-with-eurasia dept.

Security 227

pr0nqu33n writes "C|Net is running an article on the DHS's requirements for the Real ID system. Thursday members of the Bush administration finally unveiled details of the anticipated national identification program. Millions of Americans will have until 2013 to register for the system, which will (some would argue) constitute a national ID. RFID trackers for the cards are under consideration, as is a cohesive nation-wide design for the card. States must submit a proposal for how they'll adopt the system by early October of this year. If they don't, come May of next year their residents will see their licenses unable to gain them access to federal buildings and airplanes. The full regulations for the system are available online in PDF format. Likewise, the DHS has a Questions and Answers style FAQ available to explain the program to the curious."

cancel ×

227 comments

Gettng Godwin's law over with (appropriately!) (4, Insightful)

fyngyrz (762201) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219610)

"Where are your papers?"

Land of the free^wregistered, home of the brave^wslave.

Hmm...I could see this at the airport... (1, Funny)

StringBlade (557322) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219716)

INDY: Fahrscheine meine Herr.
VOGEL: Weg.
INDY: Tickets please.
VOGEL: (in German) Was?

VOGEL glances up and recognizes INDY who quickly punches Vogel in the face, knocking him toward the window. In another quick move, Indy TOSSES HIM OUT THE WINDOW onto the tarmac below.

(Shocked Passengers blink in bewilderment.)

INDY: No ticket!

Gettng "smack the US" over with (appropriately!) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18219726)

Uh, huh. So you're telling us that this ONLY happens in the US? Are you sure you want to do a "the US is evil" rant before looking in your own backyard? Besides in case it slipped your mind, two words. Selective Service.

Re:Gettng "smack the US" over with (appropriately! (2, Interesting)

fyngyrz (762201) | more than 7 years ago | (#18221098)

So you're telling us that this ONLY happens in the US?

No. I didn't say that, imply it, or bring up other countries at all. Strawman.

Are you sure you want to do a "the US is evil" rant before looking in your own backyard?

The US is my country. It is my own backyard. Strawman.

Besides in case it slipped your mind, two words. Selective Service.

Selective service. You bring this up, why? Are you trying to point out that the issue of having your name in a database somewhere already exists in various forms and degrees? I know; I didn't say otherwise. However, this is a different problem. Signing up for selective service - or not - did not restrict your ability to travel freely. This will do that, and where restrictions already exist, it will make them worse.

If you meant something else, by all means, enlighten me. I'm paying attention.

Re:Gettng Godwin's law over with (appropriately!) (2, Insightful)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219828)

How does having the government know that you exist enslave you?

Re:Gettng Godwin's law over with (appropriately!) (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18219862)

I bet you like dogs with big ol' slobbery chops, don't you?

Re:Gettng Godwin's law over with (appropriately!) (0, Troll)

apparently (756613) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220014)

The issue isn't the government knowing I exist, dumbass. The issue is the government being able to track my every fucking move, and my every fucking purchase. -You- have nothing to worry about however, because every time the government checked in on you, they'd find you in the same spot -- with your head up your ass.

Re:Gettng Godwin's law over with (appropriately!) (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18220210)

OWNED! Tell it brother!

Re:Gettng Godwin's law over with (appropriately!) (0, Troll)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220350)

How's the government going to track me with a fucking piece of paper in my pocket? Do you think stores will all of a sudden expect you to show photo ID when you buy toothpaste and immediately report to the police that they've seen you?

Re:Gettng Godwin's law over with (appropriately!) (2, Interesting)

fyngyrz (762201) | more than 7 years ago | (#18221146)

How's the government going to track me with a fucking piece of paper in my pocket

I fully expect the answer to that to be RFID or something more advanced.

Do you think stores will all of a sudden expect you to show photo ID when you buy toothpaste

Yes, I do.

and immediately report to the police that they've seen you?

No, the database and the systems that monitor the database will do that. No need for the store to do anything but collect your ID automatically.

Re:Gettng Godwin's law over with (appropriately!) (1, Insightful)

cheater512 (783349) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220576)

Do explain the following:

a) Why cant they do that right now?
b) How does a national ID help them track you?

Re:Gettng Godwin's law over with (appropriately!) (1)

JackMeyhoff (1070484) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220406)

What do you think you need when you drive your car? papers (Driving License) What do you think you need when you fly on a plane? papers (Photo ID / Pasport) What do you think you need when you board that bus? Papers (Ticket) What do you think you need when you board that train? Papers (Ticket) You carry your "papers" with you every day in one form or another.

Re:Gettng Godwin's law over with (appropriately!) (3, Interesting)

fyngyrz (762201) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220870)

You carry your "papers" with you every day in one form or another.

Yes. And this is a step beyond those, sometimes several steps beyond. Are you OK with that? Are you OK with the fact that the government decides where and when you can go, if you drive, if someone else drives? It used to be that a transportation ticket for any destination within the USA had the following information: Where you got on (sometimes), and where you're supposed to get off. In the case of the NY subway, an ID-less token got you on, and you got off when and where you pleased. You could ride all day. And I often did. I'm old enough I've had plane and train tickets w/o personal identity information; got on in NYC, getting off in Washington. Nothing else. Could have handed it to my girlfriend, it would have been perfectly valid. Didn't used to be the government's business where you were, who you were, or where you were going except in the case where your skills were a safety issue, or in other words, when you drive. In that case, the state has a compelling interest in your competence, and that is what a driver's license is supposed to attest to, not what your real name is or anything else - just that you can drive; the fact that it identifies you is peripheral to its purpose, not the other way around. These days, that's no longer true, but I submit that it is not a good thing at all.

In short, I agree, you're right in the technical sense, they are asking for more and more papers. I firmly believe that's 100% the wrong way to go, and that whatever good you might get out of it, it'll never make up for the enormous bad that it brings. I am not a criminal; I absolutely resent being treated like one. If someone is determined to be a criminal, hang a fucking GPS/RFID/venomous bracelet 'round their ankle if you must let them wander in public, otherwise incarcerate them or exterminate them, but do not bring the presumption of guilt onto the head of every warm body in the country.

I hate this whole "mommy" government thing, top to bottom. We don't need it, there are better ways to go, and getting it is going to hurt us a lot, count on it.

"usa (tagging beta)" -- how appropriate (1)

schwaang (667808) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220544)

Considering how Real ID is the USA's beta tagging program.

identify (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18219612)

This posts ID is: f1r57p057

I hope this falls flat (5, Insightful)

El Cubano (631386) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219626)

States must submit a proposal for how they'll adopt the system by early October of this year. If they don't, come May of next year their residents will see their licenses unable to gain them access to federal buildings and airplanes.

I hope that enough states refuse [wikipedia.org] to participate that it makes the federal legistlature repeal the law. Of course, congress will likely do as they've always done and threaten to pull federal highway funding or education funding until the states in question comply.

Re:I hope this falls flat (1)

kimvette (919543) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219660)

Which is what happened to the unlimited speed highways in the western us.

OK, the limit was "reasonable and prudent" in those states, which in the plains and the deserts means "unless it's raining go for the rev limiter"

*sigh*

Re:I hope this falls flat (1)

andreMA (643885) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219666)

I'm interested in what happens if a person lives in a state that doesn't "comply" and a citizen of that state receives a suphoena to testify in a trial at a Federal courthouse. I suspect there will be a wiver system available only to witnesses that the govenment likes.

Re:I hope this falls flat (1)

Walt Dismal (534799) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220582)

Well, the good side of this is that airports, Federal courthouses, and other Federal buildings, are no longer going to be cleaned by (mostly Mexican) illegals. The bad side is, all the Federal buildings in Los Angeles, and LAX, are going to stay dirty.

Re:I hope this falls flat (3, Informative)

bockelboy (824282) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220052)

Sometimes I think states depend too heavily on the federal government loan shark.

For example, take Colorado. Their land-grant institution, CSU, is supposed to be the premier state-run school. However, only about 8% of the budget is provided for by the state. The rest of it is mostly provided by student loans (in turn, provided by the government) and federal government grants.

So, if Colorado ever wanted to exert a state right over a federal right, Congress can easily cut education funding for the state and watch the state universities collapse.

It's sad that states are so dependent on the teat of Uncle Sam. Of course, if they wanted to provide the services through the state, the resulting state tax increase (followed by no federal tax increase) would insure the whole government got voted out.

I wonder if the founding fathers would be saddened by how state governments basically only have the rights and duties the federal government doesn't care to control. Look how easily ID systems just went from state control to federal control - barely any fighting that Joe Q Public even noticed! What state right is next?

Re:I hope this falls flat (1)

fyngyrz (762201) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220290)

Hmm. Revolution: Maybe states ought to make a law that all fuel/road/highway taxes stay in-state, and cannot be "fed" to the feds; then they can build their own highways. Of course, it wouldn't work here in Montana; too much land, not enough taxpayers. Same thing for edumactionisming; figure out the portion of the federal taxes that go to education, and take them before the fed does, and indemnify the taxpayer - by force against the feds if need be - from paying the fed, then handle your own education costs. Well populated states could make a hell of a splash that way. Someone definitely needs to stick a size 12 foot up the feds ass. They're totally out of hand, using bribery as a tool of coercion on their own sub-regions. Disgusting.

Re:I hope this falls flat (1)

ultranova (717540) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220926)

by force against the feds if need be

At which point the federal government will respond with force and, having a larger army at its disposal, win. The same way it happened the last time [wikipedia.org] .

The time when US was a loose federation are long past. With modern communication and transport methods, not to mention information technology, there are no empires so large they couldn't be centrally controlled effectively. Better forget fantasies about matching central government with force and instead trying to affect it from the inside, by trying to get people selected there who will losen the reins.

Re:I hope this falls flat (1)

fyngyrz (762201) | more than 7 years ago | (#18221052)

No, that is entirely wrong. That wasn't the feds; that was one group of states against another. This would be the states - all of them - against the feds. Recall the citizens to the guard; the feds wouldn't even *have* an army. Trust me, a real revolt would work. The civil war was not a revolt; it was an almost equal polarizing of the states, which is something else entirely.

Re:I hope this falls flat (1)

GigsVT (208848) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220300)

What state right is next?

Vote for Ron Paul in 2008 and it will be "none".

Good luck with that (5, Insightful)

localroger (258128) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220078)

Back when the Feds were twisting everyone's arms to raise the drinking age to 21 Lousiana refused. We had a damn good reason; our state constitution forbids it, very directly saying that at 18 a person has "all the rights and privileges" of adulthood. (It's from the Napoleonic Code, and survived the big overhaul of 1974). So the lege started by floating a constitutional amendment, which fell flat with the voters. So then they passed the law anyway, and the state supreme court struck it down. So then, with weeks left on the deadline they passed the exact same law again and this time the state supreme court did a back flip and a twist and said that the constitution doesn't really say what it says and upheld the law. And that is how Louisiana became the very last state where an 18 year old can't buy a beer.

It will go down the same way with Real ID, just watch. It might be the Mormons or some blue state that stands up but they'll be told fine, pay for your own highways (though we'll still take your tax money) and good luck to any of your citizens who want to fly. And conversations will be had behind closed doors about the way things have to be and it will be done.

Re:Good luck with that (1)

Warshadow (132109) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220368)

This is also why countries like Zimbabwe have better roads than Louisiana. It felt like I had a concussion for the 2.5 years I lived in Shreveport because of the wonderful roads.

Re:Good luck with that (1)

Original Replica (908688) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220488)

(though we'll still take your tax money)

Look at your proportion of tax dollars paid to the feds vs your state. That's the same amount of control your state has over it's own "state" law. When a stae lowers it's income tax or property tax to attract residents, it loses some autonomy. Imagine what a diverse country we would live in if States had equal power and money to the Fed.

Re:Good luck with that (2, Interesting)

flyingfsck (986395) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220670)

The states can tell the Feds that they will collect all taxes themselves and then go slow on handing it over to the Feds - Two years later: Yeah, yeah, cool down, the cheque is in the mail...

That is what Alberta threatened to do a few years ago during a Federal spat and the Canadian government backtracked very quickly. Of course it helps that Alberta is just about the only province that actually pays anything.

Another Alberta trick is to threaten to replace the RCMP with a provincial police force, which will throw thousands of Mounties out of work. Any state with a semi-intelligent governor can do things like this to force the Fed's hand. The Washington burocrats only have as much power as the states allow them to have.

Re:Good luck with that (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220876)

Another Alberta trick is to threaten to replace the RCMP with a provincial police force, which will throw thousands of Mounties out of work. Any state with a semi-intelligent governor can do things like this to force the Fed's hand. The Washington burocrats only have as much power as the states allow them to have.
Uh, no. You might have heard of this little thing called the Civil War, wherein it was determined, after a few million casualties, that Washington has more power than the states would like it to have.

Read History Much? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18220782)

Are you surprised? Lousiana lost her right to determine her own destiny sometime back in 1865.

As did every other state in the union, be they 'north' or 'south'.

Really do wish they could've fought over a realistic right instead of something as asinine and horrible as slavery, but, well, it's too late to start crying about the big bad Federal government telling states what to do now. :P

Re:I hope this falls flat (1)

Registered Coward v2 (447531) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220320)



States must submit a proposal for how they'll adopt the system by early October of this year. If they don't, come May of next year their residents will see their licenses unable to gain them access to federal buildings and airplanes.


I hope that enough states refuse to participate that it makes the federal legislature repeal the law. Of course, congress will likely do as they've always done and threaten to pull federal highway funding or education funding until the states in question comply.

Except, in this case, it'll be the same Congress' constituents raising an uproar - when Grandpa and Grandma miss their grandchild's birth; or the kids miss getting to a dying relative; vacations get ruined, etc they'll run as fast from DHS and work to limit the damage.

Smoke and mirrors (5, Insightful)

Wind_Walker (83965) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219662)

Next time you're going through airport security and being forced to show your Photo ID and boarding pass, remember this:

All 19 of the 9/11 hijackers had valid photo ID and a valid boarding pass.

Re:Smoke and mirrors (2, Insightful)

fyngyrz (762201) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219718)

Troll? Fucking troll? For crying out loud, mods, fix this - that is anything but a troll comment! It is topical, relevant, true and thought provoking. /P.

Parent is not trolling (2, Insightful)

vivaoporto (1064484) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219736)

It is relevant. The government is trying to sell this ID idea using the good old and worn out excuse of "curbing terrorism", but indeed, all the "allegedly" 9/11 terrorists had valid IDs. Despite of the fact of National IDs working in a lot of places (Europe and Brasil, from the top of my head), it doesn't really fits in the U.S. concepts of freedom.

How is that a "Troll"? (2, Insightful)

khasim (1285) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219738)

Read the "Questions and Answers" section.

What is REAL ID?

        REAL ID is a nationwide effort intended to prevent terrorism, reduce fraud, and improve the reliability and accuracy of identification documents that State governments issue.

So pointing out that the terrorists had authentic identification does contradict the premise of Real ID.

Do not confuse terrorism with identification. These cards will NOT carry the "may be a terrorist" stamp when they are issued.

Re:How is that a "Troll"? (1)

Trailwalker (648636) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219852)

REAL ID is a nationwide effort intended to prevent terrorism, reduce fraud, and improve the reliability and accuracy of identification documents that State governments issue.
Government at all levels is well known for its magnificent record when it comes to reliability and accuracy.

Only Government approved terrorists and fraudsters will receive REAL ID.

How is that a "Fake ID"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18219940)

I think the point is is that states need to toughen up the process of getting identification. Anyone who has obtained fraudulent ID in order to get liquor knows just how bad the process really is. Terrorism reduction is just a side-benefit.

Re:How is that a "Fake ID"? (5, Insightful)

Talgrath (1061686) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220532)

Except, again, the 9/11 terrorists had VALID, LEGAL IDs; they weren't fraudulent, they didn't lie about who they were. The 9/11 terrorists were here on perfectly valid visas, and all their IDs were obtained through perfectly legal means; which means, even if the "Real ID" system flies, it still won't stop terrorists from getting a valid ID. Somehow people have gotten it into their head that the 9/11 terrorists did things illegally before they attacked us, but this simply isn't the case; the 9/11 terrorists were normal, law-abiding individuals until their actions on 9/11.

Re:How is that a "Troll"? (2, Insightful)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220002)

How does an ID reduce terrorism? Do they plan on putting an evil bit on these things that terrorists will have to set?

Re:How is that a "Troll"? (2, Insightful)

Marillion (33728) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220916)

In the wake of 9/11, the people at the DHS are under enormous pressure to do something about security.

What's been lost is the difference between doing something about it is and doing anything about it. Read ID is the later.

Re:Smoke and mirrors (4, Insightful)

penguinrenegade (651460) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219774)

MOD PARENT UP.

This is absolutely true and D.C. is trying to get the rest of the people to become sheep and give up their rights. If no new information is being collected, no new requirements are being mandated, then exactly why is this necessary?

9-11 was cited as the reason for this in the FAQ (for those who RTFAQ) and it is complete and utter bull.

States that are trying to reject this (so far) include:
Maine (passed)
Georgia, Massachusetts, Montana, Washington, California, and Texas)

This is EXACTLY a national ID card, and we already have the right to board aircraft. The problem is that we LET D.C. regulate states! Mod parent up - this is "national security" at its worst.

Mod him up ? (4, Insightful)

DrYak (748999) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219822)

Who did mod him troll ?

I mean, it's true : those terrorist had valid non-counterfeit IDs, linking them to the identities they used in the states and with which they didn't have any problem. Serious terrorist are supposed to keep low profile until last moment and ID linking to central database will be no help having a centralized national database won't bring any new information. (Except if "Al Qaida" provides a database of all identity of their terrorist. But as Al Qaida is more a "franchise" used by small groups [and used by the media to scare people] rather than a real well organised corporation, that not possible even in theory...)

Politicians should stop pretending that the ID is some magical problem that'll definitely fix the terrorism problem for sure. Here in Europe, almost every country has ID, but *that* isn't what will stop some of them of being targeted by attacks.

An ID card is just a convenient and standardized way for quickly showing who you are, for all those moments where you need it (before entering in nightclubs. while buying alcohol, when going to the administration, to prove you are the owner when using credit card). And that is the only thing politician should ever pretend. All the rest are lies. An ID card will never show what people *intend to do* and will never ever stop terrorists.

Re:Smoke and mirrors (1)

mack knife (96580) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219980)

You're missing the point. You're viewing this initiative out of the context of every other post-9/11 counterterror program, and then faulting it for not doing everything on its own.

The point is not that terrorists can't get access to legitimate ID documents--it's that if ID documents can be issued with greater confidence as to their integrity, it's easier to check people's names against watch lists. You can argue about the propriety of those lists, and the competence of the government in creating them, but ultimately even the very best, most complete, no-false-positives watch list won't be any good if fraudulent ID documents can be easily obtained or created.

Profit (0)

HomelessInLaJolla (1026842) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219668)

Arguing about it lends to Senators and Representatives spending their time arguing about it. Their arguing time is very expensive and, if the argument grows large enough, they may need to schedule a national conference to argue about it. That's even more expensive.

Implementation is expensive but, if they're really dead-set on going ahead with it, it cannot be avoided. The best thing for a taxpayer to do is to pay close attention to the companies which profit from the allocation of the new funds in the hope that they can make an private investment in those companies. The taxpayer will never see the corporate profit of his tax dollar but the private citizen may.

Enforcement is expensive. The best thing for a taxpayer to do is to comply as quickly and painlessly as possible to minimize the tax burden of enforcement. In the case of the Real ID system: just go and make sure you have yours. After you have yours then you can freely debate, until you're blue in the face, whether or not it is right or true for us to have them. Unless the goal is a coordinated DDoS of the court system there's no sense in avoiding a mandatory ID.

Profit. Think along the lines of profit. Minimize effort, minimize damage, maximize return. Do nothing if you have to.

Re:Profit (1)

FooMoeDee (1071002) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219710)

The taxpayer will never see the corporate profit of his tax dollar but the private citizen may
Doesn't this indicate that the taxpayer is paying twice--once for the product and once for the privelege of investing in society? Isn't the tax dollar supposed to cover the cost of the privelege of investing in society?

The citizens are being double charged and receiving the least profitable levels of stock options. It makes perfect sense from a profit perspective.

Re:Profit (2, Insightful)

hairpinblue (1026846) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219792)

Doesn't this indicate that the taxpayer is paying twice
The taxpayers pay far more than that.

Re:Profit (3, Insightful)

FuMoDi (1071014) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219742)

just go and make sure you have yours...After you have yours then you can freely debate
Debate within compliance is just lip service, isn't it? We can debate until we're blue in the face but it won't make a bit of difference in terms of profit as the money has already been allocated and spent.

Re:Profit (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220164)

Senators and Representatives spending time arguing fruitlessly may be expensive, but it has the excellent side effect of preventing them from doing other even more stupid and expensive things.

Re:Profit (2, Insightful)

phlegmofdiscontent (459470) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220962)

Compliance before argument? What country are you from, 'cause it sure ain't the U.S.? Did the Sons of Liberty comply with the British on the Tea Tax? No, they threw that fucking tea into the ocean. Did Pennsylvania farmers comply with the excise tax in 1794? No, they took up arms and started the Whiskey Rebellion. Did the Native Americans comply with orders to move to reservations? No, they got some guns and started shooting white settlers and the Army. This country has a long history of rebellion rather than compliance. When rights are being taken away, people fight back. It wasn't until we gained a huge amount of prosperity that more and more people (and states) started willingly giving up their rights because there's too much to lose if they resist.
You can comply with RealID and argue until you're blue in the face, but the fact is, once it's a reality, it's NOT going to go away. You've just surrendered another small portion of your rights. What happens next time? When you need to show your new ID to get into ANY building, or swipe your ID to get into your car? Or get a tracking chip? Are you going to comply? Or are you going to resist? Somewhere there needs to be a line and the fact that a few states are resisting is heartening, because maybe more can be persuaded to resist this power grab.

Re:Profit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18221204)

Fuck you, you goddamn sheep.

You are the biggest spineless jellyfish I have ever seen. Just because the Fed wants to do something we should comply?

You make me sick.

I bet if the Fed proposes sticking RFID tags up our asses, you'll be the first to drop your pants and bend over.

Announced on a Thursday? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18219706)

Wow, the administration is fairly bold making this announcement on a Thursday rather their usual "bury it on a Friday" type announcement.

Yes they have admitted to burying news with Friday announcements.

Re:Announced on a Thursday? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18219794)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic le/2007/01/25/AR2007012501951.html [washingtonpost.com]

Bush aides charged with speaking to the public and the media are kept out of the loop on some of the most important issues. And bad news is dumped before the weekend for the sole purpose of burying it.

With a candor that is frowned upon at the White House, Martin explained the use of late-Friday statements. "Fewer people pay attention to it late on Friday," she said. "Fewer people pay attention when it's reported on Saturday."

Your papers, please. (4, Insightful)

rantingkitten (938138) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219724)

What, exactly, is this supposed to do to "fight terror"? The only thing I'm terrified of is how easy it would be for an invasive, looming government with no regard for privacy and individual rights -- such as the one we have now -- to abuse this. "The terrorists" aren't getting ID cards. The law-abiding citizens are. And the citizens are the ones who will pay the consequences.

It's worse than that. (4, Insightful)

khasim (1285) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219812)

"The terrorists" aren't getting ID cards. The law-abiding citizens are. And the citizens are the ones who will pay the consequences.

Actually, most terrorists in the US have had authentic identification issued by the US government (or accepted by it).

The real terrorists will have no problem complying with this law.

Not only that, but it will be run by people. And people can be corrupted. A single ID card that is accepted as valid anywhere in the US becomes very valuable. So some low grade government paper pusher decides that he can make a bit of money on the side by approving fake requests. So the illegals in Texas are getting ID cards issued by a corrupt guy in New York.

Yeah, if you wanted to help crime NATIONWIDE, you really couldn't come up with a better plan than this.

It's worse than that-Worldwide. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18220158)

"Yeah, if you wanted to help crime NATIONWIDE, you really couldn't come up with a better plan than this."

It's good enough for the rest of the world. [epic.org]

Write Your Representatives (4, Informative)

pyro_peter_911 (447333) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219744)

Downsize DC [downsizedc.org] has an ongoing campaign to repeal the REAL ID Act. Go visit their site then send your Senators and Representative a message. It only takes a couple of minutes. Let your idiot representative know that you're watching and you'll hold them accountable for their actions. It doesn't take long. Just go do it.

Peter

Much better (1)

DogDude (805747) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220062)

Join the Libertarian Party. That's the basic premise of the party, and since they're (a distant) #3 in terms of power, you can do much more good by joining them than "joining" some random blog that nobody has ever heard of.

No thanks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18220234)

As much as I mistrust the cops, I'd trust an unregulated private security force a lot less.

Re:No thanks (1)

DogDude (805747) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220450)

The Libertarian Party has never advocated for privatization of police. Read the official platform here [lp.org] .

Re:No thanks (1)

drix (4602) | more than 7 years ago | (#18221066)

Done. The only mention I found of the police had something to do with roadblocks. I did find this, however:

Federal, state and local governments have created inefficient service monopolies throughout the economy. From the US Postal Service to municipal garbage collection and water works, government is forcing citizens to use monopoly services. These are services that the private sector is already capable of providing in a manner that gives the public better service at a competitive price.

That sounds a lot like what the parent poster was talking about. One could easily see that sort of thinking leading to something a lot more extreme, if we were ever stupid enough to vote you wackos into power. (This seems like a good time to plug one of my favorite The Onion articles [theonion.com] of all time.)

And I'm measuring my words carefully when I say "wacko." I don't see how else you could characterize this:

Solutions: We oppose all laws at any level of government restricting, regulating or requiring the ownership, manufacture, transfer or sale of firearms or ammunition. We oppose all laws requiring registration of firearms or ammunition. We support repeal of all gun control laws. We demand the immediate abolition of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.

Wow. Congratulations on being to the right of the NRA. Not very many people can claim that.

I agree with a great many of the positions espoused in your platform, but in the end you libertarians are just as pie-in-the-sky detached from reality as the lefties you so ardently despise. Who knows, maybe AK in every garage and a chicken in every pot sounds like a great idea to a bunch of white computer programmers living in the suburbs. Meanwhile, back on planet Earth, it doesn't take a whole lot of imagination, plus maybe a very passing acquaintance with human nature, to see what a monstrously reckless idea that is that you are advocating.

Downsize DC (1)

HomelessInLaJolla (1026842) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220250)

The website has prominent names with proven records in real results for the taxpayers and citizens. Best of luck in their efforts.

There isn't even a valid debate here.. (1)

mofomojo (810520) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219814)

We should just boo them until they leave office.

Privacy advocates trolls and flamebaiting? (1)

jforest1 (966315) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219840)

Is this /.? Since when do privacy advocates' comments get marked as flamebait and troll? And a "don't argue, just do as your told." post get modded up?

Re:Privacy advocates trolls and flamebaiting? (1)

beakerMeep (716990) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219984)

it happens from time to time but slashdot has pretty good system to keep the mods honest (unlike digg or some other such nonsense sites). The karma system hands out mod points to those with good karma more often than those without, as well as the meta moderating which (i think) performfs a similar function. wrongs tend to get righted quickly, and overall it's probably one of the better systems anyone could come up with imho.

its about time! (0, Flamebait)

IT 073571 (1069570) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219850)

although this affects the privacy and individual right, its just a small price to pay for the public safety and security.

Re:its about time! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18219990)

OK, since you're smart enough to see how a national ID somehow increases public safety and security, why don't you explain it to the rest of us?

It makes us less secure (3, Interesting)

Original Replica (908688) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219858)

From the article:which means that businesses like bars and banks that require ID would be capable of scanning and recording customers' home addresses.

Because reading it off the front isn't good enough? Why would they need to scan my address unless they wanted to send me junk mail or make a database of my drinking habits? This is security theater at best.

In two of three cases, safer. (1)

twitter (104583) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220516)

From the QA:

the official purposes of a REAL ID license to those listed by Congress in the law: accessing a Federal facility; boarding Federally-regulated commercial aircraft; and entering nuclear power plants.

You are safer on a bus and outside of nuclear power plants than you are on an airplane or inside a nuclear power plant. See, big brother is watching out for you after all.

Getting spammed by bars, and crushing political opposition, free speech and the American way, are an unfortunate side effects of insuring your safety. Be grateful, so grateful that you do as you are told.

we already have sufficient ID (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18219936)

Why doesn't the federal government simply require its existing Federal ID for anyone who boards a plane? It's called a passport, and it's already (presumably) secure, or can easily be legislated as such. People who don't take airline flights needn't bother to get one, and no additional (read: expensive) requirements need to be imposed on the states. The fact that this isn't being considered (or even discussed) tends to corroborate the real purpose of the REAL ID Act: a complete database of everyone, forever. Your papers, please.

come next May IF your state says NO you are SOL (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 7 years ago | (#18219974)

If you need fly, use federal buildings, work at the airport, work at a federal building?

Re:come next May IF your state says NO you are SOL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18220388)

If you work in a Federal building, you more than likely already have a Federal ID card that's required for access to that building -- why should the IRS (et al) trust your State-issued ID? After all, they don't really have a convenient way to verify its authenticity; if they did, there would be no need for the requirements outlined in the REAL ID Act.

One card.... To rule them all. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18220084)

One card.... To rule them all.

zero to lawsuit (4, Insightful)

superwiz (655733) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220098)

This smells like zero-to-lawsuit in less than .1 second. It would mean that residents of the states that don't adapt DHS' guidelines would be discriminated against in Fed Gov employment as well as interstate travel. First of these is probably unconstitutional and the second of these is definately unconstitutional.

Re:zero to lawsuit (1)

Short Circuit (52384) | more than 7 years ago | (#18221200)

No, it's illegal for states to discriminate against residents of other states. It's not illegal for the federal government to give preferrential treatment. The constitution specifically grants the federal government the sole right to regulate interstate commerce, and air travel easily falls under that category.

As for federal employment? I've never heard of federal laws against residency-based employment restrictions.

Mark of the Beast? (1)

acedotcom (998378) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220104)

i know it is not, but there is an Evangelical Christian magazine called Endtimes that believes it is...seriously. I am anti national ID, but only for privacy reasons, but these fuckers are crazy...
check out their site, http://www.endtime.com/ [endtime.com]
and their partner site http://www.nonationalid.com/ [nonationalid.com]
Can you believe our Prez swings with these guys?

Air travel? (2, Insightful)

imunfair (877689) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220124)

Shouldn't the states have control of the airports within them? If that were the case then you could fly to any other state that had rejected the Real ID as well.

I'd be curious to know exactly what law gives the federal government control over who can fly, instead of the airlines or the airport. If there is such a law, is it constitutional? Interstate commerce is the only federal juristiction I can think of that's close - but that doesn't apply to civilian passengers with nothing to sell...

Re:Air travel? (1)

bluemonq (812827) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220268)

In this case the *airlines* are engaging in a form of interstate commerce. A little hard to get around that one.

Interstate Commerce covers everything (3, Informative)

bigtrike (904535) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220924)

If the interstate commerce clause can be used to regulate the growing and consumption of a plant which is never sold and never leaves the owner's property, then it can cover just about anything else.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzales_v._Raich [wikipedia.org]

Why are you guys always against this? (1)

trimbo (127919) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220214)

What's the problem with trying to create a more reliable identification system? Why is this considered an invasion of privacy? Is Slashdot full of id theiving outlaws or something?

Even if the government is selling this with the wrong focus ("9/11 terrorists oh noes!"), we still need a more reliable ID system than drivers licenses. Ever had your credit card number stolen, or your bank account drained simply because someone knows the last 4 of your SSN? That last four digits seems like it's the key to everything in your life these days.

It's obvious that Citibank, BofA, Visa, etc. aren't ever going to do anything to stop identity theft, maybe it's time the government starts doing something about it. If ReadID helps, it would be a big step forward on that front. I don't care if it has to be sold to the public using terrorism, because it's still an improvement over what we have today.

Re:Why are you guys always against this? (1)

coastwalker (307620) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220708)

Not everyone has a driving license. Even a SSN is not the same as an id card. Everyone will have an id card - and you will carry it at all times and be expected to produce it before entering any building or using any transport - at least I will be voting for you to do these things as soon as I know that it can be done.

Just think! anybody caught without a card must be a terrorist or at least a criminal of some kind and we can put them straight into concentration camps! brilliant! Illegal immigrants and minor criminals off the street in less than a year! Don't know what your going to do with all these millions of non-citizens. Oh hang on I have an idea - you could issue them with second class cards marked with a yellow star or something, once you had found out exactly what sort of non-citizen they are.

Has anybody really thought through what you are going to do with all the people you catch who wont have a real id card? Its certainly going to be a great job creation scheme locking them all up and processing them. Maybe thats the great economic miracle of this century - everybody will be employed running the United States Prison.

I'm all for it mind you, and I want everything to be stored on video - and available for the police to review if they suspect you of a crime. We almost have the technology to do it, so why not do it. After all if you are happy having a metal tag in your ear whats wrong with your every moment being recorded on video. After all the police are only going to look at it if they suspect you of committing a crime.

By the way if you happen to be a rich criminal or terrorist who needs a fake id or your life video editing - then for a very large sum of money I can fix it for you.

If you happen to be Joe public with no money then you had better hope you never run a red light - because I'm selling a data mining program to the government that looks through every bodies life video & flags it up to the police. Its ok it doesn't tell them how many people you have slept with or even what sex they are - thats in the medical data mining program that will stamp out STD's - Permanently! Just think of the social good we can do with this technology, no more pedophiles or gun crime, no underage drinking, no drug taking - it will be fantastic!

I am not paranoid. I am looking forward to the technological means to create paradise on Earth. If you have any concerns about that paradise you had better start thinking about it now, because its coming in your life time and not mine. I am old enough to avoid it, but I'm betting that you arn't.

Re:Why are you guys always against this? (1)

Watson Ladd (955755) | more than 7 years ago | (#18221142)

Come on. If Congress can issue the ID cards, and state that they are government property, then they can regulate how they are used. Just impose European-style privacy regulations onto all businesses.

Re:Why are you guys always against this? (1)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220720)

I don't care if it has to be sold to the public using terrorism, because it's still an improvement over what we have today.
You don't care? WTF are you smoking? Your points were reasonable and clear up until that point. Do you realize what, in effect, you're saying? Let me translate:

"I don't care if our government lies to us about something to pass it, because it's better for us."

There's something horribly wrong if the government is lying to us to pass laws, because we don't think the law is beneficial, and they do. That's a phenomenon I'd rather not allow to happen, thank you very much.

Re:Why are you guys always against this? (1)

trimbo (127919) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220944)

> "I don't care if our government lies to us about something to pass it, because it's better for us."

It doesn't work for me when people put words in my mouth. Invoking terrorism for the RealID debate is an overstatement, but not a lie. Now that we have much more effective watch lists, and I would really hope some of those guys on the 9/11 flights would have showed up on them in this day and age. If they would have, and the guys would have needed fake IDs, having better identification would actually help in fighting terrorism.

In any case, I'm surprised that you're surprised about the government officials using overstatement as a tool. It is a necessary, standard operating procedure in politics in the US. Since Katrina happened, all politicians invoke it to get public works projects done like fixing levees in California, which, even if they broke, would be far, far less impactful than it was on New Orleans. You'll hear things like "We have another Katrina on our hands in Sacramento" -- a gross overstatement of the real issue -- but which might be the only thing that can get taxpayers to approve another $5bn bond.

A good definition of politics in a republic or democracy might be "Convincing people to do the right thing for the wrong reasons." I've always said the debate over Al Gore's global warming claims are in this category. Does it matter if he's wrong? Wouldn't it be best if we did cut down on fossil fuel use either way? I'd rather have Al Gore be wrong and cut down on imported oil than keep sending money to the Saudis.

In any case, I read up on the RealID plan more after my post and it seems like they just want to change the requirements for driver's licenses. I'm not sure it will really help identity theft like they say it will. That kind of impact would be too inconvenient for Visa and Mastercard :\

How the fuck did this come to pass? (1)

Ka D'Argo (857749) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220224)

I read one of the other articles about it here on /. a while back, when it was in the "idea" stage. Now it's all but basically implemented? I got a few..questions here so mod me down if you wish cause, I gotta ask;

So, we have until 2013 to become registered and with card right, what if we don't register? Are we just not admitted into federal buildings and airplanes as the article says? Or can businesses start not allowing customers entrance to their places without a card? Will businesses be able to shut off allowing a customer to buy a service or good from them cause they don't have a card? (such as even if they are paying for cash?) And what will be the "cost" of this new card for individuals? Some of us on fixed or basically no income at all, can barely afford to pay the bills and buy food every week, even if it's an el cheap price of like $20.00 USD that's $20 I don't have to waste every week, that's money spent on bills, and food. If it were something of a luxury item as most people would tell you, eat less or buy cheap food like ramen, save up and buy it. But should we American's be forced to pay for it? (The article wasn't clear on any individual cost)

This is both not shocking at all and scary. I expected much from Bush's plans and whatnot, I wouldn't be surprised if he got us caught in a nuclear war. But this is scary. I don't fly on planes and such so ID's to get on them never bothered me. I have a fear of cars. I don't mind riding in them, as long as someone else is driving. As such I've never gotten a drivers license and anything I've needed one for can always be clarified for by a DMV issue state ID', none of this RFID-track-me-anywhere bullshit etc. If I'm paying in cash, a restaurant or bookstore shouldn't need to see my "papers" to allow me the grace of purchasing their services or goods.

So, let's actually read the article... (4, Informative)

Jeian (409916) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220230)

Since /. readers have a tendency to start screaming about national ID cards and identity databases without (apparently) actually reading the documents in question, I will provide the relevant quotes for you.

http://www.dhs.gov/xprevprot/laws/gc_1172767635686 .shtm [dhs.gov]

"In the proposed rule, DHS is proposing to limit the official purposes of a REAL ID license to those listed by Congress in the law: accessing a Federal facility; boarding Federally-regulated commercial aircraft; and entering nuclear power plants."

"Is this a National ID card? No. The proposed regulations establish common standards for States to issue licenses. The Federal Government is not issuing the licenses, is not collecting information about license holders, and is not requiring States to transmit license holder information to the Federal Government that the Government does not already have (such as a Social Security Number)."

"Will a national database be created that stores information about every applicant? No. The REAL ID Act and these regulations do not establish a national database of driver information. States will continue to collect and store information about applicants as they do today. The NPRM does not propose to change this practice and would not give the Federal government any greater access to this information."

"DHS is proposing minimum standards that will appear on the face of the card. The proposed regulation would require each of the following on the face of REAL IDs; space available for 39 characters for full legal name; address of principal residence; digital photograph; gender; date of birth; signature, document number; and machine readable technology."

"What is the Machine Readable Technology specified in the NPRM? The regulations propose the use of the 2-D barcode already used by 46 jurisdictions (45 States and the District of Columbia). DHS leans towards encrypting the data on the barcode as a privacy protection and requests comments on how to proceed given operational considerations."

So, let's see. What we're *actually* looking at is federal standards on what information needs to be displayed on state ID cards, and how identity needs to be proved prior to the issuance of a state ID card.

Gee, that's actually a lot less threatening then all the comments are making it sound. Hmm...

Timothy McVeigh had a US birth certificate! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18220282)

This is ridiculous. When do we say "enough is enough"?

Thanks, but I would rather not be protected by big brother.

Why Is this Bad? (2)

otterpop81 (784896) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220298)

I'm being totally serious here. Please don't flame. I just would like someone to carefully explain why a National ID is bad. We already have State IDs (Driver's Licenses) which are are required for virtually everything. We also have Passports, which some may argue are optional, but they are certainly not optional if you want to leave the country. We also have Social Security numbers and cards which you have to present if you want to get a job anywhere. The SSNs are presumably primary keys to a big database somewhere with all your information in it. Oh, and there are voter IDs too, but the requirements of those seems to vary by state (and maybe locale).

So my question is, since we already have State IDs with pictures on them, and National Social Security cards (without pictures, but with a big database somewhere attached to it), and National Passports (optional, but with picture), what's wrong with having a national ID card with your picture on it. Seriously asking.

Re:Why Is this Bad? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18220480)

Who modded this 'flamebait'?! The guys putting forward a reasonable point of view in a thoughtful post - it might not be in line with the majority view here, but people are still entitled to their opinions without sanction.

Re:Why Is this Bad? (1)

otterpop81 (784896) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220592)

Thank you for this comment. You're right. Reasonable debate somehow seems impossible here.

The thing is, I can't say that I really have any opinion at all about National IDs. I really do just want someone to explain to me what the big deal is. Maybe I'm just stupid. Someone here already called me that today on another thread :)

Re:Why Is this Bad? (1)

mschuyler (197441) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220660)

Moding this post flamebait is a perfect example of the misuse of the moderation system. As I understand it, moderation is not there simply so you can push your own politial point of view. The moderation itself is a flame. Hopefully others will mod it back up--NOT for its point of view, but because of the injustice. Or perhaps meta-moderation will ctach it. It's really unfortunate slashdot has become so politically correct that you can't have a reasonable discussion with encountering this nonsense. Just for the record, I hope my state says "No" as well.

Re:Why Is this Bad? (1)

otterpop81 (784896) | more than 7 years ago | (#18221076)

I do appreciate your comments. It _is_ an injustice that one can't have a differing point of view around here.

However, like I said in my original post, I don't _have_ a point of view. I just want some explanation of why this is bad. I'm not trolling here. I promise. Will someone please tell me what the problem with a national ID is in light of the things in my original post?

How will they staff the building? (1)

IvyMike (178408) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220414)

If they don't, come May of next year their residents will see their licenses unable to gain them access to federal buildings and airplanes.

I hope my state doesn't comply. It will be interesting to see how the feds are planning to staff their buildings with 100% out-of-state employees. I can see it now: "Sorry, Judge! Even though you were elected to serve in California, you can't enter the building...because your id is from California."

Re:How will they staff the building? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18221228)

Look at the bright side: Without a Real ID you'll be denied admittance to federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison.

Who ultimately benefits from controlled chaos? (1)

JAB Creations (999510) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220430)

This is the last step before they inject these things in to our flesh. This is part of a greater plan to stop an anti-government uprising because they will be able to lock down those who do not conform. Why do you think the armed forces can have big guns but civilians can't? This is not about improving systems but improving systems of control. The worst evil is the one you've been convinced does not exist! The original US Government when creating the constitution foresaw the government to become oppressive once again and gave us these constitutional rights to defend our lands, our homes, our people. Pacifism, indifference, and apathy towards these issues will lead our people to worse things then miscegenation, homosexuality, and complete moral decay of society. The real question is who ultimately benefits from all of this controlled chaos?

If big air-travel states opt out it's doomed (3, Interesting)

davidwr (791652) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220540)

If even 2 or 3 states with lots of air travelers opt out, er, "just say no," the feds will be forced to adopt another way for these people to board airplanes or the airline industry will have a fit. If it's inconvenient or expensive expect a hew and cry from the voters.

The "ultimate" backup plan for the feds is to require passports for internal travel. Insert In Soviet Russia joke here.

Uhh.. well.. we will let you wait before we ID you (1)

k1e0x (1040314) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220588)

What they are going to allow us to wait before they enact total control?

Airline companies should decide who can, and who can not, fly on their own air planes. They should decide who must be searched and who must present ID. Why the government is involved, I'll never understand.

This is absurd.. its like saying.. "You don't like the interest rate? Well how about.. no payments for 60 days on your 21% interest loan. ehh? good deal there son."

I'm.. actually scared to do this.. but I'm drawing the line here. I declare that I will not be spied upon! I will not be recorded! RFID tagged! or video taped! ..and I'm inventing methods to break systems that will try to. I am aware I will probably go to jail but I am not going to willfully allow this.

what diffrence does it make? (1)

proadventurer (1071064) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220798)

The morning of the Polish revolution civilians were not allowed to even posses BB guns, by noon they had tanks. Everyone is all fussy about a national ID. Let it be known: Me, mr PSG1, FiveseveN, and M2 will be sharing 1 national ID. I am no nutcase, (self diagnose) and I think the 2nd amendment is clear.

the illusion of security and counterexamples (2, Interesting)

borgalicious (750617) | more than 7 years ago | (#18220894)

Having traveled through countries that have actual, recurrent terrorism, I've encountered real efforts at security. These contrast markedly with the US "put a duffer in the airport to check that the name on my boarding pass matches my driver's license" policy.

Two examples stand out clearly in memory. Passing through Paris' Charles de Gaulle airport I was stopped and questioned by no less than 7 pairs of guards who wanted to see my passport and ask me some simple, relevant questions. Although the questions were simple, they studied my response intently looking for any indication that I was lying. It was polite, it was brief, but I was scrutinized. On one of those trips, I found that the luggage carousel had been locked off because an unattended bag had been discovered. Within minutes, that bag was taken outside, put under a bomb blanket, and had a primer bomb fired next to it. It turned out to be just plain luggage, but it was clear that they were taking no chances.

Another time, on business travel ending in Heathrow, I was asked questions relevant to my journey by someone as polite and as assiduous as in Paris. He finally asked me "why did your firm send you and not someone else?" which caught me quite off guard. I have little doubt that he was expecting me to fish for an answer to that question, and might have been moved to further questions if I replied more facilely.

An ID card is junk compared to civil servants like those.

What the fuck happened to Full Faith and Credit?!? (1)

bitbucketeer (892710) | more than 7 years ago | (#18221024)

What do you mean my State's ID won't be accepted? I guess Article IV, Section 1 can be safely ignored from now on. Besides, I already have a National ID... it's called a Social Security Number. Why do I need two National ID's?

But I don't drive a car! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18221064)

If I don't drive a car, why do I need to get a driver's license to fly in a plane?!?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...