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!

Canadians Wary of 'Enhanced Drivers Licenses'

samzenpus posted more than 6 years ago | from the tell-me-everything dept.

Privacy 258

Dr.Merkwurdigeliebe writes ""Enhanced drivers licenses such as those to be issued in B.C. will lay the groundwork for a national identity card", federal privacy commissioner Jennifer Stoddart said yesterday. Stoddart said the licenses, touted as an alternative to a passport for the purpose of crossing the U.S. border, closely resemble the Real ID program in the United States. She characterized that program as a way of introducing a "type of national identity card" for Americans."

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

Is that a typo in the subject? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22331314)

Whould that not be 'wary' instead of 'weary'?

Re:Is that a typo in the subject? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22331330)

Maybe "leery"

Re:Is that a typo in the subject? (1)

zoward (188110) | more than 6 years ago | (#22332106)

Good thought. I find it amusing that someone added the "spelchek" tag to this, since a spell checker would not have caught it, "weary" being a valid word. That having been said, it won't be for a while after the national ID card goes through that Canadians will be weary of it.

Yes (4, Funny)

lawnsprinkler (1012271) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331360)

It would.

Re:Yes (4, Funny)

smitty_one_each (243267) | more than 6 years ago | (#22332068)

Wood knot.

Re:Is that a typo in the subject? (5, Funny)

Bastard of Subhumani (827601) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331658)

I reckon they've run out of those stupid extra 'u's that they randomly insert in words so they're using 'e's instead.

Ob. Family Guy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22331696)

Whould that not be 'wary' instead of 'weary'?

You're eating hair!

Re:Is that a typo in the subject? (4, Informative)

driftingwalrus (203255) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331920)

It should indeed wary. Weary means that they are tired of it. Wary means that they are cautious about it. Computer spellcheckers are not as effective as people think.

Re:Is that a typo in the subject? (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331984)

Give me the location of the nuclear wessels!

Spellcheckers are very effective, they check that words are spelled correctly. They don't claim to be 'intention checkers'..

Re:Is that a typo in the subject? (1)

Bloke down the pub (861787) | more than 6 years ago | (#22332202)

Give me the location of the nuclear wessels!
No you're ferret!

Re:Is that a typo in the subject? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22332036)

I, for one, welcome our new fatigue-inducing licences.

Canada Americans (0, Troll)

madcitymin (1203364) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331322)

So would those BC residents become americans when they receive this card?
First Post

Re:Canada Americans (2, Funny)

Grendel70 (1000350) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331472)

So would those BC residents become americans when they receive this card?
Why do you think they're wary?

Won't fly. (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22331336)

Brits have resisted ID cards for over 4 decades.

The American RealID will collapse due to the lack of state support (14 refuse to implement, numerous states refuse to fund, not to mention the inevitable protests).

The Chinese have ID cards, and they also have execution vans roaming the countryside acting as judge, jury and executioner, handing out justice at needlepoint.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-06-14-death-van_x.htm [usatoday.com]

What they don't tell you is china also pulls organs from the bodies.

The Canuk's won't accept an ID card. They have just as many guns and ammo as the US does and they really don't like being screwed with.

Re:Won't fly. (5, Insightful)

kaos07 (1113443) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331612)

Sure the Chinese have ID cards and sure they execute people. I'm not for any form of ID card, but it seems as though you're insinuating that they're somehow connected, and that's a fairly stupid link.

ID Cards != Execution by lethal injection

Re:Won't fly. (2, Insightful)

AndGodSed (968378) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331666)

Agreed. The Chinese execute people as well as the North Koreans. It depends on the reason behind the issue of the ID card -> if it is a means of controlling the populace a'la Communism = bad idea. If it is a means of keeping track of your population i.e. paranoid US governmant = Bad idea depending on who you talk to. If it is a more efficient means of doing what normal ID docs have done for years = Bad idea depending on who you talk to...

No connection to mass executions...

Re:Won't fly. (3, Insightful)

zazzel (98233) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331648)

Germany has ID cards, too. You don't see any people being executed here, though.

Honestly, an ID card *per se* is not a scary thing. The scary thing is the collective databases your government or companies(*) create, and the tracking of phone records, movements (through ID cards, EC/credit cards, ...).

My government (Germany) introduced biometric information into passports through the EU backdoor, when the first attempt failed on a federal level. THAT's scary! The former Secretary of the Interior pulled that trick on us.

(*) Yes, they WILL make the data available to the government, is "asked" to.

Re:Won't fly. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22331964)

"You don't see any people being executed here, though."

That's because it's passé in Germany.

Re:Won't fly. (2, Funny)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#22332000)

"My government (Germany) introduced biometric information into passports through the EU backdoor"

Eww. Why were they keeping their passports in there anyway?

Re:Won't fly. (4, Informative)

Vectronic (1221470) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331738)

"The Canuk's won't accept an ID card. They have just as many guns and ammo as the US does and they really don't like being screwed with."

Canuck*

But I dont think we (im Canadian) would be very wise to use guns to express our anger towards this identitfication card, considering thats part of the reason why its trying to be implimented, because aparently us crazy Canadians are ever so fond of sending terrorists to your country. :|

http://www.johnvandongen.com/ [johnvandongen.com]

"He sat on the Select Standing Committees on Agriculture and Fisheries and on Crown Corporations, as well as the Official Opposition Caucus Committee on Children."

"Before his election to the Legislative Assembly, John operated a dairy farm in Abbotsford."

First of all, I have NO idea what the "Caucus Committee on Children" is, and the only references to it that I can find only come back to various biographies of John Van Dongen... but considering he used to heard cattle, and is involved with some comittee of children? now he wants to heard adults? I digress.

As much as I'd like to believe that this ID Card wont "make it", that we will wake up, and finally realize whats going on...im sure it will eventually, even though most Canadians avoid entering US Soil now, even though our dollars are nearly par, simply because we know its going to be a hassle, and most of us are more aware of the Patriot Act(s) than Americans are... it wont be long before we have a National ID (as apposed to the Provincial that exists now), then a Continental ID card, (North American Union) because "its so much easier", it wont be long before its on the news and daytime TV...

"it used to take me 20 minutes to cross the border, having to dig up all my papers and such, but with this new ID Card it was a snap, was as quick as buying my groceries through the self-check-out isle, its great!"

Re:Won't fly. (3, Insightful)

root_42 (103434) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331746)

The Chinese have ID cards, and they also have execution vans roaming the countryside acting as judge, jury and executioner, handing out justice at needlepoint.

What on earth is this supposed to imply? That id-cards boost unjust trials? You cannot be hinting at the ethical problems connected with capital punishments, since the US uses capital punishment, too. Counterexample: In Germany we have had id-cards since after the war. We abolished capital punishment in 1951 and have a working juridicial system that adheres to the rule of law. So maybe the US should also look at positive examples of countries having id-cards. Your comment was simply polemic.

Looks more like a death Bus. (1)

agent (7471) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331836)

The "criminal" has a way better sense of style than the nerdy police.

Re:Looks more like a death Bus. (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#22332010)

Where do the mercenaries (A-Team!!) fit in?

Re:Won't fly. (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331866)

The whole point of the ID cards is so that we wouldn't have to use our passports to cross the US border. If the US wasn't so keen on beefing up border security, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Personally, I don't see the need. If you want to travel to another country, just use your passport. It's not that hard to obtain one.

Re:Won't fly. (2, Insightful)

driftingwalrus (203255) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331928)

Ho ho! It is to laugh! Have you tried getting a passport lately? The wait is on the order of six months. It's an enormous pain in the neck for something that in no way improves security at border crossings.

A note to the Department of Homeland Security: Terrorists can get passports too.

Re:Won't fly. (2, Funny)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#22332020)

"A note to the Department of Homeland Security: Terrorists can get passports too."

Yeah, but then they have 6 months to consider the error of their ways! Well, if they're Americans going to another country to commit terrification.

Re:Won't fly. (3, Insightful)

rudy_wayne (414635) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331934)

"The American RealID will collapse due to the lack of state support (14 refuse to implement, numerous states refuse to fund, not to mention the inevitable protests)."

What's funny and ironic about this is that the U.S. has had a National ID card for several decades. It's called a Social Security card. Just try to do something -- get a credit card, borrow money (any amount, any reason), get any form of insurance, get a job, get a driver's license -- without giving them your Social Security Number. In most cases it's impossible.

Re:Won't fly. (1)

driftingwalrus (203255) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331960)

The big difference here, of course, is that the social security card is made of paper and very few americans carry them on their person. RealID would be super-duper-sci-fi-foolproof(meaning only moderately more difficult to forge), and people would have to carry it.

Re:Won't fly. (2, Informative)

teh kurisu (701097) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331988)

Belgium has compulsory national ID cards, but no death penalty in conformance with the European Convention on Human Rights.

I hope that refutes whatever it was you were trying to prove.

That's how these things happen. (5, Insightful)

tygerstripes (832644) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331366)

If a government wants to introduce something like this against opposition, they simply have to make it non-compulsory but inconvenient NOT to adopt the measure.

You can get about without a passport or driving license, you can purchase goods without using your SmartCard - but why make life so difficult for yourself when, with just a couple of concessionary biometric measures, you can take the easy path?

There's never any need to convince the masses that something is a good idea; just convince the individual that it's not worth fighting.

Am I preaching? Hell no. When these things get introduced in the UK I'll grumble like hell and offer my vocal support to anyone who opposes the new identity scheme (whatever guise it eventually takes), but at the end of the day...

Re:That's how these things happen. (1)

im just cannonfodder (1089055) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331644)

people are already fighting this in the uk

http://www.boingboing.net/2008/01/29/leaked-uk-govt-doc-r.html [boingboing.net]

FTA: Leaked UK gov't doc reveals plan to "coerce" Brits into national ID register -- Posted by Cory Doctorow, January 29, 2008 3:01 AM |
Phil from the UK anti-ID-register group NO2ID sends in this nugget -- note the call to action there. We've got a sensitive government document revealing the British government's plan to trick us into a database state and we need as many copies as possible, as quickly as possible!

If you mirror this document, please add a link to it in the comments for the post.

UK campaigners NO2ID this morning enlisted the help of bloggers across the world to spread a leaked government document describing how the British government intends to go about "coercing" its citizens onto a National Identity Register. The 'ID card' is revealed as little more than a cover to create a official dossier and trackable ID for every UK resident - creating what NO2ID calls 'the database state'.

NO2ID's national coordinator, Phil Booth, exhorted bloggers, freedom lovers and anyone who gives a damn about personal privacy to mirror the annotated document on their site.

"The charade is over. While ministers try to bamboozle the British public with fairytales about fingerprints, officials are plotting how to dupe and bully the population into surrendering control of their own identities."

"Biometric ID cards are a sham; a magician's flourish to cover the biggest identity fraud there has ever been."

1.2MB PDF Link can be found here >>> http://craphound.com/NIS_Options_Analysis_Outcome.pdf [craphound.com] (mirror this file!)

so take action against fascist id cards.

Re:That's how these things happen. (1)

nicklott (533496) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331702)

There's never any need to convince the masses that something is a good idea; just convince the individual that it's not worth fighting.
You're right in principle, but in practice the UK government is not doing that: £293 per person?! [no2id.net] I think that will go a long way to convincing most people that it's worth fighting.

When these things get introduced in the UK I'll grumble like hell
Maybe that's all you'll do, but if they introduce ID cards here I for one will be out on the streets, as will at least one leader of a major political party [guardian.co.uk] .

RFID is NOT secure! (5, Insightful)

Nemilar (173603) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331376)

The article says that these are basically standard licenses, but they include RFID chips.

Is anyone else worried about all these RFID chips that companies and government seem to love putting everywhere? Credit cards? Products? Licenses?

They do realize that RFID is not secure, right? And that anyone with a few bucks can buy or build an RFID reader and cloner? So basically, the validity of your RFID scan is zero. Anyone who can counterfeit a license today will be able to counterfeit a license tomorrow, as long as they do a little research and invest in some extra equipment. It's a business - those who can't (or don't) adapt will die out, and those who do adapt to to the new market will succeed. But it will not be going away any time soon. RFID does not make anything more secure.

Re:RFID is NOT secure! (1)

sayfawa (1099071) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331670)

Not that this totally solves the problem, but there are things like this. [rfid-shield.com]

Re:RFID is NOT secure! (4, Informative)

jimboindeutchland (1125659) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331756)

It really depends on what you mean by 'secure'.

I used to work for a company that used RF smart cards as one of their core technologies and you'd be surprised how secure they can be.

Without going into too much detail, these cards hold a cpu with a bit of memory (up to 1mb last I heard) that require a challenge response type handshake before you can communicate with them. If you don't have the correct card keys on your reader, you can't access the card. And I really mean you CAN'T read it.

An example of this is when we tested 'rolling' the keys on the cards.

You can change the keys on the cards and the readers. This is done in a scenario where the organization may be worried that a bad person might have their card/reader keys. It's a bit tricky and quite involved really, which is why organisations may choose not to roll keys or use keys at all.

We managed to waste a few batches of cards with buggy software that put unexpected keys on the cards. Since we didn't know what keys were on the cards we couldn't read them and you can't really go guessing 1024 byte keys.

Anyway my point is that these cards ARE secure. It's just that some implementations aren't.

Re:RFID is NOT secure! (3, Informative)

supersat (639745) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331818)

Yes, RFID cards can be fairly secure, but Homeland Security is mandating EPC Gen2 Class 1 tags in these cards (at least here in Washington). What's wonderful about these tags are that they have ZERO security (besides a 32-bit kill and write password) AND they are designed to be read from a long distance. Gen2 is absolutely the wrong choice for this application. ISO 14443 (which is used by passports and credit cards) makes a hell of a lot more sense since that protocol is designed to be a close-range, contact smartcard replacement.

Re:RFID is NOT secure! (1)

driftingwalrus (203255) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331948)

This makes me wonder - how long would it take to brute-force said kill and write passwords? 32 bits isn't that many. You may be able to sneak a rig into a movie theatre and use it to brute-force a few of the passwords, then nuke the ID number. It would make for a pretty entertaining prank.

Instead of an "alternative to a passport" (3, Insightful)

giafly (926567) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331386)

... just use a passport. I'm surprised the government hasn't thought of this.

Re:Instead of an "alternative to a passport" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22331516)

"I'm surprised the government hasn't thought..."

Ah. It's clearer there.

Re:Instead of an "alternative to a passport" (1)

Vectronic (1221470) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331816)

You already can "for now"... but they are phasing it out, atleast thats what I would assume considering there isnt any other reason to start bringing new Identity cards into play.

"The Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI) will require all travelers to and from the Americas, the Caribbean, and Bermuda to have a passport or other accepted document that establishes the bearers identity and nationality to enter or re-enter the United States."

Im not sure how many of you have ever crossed the border into/from the US, but the procedure all depends on who the border guard is, and what his mood might be, it can vary anywhere from showing an ID (Passport, drivers license, birth certificate), and simply stating your reason for entering the US... other times, they might require ALL THREE of those identification cards, along with maybe another random document with your name on it (sort of the same as trying to cash a $10,000 bill in a Bank), or you'l have to pull your car to the side, sit in their little room while they look in their Google database or whatever, which generally takes atleast 10 minutes, up to a few hours at times...

Thats what will make people adopt some RFID chipped card in a hurry, especially those that cross the border daily for work... "oh Sally dont be silly, its just a card, and it makes it to quick"

Re:Instead of an "alternative to a passport" (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#22332058)

sit in their little room while they look in their Google database or whatever
No, no, no! It's not their Google database, it's their MySpace database. Anyone can insert their page into the Google database these days, but it takes an American to hack their page onto MySpace - it's a tricky proposition.

Re:Instead of an "alternative to a passport" (1)

PsychoSlashDot (207849) | more than 6 years ago | (#22332198)

I'm Canadian. Thing is... in my opinion getting a passport is a pain. I get it that it's supposed to be difficult for those who aren't entitled to have one to get one, but the process really doesn't support that. I evidently have to go get a specific-sized picture taken, then I have to get someone who's an accountant/pastor/judge/teacher or OTHER PASSPORT HOLDER to sign the back of the photo. Then I fill out a form, get that same someone who signed the photo to put his/her address on it. Finally, I mail all this crap physically to the government along with my existing ID (birth certificate). After some period of time passes, they'll send it all back to me with a passport.

I don't want to be without my ID for a month. Anyone who can get their hands on existing basic ID can manage this process, which ultimately means that existing ID is as good as a passport.

I want a local office I can visit in person, take my photo, state my information, show my ID, and leave. A couple weeks later I should be able to go back and pick up my passport. Or get detained for fraud.

I live in a major border city. There's huge incentive to cross the border casually for reasons like a} concerts/entertainment, b} access to a major airport, c} shopping. I can't be bothered with the current process of obtaining a passport.

Re:Instead of an "alternative to a passport" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22332204)

Canadian passport expiration is only up to 5 years and they cost each time you updates. ID cards should be "cheaper" as they should be available "for free" as they already comes out of your tax dollars pocket.

Wary, not weary (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22331388)

"Weary" sounds like the Canadians have had these things for ages, and are sick of them.
"Wary" means they're distrustful of them, and don't want them to come in.

The linked article certainly uses "wary" so I assume that's what the /. headline should be too.

Re:Wary, not weary (1)

stupidflanders (1230894) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331700)

No, you see, because the cards are oh so very heavy. Perhaps the licenses are made of Osmium [wikipedia.org] . That would be convenient, as you could use old drivers licenses to make a metal-hydride battery. Of course, you would need to keep your card in a fume hood. Hopefully the government will provide subsidies for those who cannot afford fume hoods.

Re:Wary, not weary (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22332180)

Now watch the editors... not edit.

Go ahead, mod as troll... but you know it's true.

So how long until global identity cards? (1)

CrazyJim1 (809850) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331402)

And will astronauts need to show theirs at NASA before they allow them off the globe?

Re:So how long until global identity cards? (4, Funny)

Remusti (1131423) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331456)

No, but they will need them to get back in.

Weary != Wary? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22331410)

Shouldn't headline be 'wary' as in 'suspicious of' and not 'weary' as in tired of?

Weary??? (0, Redundant)

lixee (863589) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331452)

Isn't it supposed to be spelled "wary"?

Bunch of pussies. (3, Funny)

Seumas (6865) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331462)

Stop crying you whiny Canadians! In America, we don't worry about such things, as long as we have sports heroes who make $50m/yr that we can still worship and our favorite sit-coms are still on the air and we can still teach our children that the world is 6,000 years old and we can still own machine guns for hunting elk!

Re:Bunch of pussies. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22331480)

So sad and true, brother. As long as we can watch Acording to Jim and monday night football and blow the crap out of animals with shotguns for sport, we're quite happy to disregard any privacy concerns in america. *sigh*

Re:Bunch of pussies. (1)

Jafafa Hots (580169) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331894)

"So sad and true, brother. As long as we can watch Acording to Jim and monday night football..."

Ha. Just shows how much YOU know about globalization, creeping fascism and politics. Monday Night Football doesn't even exist anymore.

Re:Bunch of pussies. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22331520)

Remember, we don't own machine guns so we can hunt, we own them so we can fight back against the government if necessary.

I'm not a gun nut. I don't own a gun, haven't shot a gun, and hope that I will never have to use a gun with the intent to hurt another. However, I support the right to own guns. The 2nd Amendment was put in place largely because the British tried to confiscate and hoard guns so the "rebels" couldn't fight back, and the founders didn't think that should happen again. The "I should be able to own an assault rifle for hunting" myth needs to be replaced with "I should be able to own an assault rifle in case the people decide to take back their country by overthrowing the government"... or something along those lines that sounds better.

Re:Bunch of pussies. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22331580)

Yeah, that would actually make sense, you know, if you also had the right to own guided missiles and tanks. I mean, what are you going to do with your assault rifle against those?

Re:Bunch of pussies. (3, Insightful)

gobbo (567674) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331766)

Yeah, that would actually make sense, you know, if you also had the right to own guided missiles and tanks. I mean, what are you going to do with your assault rifle against those?

You folks have a short memory... the Viet Cong kicked your asses using old rifles and discarded bean cans and a willingness to die. Read up on guerilla warfare sometime. BTW, a trillion dollars in Iraq and lots of missiles and tanks hasn't won it, either.

For that matter, Gandhi didn't use a single bullet, just serious nerve and (American) strategy.

Re:Bunch of pussies. (1)

alexgieg (948359) | more than 6 years ago | (#22332016)

Yeah, that would actually make sense, you know, if you also had the right to own guided missiles and tanks. I mean, what are you going to do with your assault rifle against those?
I'm not American so I haven't studied the American Constitution as much as an (interested) American would, and in consequence what I say here might be wrong, but from what I've read on a lot of websites dealing with this 2nd Amendment issue, the actual meaning of the text is that any citizen, including group of citizens, is constitutionally allowed to own the same weapons used by the military at any given time, because otherwise the right of overthrowing the government would be effectively void, nothing more than dead letter.

And yes, this means grenades, machine guns, guided missiles, tanks etc., up to and including thermonuclear bombs. The notion that individuals owning weapons of mass destruction is too much of a risk was not part of the ideas of the Founding Fathers.

Thus, any law forbidding you of owning these things, or even of forbidding you of carrying them wherever you want, is unconstitutional. What, sadly, doesn't mean much if no one is willing to fight for those rights to be upheld and stay valid.

Re:Bunch of pussies. (1)

ksheff (2406) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331804)

most firearm owners don't have machine guns either. If you want to make the effort to get a class III license from the BATF and follow their rules, you can own one though. But I doubt anyone seriously uses an assault rifle for hunting. A semi-auto look-a-like, sure...but a real selective fire assault rifle?

Re:Bunch of pussies. (2, Insightful)

the_womble (580291) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331636)

Bread and circuses, an very old principle.

Re:Bunch of pussies. (1)

stjobe (78285) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331732)

I misread that as "Bread and cruise missiles, a very old principle"...

Re:Bunch of pussies. (4, Funny)

scottv67 (731709) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331754)

as long as we have sports heroes who make $50m/yr

It looks like you are taking a shot at those "sports heroes" with the big salaries. But those athletes with $50M/year salaries are actually a good thing. What do nearly all sports heroes do with their salary? They spend it! Big-name athletes drive expensive cars, they live in huuuuuuge mansions, they eat in expensive restaurants, and they buy lots of "bling". Those expensive cars pay the salaries of the salespeople at the car dealership as well as the mechanics who change the oil. The huuuuge houses provide wages for carpenters, electricians, house keepers, etc. Every $500 dinner tab at a fancy-schmany restaurant pays the wages of wait-staff, cooks, etc. What better way to stimulate the economy and get money into the hands of people who work for a living than to give it to a pro athlete? When was the last time you heard a story about a pro athlete who had millions in the bank? It's very rare. Nearly all of them spend it as fast as it comes in (or faster).

Giving an athlete $50M/year is like giving hay and water to a cow. The cow doesn't hoard the hay and water in its body. After the cow ingests the hay and water, a number of "calves" can all take a turn at one of the teats. (How's *that* for a Slashdot analogy?)

Re:Bunch of pussies. (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331892)

And thanks to $50 Million salaries, it costs $150 for decent seats at the hockey game. The money to pay them is coming from regular joes anyway. Why not just let the regular joes keep their money?

Re:Bunch of pussies. (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#22332090)

He wasn't talking about the money going back to regular Joes, he was talking about it going to those who work in fancy restaurants and classy car dealerships. Take from the working class, feed it back into the upper class! Yay!! You could just save time and give me your money instead, I'll be upper class in no time!

Re:Bunch of pussies. (1)

pipatron (966506) | more than 6 years ago | (#22332220)

How's *that* for a Slashdot analogy?

Hm, I don't think I understand. How does all of this relate to a car?

Re:Bunch of pussies. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22331840)

Good job raging against the machine you dumb asshole.

rec.sport.pro-wrestling (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22331490)

news:rec.sport.pro-wrestling [rec.sport.pro-wrestling]

Why so afraid of a national ID card? (4, Insightful)

Confused (34234) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331566)

Could someone please explain to me, why Americans, Canadians, Brits and Australians are so afraid of a national ID card?

I live in continental Europe in a country where everyone is expected to be able to identify himself to the police at any time, in a country where there's a central voter register and if you move, you are expected to register yourself with the local town inside of 3 weeks. That sounds like the total police state, doesn't it?

Lets see how this works out in reality:

[b]Identify yourself[/b]: Usually any official document with picture is ok, in reality this means in most cases your driving license - issued nationally, your national ID card or your passport (which many people have anyway to get to the sea in summer). As most Americans have a driving license anyway, this wouldn't change a lot of things for a good part of the population. The issuers of the driving licenses might need do a little more work checking the identity to prevent issues to the wrong name or wrong dates - but this wouldn't affect the common people.

The benefit of having a national ID card on the other hand is, that there's only a small number of documents used commonly and if you have one, you are identified. No more 'Bring 3 types of ID' stuff. You have your driving license, your passport or your ID card, you are set. If those are good enough for the police, they are good enough for everyone else too (eg banks, insurances, airlines).

As those official documents are quite important, forging those, getting those in wrong names or otherwise messing with them is taken very, very seriously by law enforcement. You don't mess around with your driving license just to get some beer before you should (which wouldn't be a problem anyway, once you get a driving license you're also considered old enough to get alcohol), that would send you quite quickly to jail. This improves the general trust in those documents.

At the same time identity theft a lot less of a problem here. If you need to identify yourself, you show one of those documents and everyone is happy. Should, for instance, a bank teller have doubts about your documents, you'll just be invited for a coffee while the police quickly drops by to check your documents. If it clear, fine, if it doesn't you're in deep deep trouble. To try getting around with a fake identity, you immediately raise the stakes to the level of a federal crime, which in most cases isn't worth the risk to small time criminals.

[b]To the police:[/b] So yes, the police may ask you at any time to identify yourself. If not, they can put you in lock-up for some time (similar to the 24 hours available to the American police if one can trust crime shows) to check your identity. In day to day operation, is seems very similar no matter if there's a national ID card scheme or not. If the police doesn't like your face, they can give you a hard time.

For people without ID, there are some procedures to get identified, but those take time and effort. If you happen to be one of the unfortunates without ID, your ID got lost / stolen / whatever, you do it only once to get a temporary replacement before having the new ones issued.

[b]Central voter register:[/b] So wherever you live, you are forced to register yourself inside 3 weeks. This is done mainly for the voter register, to have an idea who can vote in what district, for the tax man and for the police who likes to have a total control over the citizens.

The voter register is a good thing, it makes fraud and manipulation at the time of elections a little harder - you ain't registered officially in the district, you ain't going to vote for it.

The tax man is unfortunately very unavoidable. No matter if there's a national ID card or not, Mr. Tax man will own you and your data - in Soviet Russia and everywhere else too.

The police might have it a little easier to start up to indulge in their totalitarian police state fantasies if they have a national ID card. But if they don't they just dig into the data of Mr. Tax man, driving license registry or build their database of know contacts. For most people there's no perceivable difference.

[b]register yourself:[/b] That's an annoying chore you have to do if you move, although it's becoming quite quick and is often done by the landlord if you rent a flat. Not complying here fast enough / well enough isn't usually taken too seriously, you might get a slap on your fingers if you forget it. At the end of the year, Mr. Tax man will get you anyway.

To sum it up, for people living in a country with national ID cards there aren't really any inconveniences, just a few benefits, the biggest being the reduction of identity theft. Whatever bad you can imagine about the card, rest assured, is already happening without it. The IRS, Social Security and DMV knows more about you than the National ID registry ever will. So why eschew the benefits if you already have all inconveniences?

National ID Register (3, Insightful)

Cheesey (70139) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331618)

Because the ID card act is really about creating a centralised government database that stores all information about you in one place. Not just personal information either - this would be every electronic record that exists about you, like what you buy and where you travel. Some people think this would be overly intrusive, that it would give too much power to the authorities, and that the data might be stolen or lost. (You might remember some recent news stories about government data being lost: this happens quite often.)

However, most people do not understand about the database and do not care about the ID cards, so people who think it's a good idea are in luck. I guess we will see the consequences in twenty years time.

Re:National ID Register (4, Insightful)

rxmd (205533) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331660)

Because the ID card act is really about creating a centralised government database that stores all information about you in one place. Not just personal information either - this would be every electronic record that exists about you, like what you buy and where you travel.

You guys are confusing "creating a database" with "creating a primary key".

Let's for the sake of the argument assume that the tinfoil hat crowd is right and that the big spidery evil government works as they think it does. If the governments wants to create the database, but doesn't get the ID through legislation, they will create the database anyway and just use some other key, and live with the inconvenience of an occasional duplicate record or even exploit them, e.g. for creating extra voters. Whether the government collects data on everything you buy and everywhere you travel is completely independent of whether there is a national ID.

Re:National ID Register (3, Insightful)

Cheesey (70139) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331736)

You are right, but it could be argued that a single primary key into a number of connected databases is the same as a single database. The anti-ID people like to talk about "the database" because that makes the issue easier to understand.

The problem with current government databases is that they need cleaning up. There are lots of duplicate or inaccurate records, even though supposedly unique keys already exist (e.g. social security numbers, passport numbers). The ID cards act in the UK is at least partly about setting up a framework to reduce that problem: the plan is to interview passport applicants and record their biometrics before assigning them their unique NIR number. The civil service hopes that this will clean up the data, making the database more useful for whatever purposes they have in mind. This process is not cheap, so the ID cards act provides the funding and the "popular mandate" required to go ahead with it. It is hard to see how the data could be cleaned up in any other way. However, some would say that the project is unnecessary, that the £20bn would be better spent elsewhere, and that the eventual goals of the project are questionable.

Re:Why so afraid of a national ID card? (4, Interesting)

Ihlosi (895663) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331638)

I live in continental Europe in a country where everyone is expected to be able to identify himself to the police at any time, in a country where there's a central voter register and if you move, you are expected to register yourself with the local town inside of 3 weeks. That sounds like the total police state, doesn't it?



The funny thing is: Here in Europe we have ID cards, but we're very rarely asked to present them (I've had to show mine last time to get the birth certificate for my daughter). However, in the countries that seem so proud of not having national ID cards, everyone and their dog wants my ID for all kinds of crap (I'm 30+ years old and still they want to see my ID if I'm buying alcohol. And they wanted to see it when I was accompanying my wife to the federal building where she had to take care of some paperwork. ID necessary to enter what's essentially an office complex, WTF guys ??), forcing me to carry my passport around everywhere I go (which is _very_ annoying as it doesn't fit in a wallet and there's going to be major hassles if it ever gets lost or stolen).

I call BULLSHIT (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22331860)

In the course of the past month I have given my passport or my French national ID card to get (1) a bank account, (2) electricity, (3) phone/internet/cable, and (4) my apartment. NONE of those have I had to present ID for in the US.

I know I'm generalizing from my own experiences, but Europe seems to be far more classist, mistrustful, and controlling than my previous stays in the US.

Re:Why so afraid of a national ID card? (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331642)

Could someone please explain to me, why Americans, Canadians, Brits and Australians are so afraid of a national ID card?

Because of what it could be used for. What ever happened to all those Jews who used to live on the continent anyway? I know that a lot of them moved to America, Canada, Britain and Australia but they don't seem to have that many relatives back home these days.

Re:Why so afraid of a national ID card? (2, Insightful)

rxmd (205533) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331698)

Because of what it could be used for. What ever happened to all those Jews who used to live on the continent anyway?
The majority of the Jews killed during the war lived in Eastern Europe and were killed after the conquest by the German Army, which basically just marched in and carted everybody off. Not having an ID card didn't save a lot of lives.

This is a straw man argument, and a particularly disgusting one.

I know that a lot of them moved to America, Canada, Britain and Australia
Those that fit into the quota systems installed by those countries anyway. (I don't know about Australia.)

You can look, for example, at the voyage of the St. Louis, which in 1939 carried 936 Jewish refugees to Cuba, the USA and Canada, where they were refused entry, and then back to Europe. Britain acceppted 288 passengers, the others went to France, Belgium and Holland, which didn't help them a lot. [wikipedia.org]

Re:Why so afraid of a national ID card? (1)

pairo (519657) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331822)

Actually, even if his example is wrong, there is a case where IDs were quite harmful. See the Rwandan Genocide [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Why so afraid of a national ID card? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22331706)

What the hell does that have to do with ID cards?

Re:Why so afraid of a national ID card? (3, Insightful)

synx (29979) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331668)

Except that we are not living in continental Europe and we don't expect to give our ID for "any reason whatsoever".

Lets talk about what Europe does to the gypsies. ID schemes are a form of social control. They require people to do things " a certain way" and live their lives precisely and exactly according to rules.

Now the situation in this particular article is exactly who gets access to the database, and the whole 10m tracking thing. The biggest problem is one of "mission creep". So if someone can read your ID without you knowing, then anyone could, say a grocery store. Or any institution. Or any individual. What happens if I set up a system where i can tell people near me that they've been near me before. I think they'd get pretty creeped out by that. A great way to stalk someone let me tell you.

Just because you think ID cards are working out "great" for you, doesn't mean that (a) they are actually working out great and (b) they'd work out "great" here too. The inconviences are not daily, but in the aggregate, all for what benefits?

- Claimed reduction in "identity theft"
  - this problem is uniquely american for 2 reasons that are solvable without ID cards:
          - Treating the SSN as a secret that only 1 person knows. Easy to solve.
          - Credit card companies are deliberately slack about security. No online pin transactions, no signature verification, etc.
- Identifying yourself is easier.
    - This is not a real problem people have in their day to day lives. For most people their existing driver's license (or state ID) is sufficient, it has a picture and a signature. Done. Unlike Europeans, American and Canadians don't cross borders often. Being required to extra prove your identity is something that hardly ever happens.

So to summarize: Streamlining bank sign up processes and fixing bank/credit card company problems for them by giving yourself a easy to track ID doesn't seem like a very good trade off to me.

Last but not least, I think you are forgetting these IDs are readable at a LONG DISTANCE. You could drive past people and read their IDs. With some data collection, GPS system and mining you can construct a name -> ID number mapping that in theory only the police should have.

Re:Why so afraid of a national ID card? (2, Insightful)

Confused (34234) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331862)

> Except that we are not living in continental Europe and we don't expect to give our ID for "any reason whatsoever".

Yes, that's exactly the strange part. You give the your ID all the time, you have things nearly as good as a national ID (Driving license?), you are already registered in many Big Brother Databases (Income tax? Mobile phone records? Social Security?) and with all this the "I don't have to ID myself"-myth goes on.

>Last but not least, I think you are forgetting these IDs are readable at a LONG DISTANCE.

That's all? There a easy, cheap, low tech solution to that problem, just get a carrying case with a little meta. It might even be enough if you cut you a beer can twice the size of a credit card fold it around your card.

As to the general discussion about private data, although I personally hate it, I have to agree with David Brin, the times of privacy are over. Get used to it and adapt to it. The future doesn't lie in protecting the data, but to poison the data pool as a possible to reduce its reliability and make the access to data as fair as possible. As an example, the best way to get rid of the TSA No fly list would be to put half of the lawyers in America on it. I bet, inside a week, being on the no-fly list won't even delay your check in any more.

Re:Why so afraid of a national ID card? (2, Interesting)

gobbo (567674) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331714)

Could someone please explain to me, why ... Canadians ... are so afraid of a national ID card?

Here in BC, the provincial government subcontracted out some of the management of our provincial health care records to a subsidiary of an American company. This means that we essentially lose sovereignty over those records, through any quasi-totalitarian homeland security intelligence bungle the Americans want to cook up. It is an end-run (intentional or not) around our political protections and sovereign rights.

If you know many Canucks, you'll know that a certain significant percentage of us are touchy about our sovereignty, and not just the sovereignty of Quebec from Canada or of the First Nations from the Queen... but from the USA. We resent being told how to run our country, and while we lap up the American media, we don't want to be told what wars to fight or laws to have or what is moral (Alberta excepted, of course). We look for all the little ways to differentiate us from the USA... lately, one of the differences is that it looks to be turning paranoid and oppressive down there. We keep reading stories about people having to 'show their papers' and being turned away from planes and such.

Many people will take these cards and run, because they have to cross the border weekly or more, and it will be the thin edge of the wedge. But there will be a stubborn battle over them. We aren't always as polite and apathetic as the stereotype.

Don't trust in Government (2, Insightful)

Shivetya (243324) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331718)

If you read the US Constitution, that nice document the current US government ignores, you will see the seeds of government distrust in the US. Simply put, the Founding Fathers knew that governments become corrupt and they sought to head it off at the start, the Constitution defines the rights the people give to government, not what government gives to the people. It puts strict limits on how the government can act. The states were to be powerful entities in their own right.

Unfortunately our courts were supposed to protect us from the government making laws unconstitutional but they failed. Instead being government cronies themselves they let the government run the public and states over. Combined with the public being given the ability to vote for Senators and states lost their ability to oppose the government.

Doesn't mean the people gave in. While many are just fine and dandy with taking government handouts they don't want them in their house. A national id is like inviting them in. Once their in they will suddenly show up for dinner telling you what you can eat, telling you what you can watch or listen too, let alone eventually telling you what doctor your allowed to see.

We give up too much of our freedom already. We do not need a National ID card to prevent erroneous entry on documents we fill out during our days. We certainly don't need a one size fits all easy to create fradulent versions to further identity theft.

Re:Don't trust in Government (1)

pairo (519657) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331792)

Heh. It's nice how you started off well, but at one point, jumped from national ID card to the Government controlling every single aspect of your life, without actually explaining why that would be so bad.

Re:Why so afraid of a national ID card? (3, Informative)

Drall (1006725) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331742)

In the British case, what you're describing doesn't even come close to the level of personal information that the government wants stored on the card and in the national database associated with it.

You're describing a simple piece of identification. The British plans are to store or link 50+ categories of information to the ID, cross-reference these and store them all centrally. Slap on a legal requirement to notify the government of any change in these 50+ piece of information. Add to that that not just government, but also the private sector will have access to the database (vastly multiplying the possibilities security lapses).
Given their recently demonstrated skill at misplacing and misdirecting people's confidential information, I'd just as soon not have to carry a card that can be used to recreate an audit trail of every time I've been in contact with any facet of government, ever.

To compare with a couple of European examples, in Germany centralisation of storage is illegal (for historical reasons), and when you replace a card, previous records aren't linked into it. In Belgium, storage is again at the local level and there is no cross-referencing.

Basically the British ID plans operate on a far vaster and more pervasive scale than the few examples you've tried to compare them to.

Re:Why so afraid of a national ID card? (2, Insightful)

gsslay (807818) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331900)

The problem is not the card, but the database that lies behind it.

Old style European ID schemes simply don't have this to the same degree, nor is there any attempt to cross reference the contents of these database with other repositories of information. The danger is that the ability to tie this information together can and will be abused, not just by the government but by any of the organisations who suddenly make it compulsory for you to share your ID with them before they will have anything to do with you.

The idea that your bank can cross reference your financial details with your medical details, just on a whim, without your knowledge or consent, should worry you. Supporters of the schemes say this sort of thing would be illegal, but experience tells us that they will happen, simply because its easy and possible.

And then there's all the problems that could occur should the data be inaccurate, or corrupted through identity fraud. Identity theft is easier with ID cards. All the criminal has to do is forge your card and they become you, gaining the benefits of all your data in the ID database, and all the data it can be cross referenced with. It's the ultimate "all eggs in one basket" scenario. Conversely; you either become a criminal, (because you and your ID in the database is one and the same thing as far as officials are concerned), or you become no-one. Wave good-bye to all your rights as a citizen, you don't own them, your "identity" owns them and you no longer own your "identity".

Simply put; the ID cards and database will become a very powerful resource and beneficial to everyone, except the individuals themselves. Only governments and institutions who like a neat and convenient handle to pull you about with have anything to gain from it. The scope for its misuse is massive.

Re:Why so afraid of a national ID card? (5, Insightful)

twakar (128390) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331924)

Could someone please explain to me, why Americans, Canadians, Brits and Australians are so afraid of a national ID card?
I'll tell you I'm afraid of this type of thing/attitude, from a Canadian perspective anyways.

For me, it doesn't come from fear or mistrust. It's simply a matter of freedom. The freedom to go about my daily life without having to explain my intentions or actions, or to prove that I'm allowed to be wherever I happen to be. Freedom of mobility is guaranteed under the Canadian Constitution.

I also happen to enjoy the freedom from arbitrary questioning/interrogation. The freedom from being monitored, from having my movements/purchases/actions tracked, perhaps to be used against me by someone in government I may have pissed off at some point in my life.

If I'm under arrest for suspicion of whatever, then fine. Under the current system I'll have my day in court. And up until now, I still trust my legal system (for the most part). Under a 'papers please' society, I wouldn't trust any member of law enforcement or the judiciary, I would be living in fear. Please try and remember that a government is supposed to be in place to serve the citizenry, not to monitor/track/control. People who through a trusted system of due process are deemed criminal should be monitored, but a free citizen should be under no such magnifying glass.

I truly fear the day that the freedoms I enjoy now, that my forefathers gave their lives for, will be a distant memory, that can only be discussed via 'approved' texts.

Even as a Canadian, I'm scared to go to the U.S. for what's it's become. I fear that 1 wrong move, or being in the wrong place at the wrong time could land me in world of pain or trouble.

Again, the reason I don't want any sort of national ID card is that I simply enjoy my freedom too much, and I will fight to the death to keep it.

P.S. although not perfect, I do feel that for the most part, at this moment I do live in the freest (sp?) country in the world

Re:Why so afraid of a national ID card? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22332154)

The parent asks "Could someone please explain to me, why Americans, Canadians, Brits and Australians are so afraid of a national ID card?"

The short answer is, "Because we won the war."

Re:Why so afraid of a national ID card? (3, Insightful)

Pig Hogger (10379) | more than 6 years ago | (#22332158)

Could someone please explain to me, why Americans, Canadians, Brits and Australians are so afraid of a national ID card?

...This is done mainly for the voter register, to have an idea who can vote in what district, for the tax man and for the police who likes to have a total control over the citizens.

You identified the problem. We don't like the police to have a total control over us.

Re:Why so afraid of a national ID card? (1)

The_reformant (777653) | more than 6 years ago | (#22332166)

he benefit of having a national ID card on the other hand is, that there's only a small number of documents used commonly and if you have one, you are identified. No more 'Bring 3 types of ID' stuff. You have your driving license, your passport or your ID card, you are set. If those are good enough for the police, they are good enough for everyone else too (eg banks, insurances, airlines).
Most things require proof of ID and 2 forms of proof of address.

Non-driver = Non-citizen (1, Insightful)

gsslay (807818) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331582)

I know drivers' licences are a very popular route for governments to introduce national ID schemes. Put pity the poor citizen who can't/doesn't drive. Will the end result of these be non-drivers effectively becoming non-citizens?

Re:Non-driver = Non-citizen (1)

jibjibjib (889679) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331640)

I agree that this is a problem. I know someone who can't get a driver's license because of a disability, and he already has problems identifying himself to incredibly stupid organisations who seem to forget that not everyone in the country can drive.

Incidentally, a real national ID card would completely solve this problem.

Re:Non-driver = Non-citizen (1)

CrazyJim1 (809850) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331676)

Interesting. My state has a program where you can get an ID card if you don't drive. I just assumed they all did. My political website www.voteandnews.com was going to use drivers licences to determine if you are old enough to vote. I think that is a bad idea. Anyone have an idea of what I should use if I want to register people to have one login to one unique voter?

Re:Non-driver = Non-citizen (3, Informative)

synx (29979) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331748)

The problem is already solved. DMVs also issue "state ID" which is valid for all purposes that a drivers license is used for.

A national ID doesn't solve any particular problem people have on a day to day basis.

I can tell you what a national ID will make worse: identity theft. Oh but wait you say - a national ID is highly verified and impossible to duplicate or forge. Never say never - a national ID will have forgeries. Except since everyone "knows" that a ID is not forgeable, those who will be the unfortunate victim of identity thefts won't be able to get off the hook.

A similar situation has happened recently. Newer model cars with immobilizers are "unstealable" - until they are not. There is a good Wired article about this:

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.08/carkey.html [wired.com]

a choice quote:

"Since you reportedly can account for all the vehicle keys, the forensic information suggests that the loss did not occur as reported," the company wrote to Wassef, denying his claim. The barely hidden subtext: Wassef was lying."

Now imagine instead of cars we're talking about your identity. If your ID is not forgeable, then anything done with your ID tagged to it is clearly done by you. Now imagine these RFID IDs are in fact trivial to clone with the right equipment... now what?

In the end, what problem are we solving? I keep on hearing in the US the Real ID solves the issue of multiple drivers licenses from multiple states. But if that hole was plugged would it prevent terrorism? Probably not I'm thinking. Then what problem would it really help with? Tracking down and punishing people for trivial crimes will end up being the #1 application of these things.

Re:Non-driver = Non-citizen (1)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331932)

Incidentally, a real national ID card would completely solve this problem.

      Not only that but nowadays there really is no excuse to not have ONE and ONLY one document that identifies you. Different agencies can use the same document to determine if you are licensed or not (via a flag in a database), and any other relevant information (blood type, known medical conditions, criminal record, credit history, etc). Then it's just a case of controlling who has access to which database. Your doctor doesn't need to know your criminal record or driver's license type, and your police officer doesn't need to know your blood type, etc.

      Of course there's a huge potential for abuse. But there's abuse today anyway. Ask anyone who has had their identity stolen. Introducing YET ANOTHER document and YET ANOTHER branch of government to oversee this document is stupid. The system should be made more efficient, not LESS efficient. But I forget - bureaucracy's main goal is always to create more bureaucracy...

Meanwhile in Europe... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22331590)

All passports, drivers licenses and identity cards have been harmonized to one standard coming from dozens and dozens of different ones. And we're proud of it. We may still speak many different languages, we have common goals.

1984 (1)

justleavealonemmmkay (1207142) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331722)

Boohoo, there's a piece of paper telling who I am and where I live! I'm being repressed! Come and see the violence inherent in the system!

Something I missed? (1)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331870)

"Enhanced drivers licenses such as those to be issued in B.C. will lay the groundwork for a national identity card"... She characterized that program as a way of introducing a "type of national identity card" for Americans."


      I'm sorry, but when did the US annex British Columbia?

      OK, I will admit that as a Canadian I have insisted over the years that Canadians are part of America too (as are Mexicans and all residents of Central and South America), the word "America" to describe just the United States is not appropriate, and that "Americans" should get their own damned name for their nationality. However I don't think the summary is trying to make that specific point.

It's almost as if (1)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 6 years ago | (#22331930)

The "leaders" of the free world have been given instructions to implement ID cards by... 2020 or so.

 

FAILZORS?! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22332040)

Driver's Licenses as National IDs (1)

Chess_the_cat (653159) | more than 6 years ago | (#22332196)

Luckily, I don't drive.

Never trust "enhanced" (1)

Stiletto (12066) | more than 6 years ago | (#22332230)

Never, ever, trust the word "enhanced."

This word is used whenever the person selling you something that he claims in better in some nebulous way that he can't quite describe in detail. The speaker is almost certainly hiding the fact that either 1. there is nothing actually better about the "enhanced" thing, or 2. the "enhanced" thing is actually worse in some way.

The next time someone tells you something is "enhanced" ask him exactly HOW it's better. Details!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?