Yeah. Ever see the movie "Gataca"?
Posted on 01/01/2002 9:13:35 AM PST by Jhoffa_
I am sorry, I only got this far before bursting out laughing..
LOL! William Jefferson Clinton.. $775.00 for 'services rendered'
If it contains "No personal identifying information" It is worthless..
And the goal will be to include "personal identifying information"
We have seen these schemes before.. Go fix SS and Weapons Background Checks.. THEN, we will talk.
Yeah. Ever see the movie "Gataca"?
You don't actually believe that a non-id database would actually get set up, do you? And the ATF isn't supposed to be making a list of gun owners either, but it is.
There's no way in the world that a system like this would ever be implemented. Remember, National ID is being pushed by big government types, not privacy advocates and libertarians. Having personal identifying information is the whole point of it.
William Jefferson Clinton.. $775.00 for 'services rendered'
If the regular law abiding customers knew the true colors of the parasitical elite many would refuse to shop at a store that sells to politicians and bureaucrats. Thus the store owner has a choice; charge the parasite way more than regular customers or kick them out of their store. Most store owners would rather kick them out of the store than take a politician's blood money.
Do you think the ostracism database and politician/bureaucrat ID would clean up government waste and abuse in a hurry?
I'm not quite that pessimistic. I think you might be overestimated the power and competence of the government (or whoever's really running things). Remember, all of their plans have holes in them, and the more complex the technology the more often it malfunctions. "They" may want to impose a global fascist new world order, but I don't see it succeeding. For every totalitarian measure, there's a countermeasure. For example, a highly centralized computer network is vulnerable to hackers. The future may be chaotic, but I can't see how a fascist plan is going to impose itself on everybody. The centralized media gives you the illusion that there's a consensus, but this is extremely misleading. All it takes is a minority of resisters, combined with the facts of government corruption and incompetence to ensure the failure of any grand scheme.
As for the database, if no identifying information may be collected at the point of entry, how would it get in there? There would, of course, need to be a secure system for making entries into the database, but I think it's doable. There are only three ways of becoming a citizen: being born here, being born to an American citizen abroad, or being naturalized. Some sort of short-term card could be issued at hospitals and naturalization centers, authorizing the holder to be entered into the database within a short period (a few days).
As long as the entry process occurs in groups, personal information can't be attached to the biometric data -- e.g. you can show up at any entry center and surrender the card (which would contain minimal identifying information, like approximate age, gender, race, but no specific identifying information like a name) in order to get in and then go into a room for biometric entry 20, 30, 50 people at a time in random order, with no presentation of any personal information before putting in your biometric data. Some sort of non-identifying provision would need to made for infants, who would obviously have to be accompanied by an adult who would not necessarily be eligible for entry into the database -- perhaps upon surrendering the card, each person or guardian of an infant would be given a tag of some sort indicating whether the holder or an infant accompanied by the holder is eligible for entry.
The initial set-up of such a system would be a bureacratic nightmare, though no more so than for a national ID system which does include personal identification; but after that I think it would be very manageable.
Actually, I think Term Limits would clean things up in a "hurry"
This time please answer the question. Thanks in advance.
BTW, I did make note of your response as an alternative.
No, of course not.. It will only hinder us "litle folk"
Find a way to be an imposter to a real record. That is NOT hard to do. I have many years in the intel community where biometrics are used, and I can say with certainty that without STRICT controls they are unreliable. By strict, I mean controlled beyond anything a civilian authority can control, because such controls REQUIRE controlling the population the biometrics represents.
My previous post was to infer the horrible. We can loose the records that contain our identity, and without being able to verify that identity we will be prevented access to our personal information, such as credit cards or employment. Biometrics can also be played. By that, I mean look at the credit reports. they are screwed constantly, but at least people understand that and do not hold them in high regard. Biometrics would be. No record, no identity. People could screw you in a heartbeat by deleting your record. The movie “The Net”, was an excellent example of digital warfare. Erasing a n identity that is only supported by a biometric would be very dangerous and give the government the ability to control you.
You may think that a biometric would be anonymous, but it would not be, it could not be, and if it started that way, it would be soon converted to a positive identity system.
We do not need biometrics as we already know who is an alien.
If you don't think that the gov does not maintain illegal databases, I'd like to sell you my house for a million bucks, t is worth it, trust me.
Please elaborate on that. ...How would it hinder "little folks" to ostracize dishonest politicians thereby helping tremendously to ensure that honest persons are elected to government offices.
Actually, I think it is hard to do. What is difficult is foolproofing biometric security systems for access to buildings, computers, etc. But where the individual in question is always face to face with the person requiring them to put their iris/palm/skin cell on the screening device, it's pretty difficult to fake being someone else.
We can loose the records that contain our identity, and without being able to verify that identity we will be prevented access to our personal information, such as credit cards or employment. Biometrics can also be played. By that, I mean look at the credit reports. they are screwed constantly, but at least people understand that and do not hold them in high regard. Biometrics would be. No record, no identity. People could screw you in a heartbeat by deleting your record.
No, no, no! Your biometric database record would NOT be your identity -- it would only establish whether you are a citizen or non-citizen. Your presence in this database would have no effect on identifying yourself for purposes of credit, etc. No bank or credit-grantor is going to give you access to account #XYZ just because both you and the account holder of record are citizens -- they need to verify your identity, not your citizenship status. And as for people "screwing you in a heartbeat by deleting your record", they would have to 1) get hold of your biometric (let's say skin or hair cell) and 2) get access to the federal database, and 3) get access to the state database. No one could just get access to a database, and target someone for deletion, because there would be no identifying information attached to the database records.
Erasing an identity that is only supported by a biometric would be very dangerous and give the government the ability to control you.
That's why there needs to be a system of back-up databases at the state level. And no one's identity could be erased -- remember your identity wouldn't be in the database -- only the database record of your citizenship could conceivably be erased. But everyone would still be able to resort to the existing methods of proving citizenship in order to get re-entered into the database; i.e. presenting birth records, testimony of credible citizens who have known you for a long time, testimony of a current or former employer who has a record of having identified you as a citizen via the database at the time of hiring, etc. It could be a hassle, but no more than fixing an identity problem with the current credit reporting system, and much less damaging to your daily life, as there are relatively few things that one needs to establish citizenship for (getting a new job would be the biggest problem, but that already happens with incorrect negative credit reports). And how could the government control you? At worst, you could find yourself turned down for a new job or denied a security clearance at a government facility, due to inability to prove your citizenship, but that could be cleared up by the aforementioned legal process.
We do not need biometrics as we already know who is an alien.
How do we know who is an alien? Plenty of employers get tripped up by illegal aliens brandishing phony green cards, social security cards, etc.
Which you can re-establish fairly easily, so why would they bother?
or I can add all your personal info to it and make myself a nice illegal government database.
Someone who can obtain a strand of your hair and all your personal info can already combine this info into a database entry. I don't see how the existence of biometrics-only citizenship database would expand this ability.
If you don't think that the gov does not maintain illegal databases, I'd like to sell you my house for a million bucks, t is worth it, trust me.
I know all too well that the government cannot be trusted not to maintain illegal databases. I am a Pennsylvania resident who has bought several guns from an FFL in the past year. In case you haven't been following this story, it recently came out that the Pennsylvania state police have been maintaining an illegal database of gun buyers, in violation of both state and federal law, by recording and retaining information from NICS searches. The FBI has notified the state in writing that this practice is illegal and must stop immediately, providing excellent ammo to the citizen's group which has filed suit to stop the practice and have the database destroyed. To me, this is a good example of the difficulty of getting both state and federal authorities to cooperate in an illegal scheme against citizens -- when one entity starts running such a scheme, there's always somebody on the other side who has incentive to ferret out and publicize the scheme; in this case it was the FBI auditors.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.