What is Digg?107 Comments
- kingkilr, on 10/12/2007, -3/+59Damned skippy, we also don't like the government getting a little to chummy with our private info.
In Soviet Russia the state IDs you! - O9f911O29d74e35, on 10/12/2007, -1/+47I've always thought it odd how frequently one uses his/her driver's license to prove his/her identity, age, or address. But rarely does anyone ever use his/her driver's license to prove one is licensed to drive.
- R34C7, on 10/12/2007, -1/+46The saying "Give ‘Em An Inch And They’ll Take A Mile” is applicable here...
Social Security Numbers anyone? - loup, on 10/12/2007, -0/+27um... Plenty of people bitch about social security cards and our current income tax system.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+27"This is not a national id card" - *****. If it quacks like a duck and walks like a duck...
- davesbrain, on 10/12/2007, -1/+27It's going to prevent terrorism, they even said so. I feel safer all ready. Thanks Department of Homeland Security.
/sarc - p0und, on 10/12/2007, -7/+29"You know the nazis had pieces of flair that they made the jews wear."
- Rheikon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19"We are trying to make sure no state is the weakest link in letting people do things they shouldn't do, whether that is boarding an airplane, or any other activity we want to prevent," he said. "This is not a national ID card."
ridiculous - ShawnHunt, on 10/12/2007, -4/+23It's over buddy, it's over.
- Yorn, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19It really bothers me that in a day and age where one out of every three US citizens will be a victim of identity theft in their lifetime, the federal government has the gonads to demand we include even *MORE* personal information all conveniently on one card.
What bothers me even more? That our legislators would so openly pass it. We need Libertarian candidates to run on this issue alone. Just think of all the votes you would get if you were running against two candidates that actually supported this thing (state rep and incumbent fed rep). I know I'm in a district where that happened and I'm planning on spending $2k to do just one TV commercial. Will I win? Absolutely.
Do you have any idea how afraid our parents and grandparents are of being ID'd, tagged, and ready to ship by May 2009? If the REAL ID act keeps going, they'll finally have something to fear even more than the terrorists. And we all know fear can be abused to drive voters to the polls. - hifiDesign, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18It's more of a discriminatory measure in that those who WON'T have it will be discriminated against. I can even see it creating two additional classes of people — those who will feel compelled to and/or are able to jump through the hoops to get these things, and those who refuse to and/or flat out can't meet the requirements for them. They're wedging the door open by putting people in an awkward position, and that's no way to protect one's country. Isn't it bad enough we are automatically consenting to random strip searches by the TSA when we haven't done anything, but now we've got to have a federal voucher that says I can fly at all??? And what if we go to a war protest or send money to the Red Cross. We could be on a terrorist no-fly list now, but with RealID what else will they do to us?
P.S. — This isn't an issue of right vs left anymore, it's an issue of big government with a proverbial corporate puppeteer's hand up its ass. Those people making money off of fear. We need to feed the homeless, educate the uneducated, and pay off our national debt. Not commit more resources we don't have to catch alleged terrorists that are ultimately not going to be stopped by security measures that tighten the noose around US citizens instead. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+20"Ummm... no it's not... That was meant as a discriminatory measure."
And you don't think a centralized ID system that will contain 'who the ***** knows what' (we certainly won't have access to see what is on our record) won't be used to discriminate against people?
Especially when the biometric stuff is put into place and details about their genes become available to someone doing the ID check, discrimination WILL occur!! - hifiDesign, on 10/12/2007, -6/+22Time to move on.
- davesbrain, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15I don't know what's sadder; that these officials can say this with a straight face and think people will believe them; or that some people will actually buy their load of crap.
- mrbradg, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17Can anyone say New World Order?
- Wacer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14@ThatsUnpossible
"What are you talking about? People use them to prove they are licensed to drive thousands of times a day as they are pulled over by police officers."
He is talking about the the ratio of times its used for ID other than traffic related. I have used my drivers license over a hundred times and only a few times for traffic. - Lavarock, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15In America, citizens check the power of their government. In soviet Russia, government check you!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13I said it before and I'll say it again:
Back during the Cold War, "Show us your papers," was something we were told to fear, something that only those "no-good reds" used. Now we're being told to embrace it?
If you honestly believe that a REAL ID card is going to stop terrorism then I've got a rock that keeps tigers away. - sh1595, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12'"... or any other activity we want to prevent," he said.' Like what, voting? Getting government benefits? If they track everybody and correlate *all* the data, what's to say that they can't tie your voting history to your "benign" ID? Then what? "You can't vote in the Democratic primary because you voted Republican." Is it that much farther down the same road, to get to "you can't vote in the election because you voted for ___ last time?" Or, say, "you can't get an ID because you've got 'n' DUI convictions?" (Maybe a good idea, but then leading to "you can't get an ID because you have too many accidents?" Speeding tickets? Parking tickets? Bad credit? The more they can identify you, the more they can "group" you. So instead of a relatively "anonymous" Soc Sec number, you become "one of *them,* whoever "them" happens to be. And once you're one of "them," they can prevent you from "do[ing] things they shouldn't do ... or any other activity we want to prevent." Yes, ideally, "responsible" government wouldn't abuse the power. But since when does the oligarchy controlling the system "respond" to John Q Public?
- Haapi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12Wow, RealID will make it difficult for an incompetent terrorist to get an ID.
But what, then, can a competent terrorist do when he does aquire a card that passes? You *know* it will happen.
There is no security in Real ID. - johngault, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11How about simply enforcing the laws that exist???
also
We just had an illegal immigrant (no id) win a FEDERAL court case here in hazelton/scranton pa to get a marriage license. the town would not give him one, so he sued and won! - williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Which is worse? A police state where you are tagged like sheep, or some illegal Mexicans?
When privacy is outlawed, only outlaws (with fake IDs) will have privacy. - davesbrain, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13It's a witch!!!! Burn her!!!!
- davesbrain, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10@Haapi
Some of the hijackers were even flagged for closer searchers prior to being allowed on the flights. These guys were all on no-entry and no-fly lists, yet all entered the USA legally and boarded the planes. The "real-id" will not stop terrorism, but will give the federal government greater control over activities normally administered by individual states. - Wacer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10I am employed in the government and I read government magazines pertaining to their agenda and its amazing the amount of data they are, or in the process of, of getting on everybody. They basically want to take every piece of information a person and feed it into super computers. They will in turn run mathematical formulas or algorithms to determine threat and normal patterns of living.
Whats the definition of "normal"? They must mean blind sheep. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10FTA:
"State legislatures have been bristling at the requirements of the Real ID Act, which would force states to comply with the regulations or face having their citizens unable to enter an airport security line, or any federal building or courthouse, with their state-issued identification."
Do you want to go to the Smithsonian? Better not forget your Real ID. Have to catch that plane? Better not forget your Real ID. Are you a reporter who is covering a Supreme Court case? Better not forget your Real ID; if you do you'll probably get fired.
Right now I can go check out the Declaration of Independence without having to pull out my wallet and prove to the guards that I am who I say I am. With Real ID I would be prevented from viewing a symbol of our nation's freedom is I refused to provide my Real ID or if I didn't have it with me. Rhetoric aside, doesn't something about this seem really wrong? - blujaded, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9@ VinceNoir
I'm not your momma and you're not mine. Keep your nose out of my business and your hands out of my pocket. As long as I'm not hurting you or anyone else, why should you care what I do? If something needs to be done within a community, those who wish it done and benefit from it are responsible for it. Good people will take care of those in need around them without expecting reciprocation, and there are a lot of good people in this country. But forcing people to pay taxes to support those who don't wish to support themselves or to pay for military action that they don't agree with is wrong.
These are the principles of Liberty - that which our great country was founded upon, and which our current government seems to be trying to erase by feeding propaganda of "safety" and "support" to the mush-heads who are afraid to take responsibility for their own lives. - bdpf, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11First it was Social Security Numbers being compromised, now it is 09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0. Your banking info has been leaked. Yes now lets put it in the unsecured hands of the government.
The only secure computer system is a dumb blind one. No net access, floppies, usb ports or other way to copy info from it. It sure would be usful. Oh but it will be encrypted. It give 09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0 as just one part of the answer.
The risks are greater than what little good this ID system would give. Plus the cost, oh the high cost, money and are freedoms. You have to have ID to enter a federal build which our taxes paid for.
A bond fire has been lite and the government is trying to burn the Bill of Rights and Constitution.
Our elected porkers keep trying to change our rights and the Constitution with the help and blessings of the legal thieves.
The only good government is less government interference in our lives. It has it's hand in our wallets, grabbing our money to pay for the pork barrel items. The checks and balances of government have failed us. The three parts of government were set up to protect use from the government, not to enslave use into a slave citizen to our government.
The biggest thing the porkers did for us was to steal funds from Social Security to pay for their pork barrels. Oh they did it legal by changing the rules. Their good at changing laws and your rights to steal from us.
DON'T TRUST THE GOVERNMENT TO KEEP YOUR PERSONAL INFO SAFE !!!!!!
THE ONLY WAY TO KEEP A SECRET IS TO TELL NO ONE. How many people will have access to your info? Anyone who has access to the ID data bank or your Smart ID.
/end of rant/ - davesbrain, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9I dugg you down because of the condescension and juvenile nature of your post.
- williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Yup. During the Cold War, governments that did this to their people were not fit for this Earth.
Now we have a government like that. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+91. A standardized ID means it's pretty easy to come up with a fake as you'll have the guidelines right in front of you. Notice how the problem of fake IDs isn't done away with but merely changed in a way where the mass production of fake IDs is now easier.
2. If the method to obtain a REAL ID requires presenting documents that themselves can be faked then what guarantee is there that all REAL IDs will be, well, real?
3. While an administration that's not corrupt might not abuse powers it has been given that doesn't mean a future administration won't abuse those powers. Would you really be happy if the next administration really did decide to abuse the system; i.e. barring people from voting based on past records, restricting access to planes based on party affiliation, etc.; using the tools that our current government has given them?
Do you see where the problem is? It's certainly not just in the REAL ID idea but in the current system as well. The only difference is that the "new" system would have me go back to the DMV (a year after I renew my driver's license I might add. I'm due for renewal in 2007. If this passes I'm back again in 2008) to wait again, pay more money, and lug around documents I'd rather keep safe in my safety deposit box. The REAL ID act won't change anything nor make anyone safer. All it will do is add meaningless expense to both states and citizens. Do you really want to pay even more taxes to implement a system that will do squat to improve the current system? - Travelsonic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8So you don't have a private life?
- blujaded, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8So I guess that makes it okay? You'll be first in line for your RFID tag?
- Haapi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8@BS:
I can concede your point, but you didn't answer my question.
Yeah, it is nice that all the states no longer print their own money anymore, too, so $20 bills are standardized, so it is easier to tell a fake Jackson from a real one, but in the same manner with respect to ID cards, having it be "easier to tell a fake" does not equal security.
And remember, Mohamed Atta's Florida license had "Mohamed Atta" written on it in big F'in letters, and most of those hijackers *were* already being tracked by existing means. Just not tracked closely enough to trigger the "hey, that's weird, they are all flying on the same morning" response. - dschrute, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Just because the feds already have a metric ton of info on all of us doesn't mean it's a good thing. This is another example of our country moving from a nation controlled by individual states to a centralized oligarchy. (which it's already become)
Thomas Jefferson wouldn't be into this, and neither am I.
This fear mongering about us having "terrorists everywhere" that need to be watched is shameful and sad. More people die every day from too many orders of super sized fries.
The Oklahoma City bombing would have happened whether Tim McVeigh had a National ID card or not. - sh1595, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Sure, *somebody* knows everything about you. But the decentralized nature of the current system means no single entity knows *everything* about you; it's a bunch of disparate entities that all have a piece of the picture. Centralizing the data means you can sort and search on it. But it's personal data, so you can sort and search people. Sorting and searching people is what leads to segregation, oppression, and generally bad things. Not that we're living in a utopian privacy state now, but centralizing and aggregating all that data, that's plain scary. Data is power, and whoever controls the data has power limited only by the quality of that data. Centralizing, and, in theory, "organizing" personal data is going in the wrong direction. I'm a proud citizen and believe in protecting the rights of citizenship (like voting) but let's face it, we're playing in a rigged game, making choices between "two" parties that grow more similar every day (the rhetoric about the "little" issues is a feint to distract you from how similar they are when it comes to governmental control over your life). How big a leap is it to see NAFTA applied to citizenship? And eventually, is it so impossible to envision a centralized international entity making decisions about how we live, what rights we have, and how we have to prove who we are? (Look at the EU.) Eventually, we won't have a *national* ID, it will be global. "Scott is number 1234567890987654321. He drives an American-made minivan (yellow flag). He shops at Wal-Mart and Kroger, and has prescriptions for x, y, and z (red flag). He voted Independent (red flag) in the last election. He talks to Johnny and Susie and Ali and Manuel on the phone (red flag, Johnny was arrested once for a protest rally). "Uh-oh, better watch this one, he posts on Digg. We'd better suspend his flying privileges 'til we sort through his comments and figure out if he's a bad guy or a good guy."
- sh1595, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8It's one thing to waive a citizenship requirement for a driver's license, but you can show up with two utility bills and a made-up social security number and get a driver's license ... it shouldn't be used as "proof" of anything except that you know how to stand in line.
- bobzibub, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Are these measures truly designed to stop terrorists?
Terrorists capable of a major action would have the ability to mimic the purchasing decisions (or use cash) and watch their movements as would the regular folks. They are not just schmoes that are angry about some issue.
They all know that their Safeway cards betray their purchasing decisions, and would behave accordingly. Use cash. Don't email. Don't encrypt. Don't phone. Visit in person. Careful where you surf the 'net.
I argue that these systems are designed to create databases of the habits of entire populations because the entire population is the actual target, and are not altering their behavior to thwart these systems. If you wanted to say, prevent civil disobedience on immigration issues one day, you could round up those specific organizers quite easily. (They'd have the highly linked nodes.) If you wanted to throw some "hacker" kids (or any political group) in jail, you could get a list. If you wanted the dirt on person X, he's connected to a set of people via phone/email records that may be involved in some other questionable activity. Politician with gay friends might be gay himself. Or a tax evader, or whatever you can leverage.
If you wanted to manage a whole population, that is the ideal tool to build. Sorta like that mirror in (classic) Star Trek Kirk's alter ego world where he can kill/monitor anyone on the ship. Remember that? Kirk gave the alter-Spock the power to control the entire ship. Not to save himself, but to change the entire outlook of the crew. That case was for the better. In Rwanda, if your ID card had the incorrect tribe listed when you crossed checkpoints, you were shot on site. - 5xSTUN, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Welcome to 21st Century America, where it'll soon be easier to obtain weapons than identification.
Too bad there isn't a multi-billion-dollar identification industry that can use non-profit front organizations to go and lobby Congress about keeping regulations within the bounds of sanity. - bobblehead79201, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Real ID is the most intrusive, invasive, fascist aspect of the our "New american Century" that is in the making. Out of all of the privacy infringements, not one has the potential to more fully eslave the American people, and ultimately the human race more than RFID technology. Just because technology gives us (as humans) the ABILITY to do certain things, does NOT mean that it gives us the RIGHT to do those same things.
Absolutely not! it is wrong. period. throw away the REAL ID act altogether... The nerve of those fascist imperialist bastards! - lulzfactory, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9i'm not even *as* worried about the privacy concerns since they're not apparent at this point. i'm more worried about this being a horrible idea which will waste millions if not billions of taxpayer dollars yet yield negligible benefits against terrorist boogeymen
why is the government willfully ignorant of the fact that the 9/11 hijackers had state issued IDs? illegally obtained, yes, but still legit - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7DHS is run by Chertoff, dual Israeli/US citizen..
- CaptA, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Beatle drummer Ringo Starr: "Everything the government touches turns to crap."
I concur. REAL ID is opening Pandora's box.
Explaining to your children and grandchildren WHY you were so "stupid" as to buy into such nonsense as the government's REAL ID package will become "its" own fate. (Picture when a snake starts eating “its” own tail; what's the ending?) Caution with extreme care is warranted here ... especially if in the future you become the "prey" at the hands of your own government. Think not? You are in denial.
Read, read, read history about other people (Germany, 1933-) that submitted to such nonsense, then your discernment will merit value based on real historical facts, not whim.
Blame whom? - csb92376, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Fortunately, the state of New Hampshire is very close to passing a state ban on "real id". The measure passed the state house almost unanimously earlier this month and is now headed for the state senate. NH will be very interesting to watch on this issue.
Contact your state representatives to try and start similar initiatives in your own states! We the people aren't going to stand for this. - Wacer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6@boshow
You make it sound like it over anyways so embrace it. Most people don't have any anonymity because they don't have a clue whats going on. Your words almost sound like your trying to lull people back to sleep. - paizon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5The United States is slowly transforming into a fascist police state....
- stevenb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Those who sacrifice liberty for safety, deserve neither. - Thomas Jefferson.
- nicc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@sh1595:
not in VA.
was at DMV just this past weekend with my girlfriend.
in order for her to get a VA license (she moved down here from NY a couple of years ago and her license had expired), she needed her birth certificate, SS card, proof of residence (bill, paystub, etc) AND her school transcripts in certified mail (and DMV had to be the party to open the certified package, otherwise it was null/void)...and that is just to get a VA ID (not license).
once she has that, then she has to take the written test so she can get a learning permit (mind you she is almost 35 and has driven for the past 18 years!) after 30 days with the permit THEN she can go back to DMV to take a road test so she can get her license. - thcobbs, on 10/12/2007, -7/+11Ummm... no it's not... That was meant as a discriminatory measure.
- Wacer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@boshow
True. One person can do very little but digg users certainly proved yesterday that a crowd can make a difference. I write my representatives every week and once in a while I do get a response that looks more a transcript of a tape recording. lol I least I try and keep people about the dangers of technology beings that I work in computer fields that does a lot of recording information and it just gets worse every day. -
Show 51 - 100 of 107 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is