ID Cards?

[Guest tv tanned]

Do you have an internet bank account?

No

Do you ever buy anything online?

Yes

If the answer is yes' date=' then YOU ALREADY HAVE entrusted your identity to these people.[/quote']

I must have missed the bit where amazon scanned my retina and took a thumb print.

[lepeep]

didn't you know TV ? anything online is always 100% genuine too, all the stories of fraud, theft and gereral bad behaviour by unscroupulous people are made up by folks like you and I, who just don't trust anyone, so are out to spoil it for others (law abiding citizens).

[soundian]

It's bloody common sense if you look at it from a logical point of view. Okay Im not an IT Security Boffin but im a logical thinker which is enough for me to figure out whats required to be put in place for ID cards to work.

You seem to believe everyone that works for the government or just all of these IT folk that work for the government are completely daft with no common sense.

They're spending enough money on the system that I would hope that there was at least one person with a brain that will already have thought about what i've mentioned already. If you think not then your expectations for the british people must be very low.

I never expected a British person to become a suicide bomber in London but I do expect someone to hack into a computer.

How's about having some faith that not everyone is incompetent. Say for yourself do you believe your competent in what your good at. If yes' date=' then why cant someone else be as well.

The technology for that type of encryption system is in existence it just has to be used right with the appropiate number and types of identifiers and access keys to keep the information from prying eyes.[/quote']

And all it needs is one spy, greedy bastard or mistake for it all to become redundant.

How many times has say the Nuclear arsenal been hacked into therefore allowing someone to launch a missile? The answer is none of any significance since we havent ever had any nuclear missiles launched by a hacker. Thats because someone with a brain has thought it through.

Just because you haven't heard about it doesn't mean it hasn't happened. I imagine in normal non-war circumstances they would need humans to arm and fire the missiles.

[Snakebite]

I never expected a British person to become a suicide bomber in London but I do expect someone to hack into a computer.

And all it needs is one spy' date=' greedy bastard or mistake for it all to become redundant.

Just because you haven't heard about it doesn't mean it hasn't happened. I imagine in normal non-war circumstances they would need humans to arm and fire the missiles.[/quote']

Dont tell me, your one of these IT experts that think they know everything about computers.

Fair enough everything is subject to exploitation by everyone.

So when will people start stealing your body parts for your plan to work.

[soundian]

Dont tell me' date=' your one of these IT experts that think they know everything about computers.

Fair enough everything is subject to exploitation by everyone.

So when will people start stealing your body parts for your plan to work.[/quote']

If I was an IT expert who thought they knew everything, shouldn't you be listening since your knowledge seems to come off the back of a government corn flake packet.

If they can't hack into the computers (big IF), they'll find a way. Blackmail, kidnapping, whatever. The potential profits make it inevitable.

THEY DON'T NEED BODY PARTS BECAUSE AS SOON AS THE INFORMATION IS TRANSFORMED INTO NUMBERS YOU CAN CRACK IT.!!!

I hope that's big enough for you to read this time.

[Guest tv tanned]

Dont tell me' date=' your one of these IT experts that think they know everything about computers.[/quote']

Let me guess, the knowledge of someone who is an 'IT expert' is nothing compared to your 'logical thinking'?

[Snakebite]

If I was an IT expert who thought they knew everything' date=' shouldn't you be listening since your knowledge seems to come off the back of a government corn flake packet.

If they can't hack into the computers (big IF), they'll find a way. Blackmail, kidnapping, whatever. The potential profits make it inevitable.

THEY DON'T NEED BODY PARTS BECAUSE AS SOON AS THE INFORMATION IS TRANSFORMED INTO NUMBERS YOU CAN CRACK IT.!!!

I hope that's big enough for you to read this time.

What is it about all you anti-establishment buggers?

So how do you physically get through customs then do you whip out your laptop and flash them yer numbers when they ask you to sit in front of a bloody scanner so they can scan your iris.

Dont tell me you will have faked the ID card cracked the encryption and substituted your info for someone elses all whilst waiting in the fucking queue with that super computer in your back pocket.

Not fucking likely if that was the case why not ransack every bank in the world of all their money. I mean if you have that much capability why not use it to take the money directly, it's much more profitable than stealing identities

[Snakebite]

Let me guess' date=' the knowledge of someone who is an 'IT expert' is nothing compared to your 'logical thinking'?[/quote']

He aint an IT expert at best he may be an amateur that reads too many IT forums and believes every word. He's probably Mr anti-microsoft

There is a higher risk of your identity being stolen right now just because the government doesnt have a copy of your biometric information.

[Guest tv tanned]

He aint an IT expert at best he may be an amateur that reads too many IT forums and believes every word.

Woah horsie.

Your exact quote was this:

Dont tell me' date=' your one of these IT experts that think they know everything about computers. [/quote']

Now, I never suggested that Ian WAS an IT expert, you however state quite clearly that IT experts think they know everything about computers.

The clue is in the use of 'expert'. I would trust someone who knows IT more than I would trust someone who claims to be a 'logical thinker'. Now, even if that person is not Ian, it most definitely is not you.

And let me rearrange your quote to reflect what I have surmised of yourself.

"He is clearly not a logical thinker, at best he may be an amateur who reads Government press releases and websites and believes every word."

[Snakebite]

Woah horsie.

Your exact quote was this:

Now' date=' I never suggested that Ian WAS an IT expert, you however state quite clearly that IT experts think they know everything about computers.

The clue is in the use of 'expert'. I would trust someone who knows IT more than I would trust someone who claims to be a 'logical thinker'. Now, even if that person is not Ian, it most definitely is not you.

And let me rearrange your quote to reflect what I have surmised of yourself.

"He is clearly not a logical thinker, at best he may be an amateur who reads Government press releases and websites and believes every word."

[img']http://www.satan.org.uk/irc/mrlogic.jpg

I take you've never heard of sarcasm then

[Hugh_Jazz]

What is it about all you anti-establishment buggers?

So how do you physically get through customs then do you whip out your laptop and flash them yer numbers when they ask you to sit in front of a bloody scanner so they can scan your iris.

Dont tell me you will have faked the ID card cracked the encryption and substituted your info for someone elses all whilst waiting in the fucking queue with that super computer in your back pocket.

Not fucking likely if that was the case why not ransack every bank in the world of all their money. I mean if you have that much capability why not use it to take the money directly' date=' it's much more profitable than stealing identities[/quote']

Just done a quick google on this. Far too much time on my hands....

If you encrypt something using 40-bit encryption....that's several billion different possible combinations. Apparently if you use 128-bit encryption (which is the standard for Internet SSL encryption), that's 300 billion trillion times more combinations than for 40-bit.....the deciphering of which is computationally unfeasible.

So, just because you're details are converted to 1s and 0s, does not necessarily make it vulnerable to attack. If it was that simple, Internet Banking would never have got off the ground.

[Snakebite]

Just done a quick google on this. Far too much time on my hands....

If you encrypt something using 40-bit encryption....that's several billion different possible combinations. Apparently if you use 128-bit encryption (which is the standard for Internet SSL encryption)' date=' that's 300 billion trillion times more combinations than for 40-bit.....the deciphering of which is computationally unfeasible.

So, just because you're details are converted to 1s and 0s, does not necessarily make it vulnerable to attack. If it was that simple, Internet Banking would never have got off the ground.[/quote']

My point exactly

If it was going to be simple to hack we would all have been robbed of our money by now.

[Guest tv tanned]

I take you've never heard of sarcasm then

Your posts thus far lead one to believe you were born without the chromosome to activate humour.

Usually when people use sarcasm in written form parenthesis or smiley faces are used to emphasise it.

Keep trying though, you'll learn one day.

[Snakebite]

Your posts thus far lead one to believe you were born without the chromosome to activate humour.

Usually when people use sarcasm in written form parenthesis or smiley faces are used to emphasise it.

Keep trying though' date=' you'll learn one day. [/quote']

Well im sorry that I didnt call you a bunch of cunts then eh!!!

I shouldn't have to stoop down to your level should I?

Now getting back on topic. Im for ID cards and it is going to happen, whether you like it or not as the government is now forcing the legislation through due to the bombings in London.

[Guest tv tanned]

Well im sorry that I didnt call you a bunch of cunts then eh!!!

I shouldn't have to stoop down to your level should I?

Sorry' date=' where did I call you a cunt in this thread?

Mind you, IT expert is a much more frightening insult. I might cry now.

Now getting back on topic. Im for ID cards and it is going to happen, whether you like it or not as the government is now forcing the legislation through due to the bombings in London.

That doesn't mean I have to like it.

I'll be more than happy to join the many thousands who are going to refuse one.

[Snakebite]

Sorry' date=' where did I call you a cunt in this thread?

Mind you, IT expert is a much more frightening insult. I might cry now..[/quote']

I guess it's not your fault you feel the urge to insult everyone that thinks differently to you. Maybe you should see the doctor about it

That doesn't mean I have to like it.

I'll be more than happy to join the many thousands who are going to refuse one.

You'd better start saving for that 2500 fine

[Guest tv tanned]

I guess it's not your fault you feel the urge to insult everyone that thinks differently to you. Maybe you should see the doctor about it

I really don't see how that followed from me asking you directly to point out where I called you a cunt. At least I didn't stoop to your level of trying to claim that logical thinking was all that was required.

You'd better start saving for that 2500 fine

I thought you told us these things weren't going to be compulsory to begin with?

[Snakebite]

I really don't see how that followed from me asking you directly to point out where I called you a cunt. At least I didn't stoop to your level of trying to claim that logical thinking was all that was required.

I never said you called me cunt

I thought you told us these things weren't going to be compulsory to begin with?

The government approach now is now veering more towards it being compulsary sooner rather than later maybe as early as 2007-8 but in any case you wont get a passport without giving up your biometric information.

So unless you never want to ever leave the UK you will have to give up your biometric information. In any case once it is compuslary you will have to give it up anyway otherwise make sure you dont drop the soap when your serving time for your descision. Dont forget when going to prison they will take your biometric information from you anyway.

[Guest tv tanned]

I realise people are allowed to change their minds and all, but you seem to have performed a rather drastic transformation given your comments here

[The Milner]

I realise people are allowed to change their minds and all' date=' but you seem to have performed a rather drastic transformation given your comments here

hahaha pwnd.

[Project S.A.M.]

The government approach now is now veering more towards it being compulsary sooner rather than later maybe as early as 2007-8 but in any case you wont get a passport without giving up your biometric information.

So unless you never want to ever leave the UK you will have to give up your biometric information. In any case once it is compuslary you will have to give it up anyway otherwise make sure you dont drop the soap when your serving time for your descision. Dont forget when going to prison they will take your biometric information from you anyway.

So you're saying that he (and anyone else who has a principled objection to ID cards) should be frightened into accepting them? The fact that a government has introduced a law which threatens jail for non-compliance is not a moral reason for a person to obey that law- only a cowardly one.

I'm not interested in these utilitarian arguments over whether the introduction of ID cards would result in a net benefit to 'society' (whatever that entity consists of)- I'd still be against them even if it could be shown that they would bring about all the 'good results' those in favour claim they will (although I share much of the scepticism expressed here). For example: for all I know it might be true that deporting all (real or suspected) Muslims would prevent further suicide bombings on British land- even if it were true it would absolutely not mean that such a thing ought to be done. (Waits for someone to completely mis-interpret that statement....)

I have a bank card because I want to store money in a bank and be able to access it. I have a drivers licence because I want to have the right to drive. I have a passport because I want to be able to pass through ports.

That does not mean that I ought to let myself be coerced into possessing a card that grants me the right to exist. My identity and everything which constitutes it is my property. In no sense is it or ought it to be the state's. If there is any higher power that would have a claim over my identity, it is God, if it exists. The state is not God, and I find it troubling when people perceive and accept it as such.

I find it incredible that people on here that generally align themselves with the right are so enthusiastic in accepting such a Stalinist measure.

[Snakebite]

I realise people are allowed to change their minds and all' date=' but you seem to have performed a rather drastic transformation given your comments here

And your point is?

That particular topic point was about the licencing trade having access to your Information and misusing it. I still believe that you will not see biometric scanners in your local shop or pubs like I said in an earlier post within the ID cards debate, only government departments, security services and financial institutions will get access.

Under correct control ID cards will work

[The Milner]

So you're saying that he (and anyone else who has a principled objection to ID cards) should be frightened into accepting them? The fact that a government has introduced a law which threatens jail for non-compliance is not a moral reason for a person to obey that law- only a cowardly one.

I'm not interested in these utilitarian arguments over whether the introduction of ID cards would result in a net benefit to 'society' (whatever that entity consists of)- I'd still be against them even if it could be shown that they would bring about all the 'good results' those in favour claim they will (although I share much of the scepticism expressed here). For example: for all I know it might be true that deporting all (real or suspected) Muslims would prevent further suicide bombings on British land- even if it were true it would absolutely not mean that such a thing ought to be done. (Waits for someone to completely mis-interpret that statement....)

I have a bank card because I want to store money in a bank and be able to access it. I have a drivers licence because I want to have the right to drive. I have a passport because I want to be able to pass through ports.

That does not mean that I ought to let myself be coerced into possessing a card that grants me the right to exist. My identity and everything which constitutes it is my property. In no sense is it or ought it to be the state's. If there is any higher power that would have a claim over my identity' date=' it is God, if it exists. The state is not God, and I find it troubling when people perceive and accept it as such.

I find it incredible that people on here that generally align themselves with the right are so enthusiastic in accepting such a Stalinist measure.[/quote']

some very good points there. I neither want to have a card for the right to exsitst in britain.

Whatever happened to the right of privicy?

[Snakebite]

some very good points there. I neither want to have a card for the right to exsitst in britain.

Whatever happened to the right of privicy?

It ended when terrorists started blowing things up.

Under British Law you are not entirely free anyway, all British Citizens are considered to be servants of the Queen

[Guest tv tanned]

Yes, but I'm interested by some specific points:

Only thing with fingerprint scanning in pubs is that the we would end up having to give up our civil liberties

So civil liberties are a concern if it is the local boozer with the info' date=' but not the government?

Who would control the information, the police? and what else would they have on file

Again, suspicion of the police for this scheme, yet not, apparently for the ID card system. Why?

Fair enough the innocent should have nothing to fear but mistakes can be made

Which is pretty much the point that Ian, Frosty, myself and many others have been making. And you made it yourself.

So let me get this straight, there's reason to be worried about mistakes, abuse of information and loss of civil liberties if the information is available to the police and licensed trade, but as long as the whole government network has access then it's fine and dandy.

Is that your position?