From: Tavia tavia@btinternet.com I don't imagine an id card would have many advantages for the users,
No, I don't either. That's why I put it the way I did. Should've added that the bureaucrats would want it electronically readable, which we don't need, when all that's really required is some sort of card which has a name, a photograph, and a signature on it. That'd say "This is me, now give me those blinking cards that allow me access to my money!", which is the main reason I need something of the sort. Something simple, so that anyone who wanted or needed to establish another identity could do so. Not that I see that happening - you see the fuss that would be made by the Laura Norder mob, oh dear me, we'd be heading for anarchy if it was that easy to get a new name! No, it's too simple, and makes other things more complex.
We need it and we don't need it. I don't know what the solution is, but it certainly isn't a tattooed shuffler in a British shopping complex, right, Una?
particularly not hitched to a system where one had to carry such, and presumably therefore had to go by a single name? I used to rather enjoy having three or four different identities... (confuse the bastards...)
And serve them right too! More often than not they deserve to be confused, seeing as they think it best to confuse others. <shakes head> Now what am I going to do with all these worms from that can?
Regards Joanne
Note: if you skip really fast in one spot, with a haughty expression on your face - it's flamenco! --Joy Sikorski, How to draw a clam.
_________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
In message F176sOPhtMSZ1oAqwXx000136a6@hotmail.com, J MacQueen j_macqueen@hotmail.com writes
No, I don't either. That's why I put it the way I did. Should've added that the bureaucrats would want it electronically readable, which we don't need, when all that's really required is some sort of card which has a name, a photograph, and a signature on it.
Had a look at a passport lately?
<rummage> The British one is still in the depths of the US Embassy, having a machine-readable visa put into it, but here's the Oz one. Passport number, passport type, issuing country, name (not the same one as in the UK one), nationality (not the same one as in the UK one), sex, place of birth (hmm, yes, I believe I covered that in the post that started this thread), date and place of issue, date of expiry, and a coded, machine-readable version of all that. Plus photo and signature.
Both passports have the "other" name listed on the notes page, at my request. The UK one also has an indication that I am a UK citizen with the right of abode, although it's not spelt out quite as blatantly as that anymore.
These machine-readable passports give access to all sorts of other information about you - anything the issuing authorities care to put on file. That can include such things as your criminal record or HIV status, to judge by the experiences of various people I know. In my case, it will undoubtedly include both nationalities and names. I don't mind this myself, since I'm quite open about the fact that I have dual nationality and use two names (and in fact could have a third passport if I cared to apply for it). However, there are situations where the second nationality could prove an embarrassment for reasons which I think many members of this list would find disquieting rather than "serves them right". An obvious one is the number of Israeli passports that turned up in the sewage outlet from a hijacked aircraft a few years ago...
My old black passport had the passport number and the relevant "this person is indeed a citizen of the UK and uses this name" information written in it, but without the capability to be waved in the general direction of a reader and have all sorts of other information displayed about me. The wonders of modern technology. Maybe we should all be microchipped and have done with it.
And so back to where I started this rant - there's a lot of surveillance/information technology that has a dual nature. It can be very useful, improving the quality of our lives, but there's a dark side to it - and it is remarkably easy for a government to persuade its citizens to acquiesce to the darker side by pushing the good things, or by trumpeting it as an important weapon in the fight against crime. All very well - but who defines "crime"? Why, the government, of course.
Blake's lawyer never thinks to question the society he lives in, until he runs into someone who forces him to think about it. It's telling that Blake has been framed on child molestation charges. "To protect the children" is the rallying call of many in Western society who want to control what adults can do.
No, I don't think you need to drug the entire population...
-
J MacQueen -
Julia Jones