Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Kosh on October 16, 2006, 09:36:46 pm
-
I was reading through this article on privacy (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15221095/) when I ran across this:
Privacy will remain in the headlines in the months to come, as states implement the federal government’s Real ID Act, which will effectively create a national identification program by requiring new high-tech standards for driver’s licenses and ID cards. We'll examine the implications of this new technological pressure point on privacy on Thursday.
Since when did this happen? :wtf:
-
a while back.
it's not that big of a deal, as there's no way they can put it into practice.
-
Ever since career chips, obviously.
-
a while back.
it's not that big of a deal, as there's no way they can put it into practice.
We'll see. They certainly are going to try.
-
Rights and freedoms frittered away...and nobody cares or notices...not even the folks writing the laws or approving them.
-
Rights and freedoms frittered away...and nobody cares or notices...not even the folks writing the laws or approving them.
What's even more scary is that if you ask the average American college aged student, they will just say "I'm not interested in politics". They don't care that their own government is tightening the noose......
-
I was reading through this article on privacy (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15221095/) when I ran across this:
Privacy will remain in the headlines in the months to come, as states implement the federal government’s Real ID Act, which will effectively create a national identification program by requiring new high-tech standards for driver’s licenses and ID cards. We'll examine the implications of this new technological pressure point on privacy on Thursday.
Since when did this happen? :wtf:
At least 6 months ago. I've brought it up several times when I've been complaining about ID cards in the UK and Americans have went 'we're better than you' (etc) in that regard (in actuality...we're both ****ed! - although Gitmo was our idea*).
*then-Home Secretary Darth Blunkett had mooted the use of the Falklands post 9/11 for interning random Ara.... 'suspects' before rejecting the idea on the grounds that, I dunno, it was too expensive (wouldn't be civil liberties, after all) - and the US doubtless knew of this repulsive 'idea'[size]
-
At least 6 months ago. I've brought it up several times when I've been complaining about ID cards in the UK and Americans have went 'we're better than you' (etc) in that regard (in actuality...we're both ****ed! - although Gitmo was our idea*).
The reason they said "we have it better than you" is because this wasn't front page headlines.
-
I don't consider better ID cards to be bad, in and of itself. If they start using these new ID cards to track people and monitor what they buy/where they go, then we definitely have cause for alarm.
EDIT: What I meant was that issuing new ID cards can be good. Using them to spy on people is wrong. And given the track record of our gov't they probably will use them to spy on us. ...So I guess you are right...New ID cards might be bad...
-
I don't consider better ID cards to be bad, in and of itself. If they start using these new ID cards to track people and monitor what they buy/where they go, then we definitely have cause for alarm.
When you use technology like this in an ID card, it becomes very easy to do just that. They could also do it without you knowing about it. Technologies like this are just too easy to abuse.
-
*wants a damn "Reset" button*
-
I don't consider better ID cards to be bad, in and of itself. If they start using these new ID cards to track people and monitor what they buy/where they go, then we definitely have cause for alarm.
EDIT: What I meant was that issuing new ID cards can be good. Using them to spy on people is wrong. And given the track record of our gov't they probably will use them to spy on us. ...So I guess you are right...New ID cards might be bad...
The biggest problem with these ID cards is that when you have removed all the technological barriers to spying, then the only barriers left are the moral ones.
And we all know how well THOSE stand up. ::)
-
Exactly.
-
Rights and freedoms frittered away...and nobody cares or notices...not even the folks writing the laws or approving them.
What's even more scary is that if you ask the average American college aged student, they will just say "I'm not interested in politics". They don't care that their own government is tightening the noose......
It is ironic. I generally consider myself more aware of the effects of things like this than other college students; but at the same time, I'm not registered to vote. I don't feel like I can make a difference. The person who can make a difference is the guy who can spew half-informed bull****, but is confident in their ignorance. I am hesitant and unsure; I'm sure that if I picked up a ballot I would have no clue who to vote for, because there's I know that there's no way that I can make an informed decision without sacrificing a portion of my life every day to reading up on local to international news.
The only way to make a significant difference is to make politics a serious aspect of your life, to be willing to manipulate the ill-informed people to do your bidding and vote how you want them to. The problem is, that works both ways, for both good and bad, selfish and selfless, but doing it for selfish gains is a whole lot easier than doing it for selfless gains because you won't be as jaded by people's apathy and cynicisim.
At least that's my rather negative take on the whole situation, condensed to a couple of paragraphs.
Actually, there is another aspect here. People will say "respect your elders". Well, most of the people in government are elders. How do you "respect" their judgement while at the same time daring to say that "Even though you have access to more information on teh subject and the possible consequences, I disagree with you."
-
On this subject (nb, pinch of salt due to source, interesting read though);
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,1927554,00.html
Racked with scandal, cowed by voter dissatisfaction and bereft of fresh ideas, Republicans are resorting to the only measure left to a party in power and desperate to cling to it: cheating, or what's more politely referred to as voter suppression.
Republican interest groups have been furiously defending strict new voter ID laws from legal challenges in states where their candidates are at risk of losing their seats in congressional elections.
The laws, requiring voters to show an official photo ID, might be sensible in an ideal world where every citizen is provided with one, but in the real world the only photo ID commonly available is a driving licence.
Those without, otherwise known as the poor and the old, make up a sizeable chunk of the Democratic base, and Republicans are determined to place as many obstacles as they can between them and a polling booth this November.
Republican-led legislatures in Arizona, Georgia, Missouri, Florida and Indiana pushed through photo ID laws in time for what the party knew would be a close election. In the first three cases the law has been put on hold by eleventh-hour legal challenges, but not before inflicting significant damage on the principle of universal suffrage.
In Arizona an appeals court placed a temporary injunction on the new ID law this month, one day before the deadline to register for the vote, but only after tens of thousands of applications to register had been turned down while the law was in effect.
Missouri's ID law was stopped by the state supreme court last Monday, one week after the deadline to register, and long after many thousands of non-car-owning Missourians had been deterred from their right to vote.
Georgia's Supreme Court ruled the state's version of the ID law unconstitutional after hearing that well over half a million of the state's previously eligible voters didn't have a driving licence.
Even after this decision Republican state election officials mistakenly or maliciously sent out more than 200,000 letters informing voters that they would in fact need a driving licence to vote. This week a mass mailing reversing the previous missive arrived on people's doorsteps, only adding to voter confusion.
Indiana's Republican Secretary of State has successfully beaten back legal challenges to his new voter photo ID law, the absurdity of which was recently illustrated by Congresswoman Julia Carson as she tried to vote. The five-term Democrat was initially prevented from casting her ballot in May's primary election in which she was a candidate, because her Congressional photo ID lacked the expiration date needed to make it an acceptable proof of identity under the new law.
Florida, the patron state of disenfranchisement in recent history, is the only other state where a photo ID is mandatory to vote. An additional measure imposing exorbitant fines on voter registration groups who miss filing deadlines was recently overturned in court, but not before Florida's League of Women suspended their drive to register voters for fear of bankruptcy.
In California, Republicans are resorting to even more questionable means to deter likely Democratic voters. Orange County Republican Tan Nguyen is under investigation for financing a mass mailing in Spanish to Latino US citizens which stated mendaciously: "You are advised that if ... you are an immigrant, voting in a federal election is a crime that could result in jail time." US citizens, wherever they are born, are indeed entitled to vote.
The desperate lengths to which Republicans are prepared to go are a measure of their fear this election cycle. They've even stooped to exploiting natural disasters. Hurricane Katrina displaced half a million low-income residents of New Orleans, and most moved out of Louisiana into Texas.
Both states, where Republicans run the electoral machines, have been slow as molasses in ensuring this massive transient population the right to vote either in their new abode or back home by absentee ballot.
The Republicans' manoeuvres, legal or otherwise, will probably not be enough to stem the tide sweeping the House of Representatives back to Democratic control in November. The best they can hope for is to minimise the damage. They've spent the last decade obsessively remapping congressional districts to filter out Democrats, and their efforts are the reason only 50 seats are in play this year instead of 150.
Under the grand design of now-indicted Tom Delay, the former Republican leader in the House, redistricting was intended to create an impregnable fortress guaranteeing a permanent Republican majority in the House. But like any building, a fortress is only as strong as its base, which this year appears to be disintegrating.
· Philip James is a former Democratic party strategist
-
This subject doesn't bother me as i intend to c=win the lottery and move to somewhere not so fraKKed........ :nod:
-
Y'know, it's crap like this that turns people to terrorism as the only way to really make a dent in the system.