PeakOil is You
Drivers Licenses and Birth Certificates
First unread post • 10 posts
• Page 1 of 1
by NeoPeasant » Fri 10 Dec 2004, 21:35:10
Luckily for children born today they will have no use for driver's licenses when they turn 16.
- NeoPeasant
- Heavy Crude
- Posts: 1003
- Joined: Tue 12 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
by gg3 » Sat 11 Dec 2004, 00:10:30
Hmm.
According to the mainstream media, "all they were going to do" was standardize drivers' license formats, which made it sound like "photo and tamper-proof stuff and maybe a fingerprint."
But.... DNA??!!!
DNA is the "source code" to your body, hence your brain and your endocrine system, hence the biological basis of your perception, cognition, and emotion.
It will not be long before a scan of your DNA will reveal such things as whether you are biased toward anxiety or depression, whether you are susceptible to developing photosensitive epilepsy, and perhaps even your sense of justice.
Sense of justice?, you ask...
Yep. Here's the evidence it's coded in our genes and inherited from our ape ancestors:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3116678.stm
Summary: Monkeys have a sense of justice. They will protest when they see other monkeys getting greater rewards for performing the same task. As proven in empirical research.
Apparently what we have here is a biological basis for three very politically potent cognitive and behavioral systems:
a) Ambition as commonly understood in free-enterprise societies: dissatisfaction with lesser reward could stimulate competitive behavior intended to increase achievement level in order to obtain equivalent reward or greater.
b) Equalitarianism: belief in equal rewards for equal tasks. Basic sense of social justice regardless of economic system.
c) Tendency toward susceptibility to communism: In the event (a) is continually thwarted on an arbitrary or otherwise unjust basis, dissatisfaction could be channeled toward enforcing (b) via socialistic measures.
And who wouldn't like to know if their prospective employee or business partner scores high on the trait that governs all of these...? And don't you think that companies such as WalMart wouldn't like to hire people who score low on this one...?
Then also, we have genetic markers for right-hemisphere processing of verbal tasks in males (tends to correlate with an "intuitive" decision making style), genetic markers for homosexuality, genetic markers for religiosity (above-average development of right temporal lobe), and the list goes on and on.
Software companies have every right to keep their source code confidential; it's their property, and it's their right to refuse to disclose it to third parties.
Individuals must have the same right with respect to the source code for their bodies: It's *yours,* you got it from your parents, the copyright inheres in the owner, and therefore you have the right to refuse to allow copies to be made (e.g. for use on your driver's license).
The ultimate right to privacy is the integrity of your own body: the powers that be have no right to access your body or obtain a biological sample from you except under a court order equivalent to a search warrant, issued upon good cause of suspecting you in the commission of an appropriately serious crime.
Anyone agree? Anyone disagree? Anyone want to start organizing around this issue?
I'll say this for now: they can have my DNA when they can extract it from my cold dead corpse, and yes this is an issue that's worth rattling the sword of the Second Amendment over.
According to the mainstream media, "all they were going to do" was standardize drivers' license formats, which made it sound like "photo and tamper-proof stuff and maybe a fingerprint."
But.... DNA??!!!
DNA is the "source code" to your body, hence your brain and your endocrine system, hence the biological basis of your perception, cognition, and emotion.
It will not be long before a scan of your DNA will reveal such things as whether you are biased toward anxiety or depression, whether you are susceptible to developing photosensitive epilepsy, and perhaps even your sense of justice.
Sense of justice?, you ask...
Yep. Here's the evidence it's coded in our genes and inherited from our ape ancestors:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3116678.stm
Summary: Monkeys have a sense of justice. They will protest when they see other monkeys getting greater rewards for performing the same task. As proven in empirical research.
Apparently what we have here is a biological basis for three very politically potent cognitive and behavioral systems:
a) Ambition as commonly understood in free-enterprise societies: dissatisfaction with lesser reward could stimulate competitive behavior intended to increase achievement level in order to obtain equivalent reward or greater.
b) Equalitarianism: belief in equal rewards for equal tasks. Basic sense of social justice regardless of economic system.
c) Tendency toward susceptibility to communism: In the event (a) is continually thwarted on an arbitrary or otherwise unjust basis, dissatisfaction could be channeled toward enforcing (b) via socialistic measures.
And who wouldn't like to know if their prospective employee or business partner scores high on the trait that governs all of these...? And don't you think that companies such as WalMart wouldn't like to hire people who score low on this one...?
Then also, we have genetic markers for right-hemisphere processing of verbal tasks in males (tends to correlate with an "intuitive" decision making style), genetic markers for homosexuality, genetic markers for religiosity (above-average development of right temporal lobe), and the list goes on and on.
Software companies have every right to keep their source code confidential; it's their property, and it's their right to refuse to disclose it to third parties.
Individuals must have the same right with respect to the source code for their bodies: It's *yours,* you got it from your parents, the copyright inheres in the owner, and therefore you have the right to refuse to allow copies to be made (e.g. for use on your driver's license).
The ultimate right to privacy is the integrity of your own body: the powers that be have no right to access your body or obtain a biological sample from you except under a court order equivalent to a search warrant, issued upon good cause of suspecting you in the commission of an appropriately serious crime.
Anyone agree? Anyone disagree? Anyone want to start organizing around this issue?
I'll say this for now: they can have my DNA when they can extract it from my cold dead corpse, and yes this is an issue that's worth rattling the sword of the Second Amendment over.
-
gg3 - Expert
- Posts: 3271
- Joined: Mon 24 May 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: California, USA
by 0mar » Sat 11 Dec 2004, 16:22:03
I think I won't be having children in America. As soon as I get my PhD, I am getting the hell out of here.
This shit is way too scary now. We have governmental control over our very beings, and time and time again, the government has shown a tendency to abuse their powers rather than use them.
Biometrics for terrorism or for keeping the population in check when the economy crashes? I think we know which one it is.
This shit is way too scary now. We have governmental control over our very beings, and time and time again, the government has shown a tendency to abuse their powers rather than use them.
Biometrics for terrorism or for keeping the population in check when the economy crashes? I think we know which one it is.
Joseph Stalin
"It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything. "
"It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything. "
-
0mar - Heavy Crude
- Posts: 1499
- Joined: Tue 12 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: Davis, California
by Permanently_Baffled » Sat 11 Dec 2004, 16:55:28
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('0mar', 'I') think I won't be having children in America. As soon as I get my PhD, I am getting the hell out of here.
This shit is way too scary now. We have governmental control over our very beings, and time and time again, the government has shown a tendency to abuse their powers rather than use them.
Biometrics for terrorism or for keeping the population in check when the economy crashes? I think we know which one it is.
This shit is way too scary now. We have governmental control over our very beings, and time and time again, the government has shown a tendency to abuse their powers rather than use them.
Biometrics for terrorism or for keeping the population in check when the economy crashes? I think we know which one it is.
Dont come here Omar , they are introducing ID cards with bometric stuff as well.
Question is , will it be a ID card or a ration card?
PB
-
Permanently_Baffled - Heavy Crude
- Posts: 1151
- Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: England
by 0mar » Sat 11 Dec 2004, 17:52:29
lol is there anywhere sane left in the world!
Joseph Stalin
"It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything. "
"It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything. "
-
0mar - Heavy Crude
- Posts: 1499
- Joined: Tue 12 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: Davis, California
by gg3 » Sat 11 Dec 2004, 20:20:31
Whew!
Okay, so now it seems like a rumor. But has anyone read the bill through, to find out if mass harvesting of DNA is lurking anywhere else in there? It's well known that such tidbits as this can be hidden deep within seemingly unrelated text, and linked (in the non-web sense) via obscure connecting language. (I once knew a person who was an expert at this type of forward-reference and backward-reference obscurantism. Sneaky as hell.)
Re. the UK: What kind of biometrics? And what's the chance that it could be restricted to a fingerprint, not a retinal scan or DNA? Any chance that a new government (post Blair) could make appropriate changes?
A fingerprint seems fairly innocuous. There have never been any claims, nor is there any evidence, that a fingerprint contains any information about any other characteristics of an individual. It appears to be a unique identifier and that's all, nothing more.
A retinal scan is more ominous.
If I'm not mistaken, there was a borderline-science field of study called Irridiology (sp?) that purported to use a crude version of retinal imaging to detect all manner of physical and personality traits. It was historically dismissed as being psuedoscience similar to phrenology.
However, information theory tells us that attenuated signals can be widely distributed throughout a system, so there is a remote possibility that the structure of the retina could reflect other genetic markers, thereby providing a basis for the claim that other physical characteristics could be disclosed via a retinal scan.
And as I mentioned, DNA is the most ominous of all: the source-code to your body, hence your brain, hence your personality.
Methinks it's time to go pro-active on this one, and start lobbying for legislation that would:
= Block any/all acquisition of DNA for purposes other than medical, with specific exceptions enumerated below,
= Require fully informed consent of the individual, with specific exceptions enumerated below,
= Require that withholding consent not be usable as grounds for any implication in any criminal, civil, or private-sector transaction including employment and medical insurance,
= Forbid the use of DNA information as grounds for denial of medical coverage or care, or differential pricing thereof,
= Provide exceptions for search warrants issued by a court of competent jurisdiction, naming the individual, the alleged crime, etc. etc., with a higher standard of proof than for any other type of search warrant,
= Allow individuals to voluntarily offer DNA evidence to prove innocence in any criminal or civil matter,
= Require that the DNA samples and any data derived therefrom, when used in criminal or civil proceedings, be destroyed and not stored in any form in the event the individual is not brought to trial or is acquitted of the charges,
= Allow retention of DNA evidence and data derived therefrom in the event an individual is convicted of a crime of force or fraud.
I would call it the "Human Source-Code Privacy Act," and no, it doesn't have a cute acronym!
(Pardon me if this seems a bit roughly worded; I don't normally write this kind of stuff in a rush:-).
Okay, so now it seems like a rumor. But has anyone read the bill through, to find out if mass harvesting of DNA is lurking anywhere else in there? It's well known that such tidbits as this can be hidden deep within seemingly unrelated text, and linked (in the non-web sense) via obscure connecting language. (I once knew a person who was an expert at this type of forward-reference and backward-reference obscurantism. Sneaky as hell.)
Re. the UK: What kind of biometrics? And what's the chance that it could be restricted to a fingerprint, not a retinal scan or DNA? Any chance that a new government (post Blair) could make appropriate changes?
A fingerprint seems fairly innocuous. There have never been any claims, nor is there any evidence, that a fingerprint contains any information about any other characteristics of an individual. It appears to be a unique identifier and that's all, nothing more.
A retinal scan is more ominous.
If I'm not mistaken, there was a borderline-science field of study called Irridiology (sp?) that purported to use a crude version of retinal imaging to detect all manner of physical and personality traits. It was historically dismissed as being psuedoscience similar to phrenology.
However, information theory tells us that attenuated signals can be widely distributed throughout a system, so there is a remote possibility that the structure of the retina could reflect other genetic markers, thereby providing a basis for the claim that other physical characteristics could be disclosed via a retinal scan.
And as I mentioned, DNA is the most ominous of all: the source-code to your body, hence your brain, hence your personality.
Methinks it's time to go pro-active on this one, and start lobbying for legislation that would:
= Block any/all acquisition of DNA for purposes other than medical, with specific exceptions enumerated below,
= Require fully informed consent of the individual, with specific exceptions enumerated below,
= Require that withholding consent not be usable as grounds for any implication in any criminal, civil, or private-sector transaction including employment and medical insurance,
= Forbid the use of DNA information as grounds for denial of medical coverage or care, or differential pricing thereof,
= Provide exceptions for search warrants issued by a court of competent jurisdiction, naming the individual, the alleged crime, etc. etc., with a higher standard of proof than for any other type of search warrant,
= Allow individuals to voluntarily offer DNA evidence to prove innocence in any criminal or civil matter,
= Require that the DNA samples and any data derived therefrom, when used in criminal or civil proceedings, be destroyed and not stored in any form in the event the individual is not brought to trial or is acquitted of the charges,
= Allow retention of DNA evidence and data derived therefrom in the event an individual is convicted of a crime of force or fraud.
I would call it the "Human Source-Code Privacy Act," and no, it doesn't have a cute acronym!
(Pardon me if this seems a bit roughly worded; I don't normally write this kind of stuff in a rush:-).
-
gg3 - Expert
- Posts: 3271
- Joined: Mon 24 May 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: California, USA
by smiley » Sat 11 Dec 2004, 20:28:22
No biometric data for US-citizens, just for tourists.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')b]the US-VISIT programme – biometric data
US-Visit forms part of a programme of measures introduced to improve safety and security for both visitors to the US and US citizens. At the moment it only applies to travellers who require a visa to enter the US and are aged between 14 and 79 years old. There are also special arrangements in place for travellers with disabilities. However, from 30 September 2004, US-Visit procedures will be expanded to include all visitors travelling under the Visa Waiver Programme (VWP) arriving at both air and sea ports of entry into the USA.
what does the US-VISIT programme involve?
The the moment, US-VISIT requires the collection of unique data – in this case a scan of an individual’s unique fingerprint by an inkless scanner, in addition to a digital photograph. These details are taken during the normal immigration inspection process and it’ll be necessary on each and every entry into the United States. The fingerprint is verified and stored on a US government computer together with the digital photograph.
All places of entry will have this scanning facility, but not all points of departure. If you’re leaving the US through somewhere with this facility, you will be scanned and you’ll need to present your passport at the self-service kiosks. However, you won’t be penalised in any way if you are leaving via an airport that does not have this facility.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')b]the US-VISIT programme – biometric data
US-Visit forms part of a programme of measures introduced to improve safety and security for both visitors to the US and US citizens. At the moment it only applies to travellers who require a visa to enter the US and are aged between 14 and 79 years old. There are also special arrangements in place for travellers with disabilities. However, from 30 September 2004, US-Visit procedures will be expanded to include all visitors travelling under the Visa Waiver Programme (VWP) arriving at both air and sea ports of entry into the USA.
what does the US-VISIT programme involve?
The the moment, US-VISIT requires the collection of unique data – in this case a scan of an individual’s unique fingerprint by an inkless scanner, in addition to a digital photograph. These details are taken during the normal immigration inspection process and it’ll be necessary on each and every entry into the United States. The fingerprint is verified and stored on a US government computer together with the digital photograph.
All places of entry will have this scanning facility, but not all points of departure. If you’re leaving the US through somewhere with this facility, you will be scanned and you’ll need to present your passport at the self-service kiosks. However, you won’t be penalised in any way if you are leaving via an airport that does not have this facility.
http://www.flybmi.com/bmi/en-gb/traveli ... heUSA.aspx
-
smiley - Intermediate Crude
- Posts: 2274
- Joined: Fri 16 Apr 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: Europe
by smiley » Sat 11 Dec 2004, 20:46:44
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gg3', 'A') fingerprint seems fairly innocuous. There have never been any claims, nor is there any evidence, that a fingerprint contains any information about any other characteristics of an individual. It appears to be a unique identifier and that's all, nothing more.
Fairly innocent ???
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'J')ust ask Brandon Mayfield, the Oregon lawyer who was arrested in May, jailed for two weeks and branded a terrorist. FBI experts mistakenly linked his fingerprint to the Madrid train bombing that killed 191 people in March - even though Mayfield has never been to Madrid. The fingerprints were later found by Spanish experts to match a foreign terrorist
http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/monte ... 026701.htm
-
smiley - Intermediate Crude
- Posts: 2274
- Joined: Fri 16 Apr 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: Europe