h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I've re-read your original post, AncientBrit, and while there are some neat ideas there, it still remains, that many of us fundementally disagree with having a compulsary id card scheme in the first place. let's face, for the cost (what, approx £3 billion) for that amount of money the scheme would have to be compulsary. Your list has a sizeable amount of inducements to carry a card, but still no real reason why we need it in the first place. I know we're all concerned about making society as inclusive as possible, but it strikes me that these inducements will still create/contribute a disenfranchised underbelly

"Fly off the handle"? What I posted was perfectly reasonable and was not written when I was angry or anything. How strange.

I know you started the thread AncientBrit, but that does not mean you "own" it. People are free to post what they want. I don't think it is unreasonable to raise crucially important areas of a debate when one thinks it is necessary. If you ignore them they won't go away you know.

So, again, I challenge someone to name some real benefits to an ID cards scheme. Or is the defeaning silence of the last 18 hours some sort of hint?

Ste

AncientBrit, haven't you just contradicted yourself? In reply to my earlier posting, you asked why I don't carry my birth certificate around as it is a much better way to prove my identity, then a few posts later you talk about the convenience of small cards. I don't know about you, but my birth certificate is a piece of A4 paper and my student card is laminated and the size of a credit card. I carry it because although I am 21, I often get asked for ID in pubs. Embarassing, yeah, but I put up with it. Otherwise, these same people who ask for proof of my age are not interested in the slightest who I am.

Only people who are out for something would ask for that sort of information.

W****E.
I have never said that I agree with having a compulsory ID Card. What I would like to see is a standard form of identification that would link all the present documents that bureaucrats claim are necessary for them to do to do their job. The real reason that this needs to be done is to reduce the enormous waste of money and resources created by the present system. The Spin offs would be easier detection of fraud and criminal activity and the true recognition of the "disenfranchised underbelly" (your words not mine) who could be given help where help was needed.
You may have read posting 1 but you seem to ignore posting 77 that was specifically addressed to you.

Ste
Please get ID Cards and ID'ing and all that that means out of your mind. Establishing your true identity goes much deeper than a need to gain admisson to a pub. Perhaps you should come home more often.

fords_prefect
You seem to have put your own interpretation on my posting number 72. I asked ' would you carry your birth certificate if it were plastic ?' Meaning of course small and convenient.
You admit to having a birth certificate. Why have you bothered to keep it ?
You also say. 'Only people who are out for something would ask for that sort of information' I ask you what sort of information and it what context do you make the statement ?

Because there's too much 'Big Brother' activity in the world today, and why the hell should I have to prove who I am? I keep my birth certificate because it's official proof of who I am. I'm not against having some sort of ID, but having all my details on one card? Too many arguments against than for, and at the moment you just can't convince me otherwise. I'm definitely in the 'against' camp. You talk about how you didn't say you wanted compulsory ID cards but just some sort of standard identification. Don't you see, that would become compulsory?

"Please get ID Cards and ID'ing and all that that means out of your mind. Establishing your true identity goes much deeper than a need to gain admisson to a pub."

You are now ceasing to make sense in a rather annoying and patronising way. Please elucidate these deep and meaningful reasons that we need to establist our identity (note: ID = identity, therefore ID cards are central to a debate about ID cards, hence getting ID cards "out of my mind" would be rather silly, no?).

"Perhaps you should come home more often."

I'm sure the whole of the United Kingdom has unalterably changed in the 12 months since I was there. I knew I should have stayed to hold things together.

*sigh*

Ste

Fords_prefect - Your posting 85
'Big Brother' thrives within the 'system' as it is today. I do accept that for one reason or another it may become necessary/compulsory to carry an ID Card . It is you that refuses to accept that possibility. What form should that card take ?
You seem to accept that an unendorsed birth certificate would suffice.
If the detail on your birth certificate was on a card that would conveniently fit you wallet, what would induce you to carry that card ?

Ste - your posting 86
The whole question of ID Cards has come about in the 12 months since you were last in England. I'm sorry that you find my reasoning annoying and patronising. I must say that your intransigent attitude does little to add to my pleasure in this conversation. Lord forbid that you should have any responsibility for holding things together in the UK.
You continue to misconstrue my words in a way that creates an argument and redirects the conversation. What's all this rubbish about "deep and meaningful'" reasons. What I said was "Establishing your true identity goes much deeper than a need to gain admission to a pub" To elucidate on that, people happily carry ID for personal reasons. To make it compulsory to carry a card would require some compelling/significant reason to do so.
The point of my proposition is that if such a compelling and significant reason should come about then people could be induced to carry a card without the need to make it compulsory. Whatever that compelling/specific reason may be, then if that positive identification is genuine and secure many other benefits could accrue.
I also believe that any necessary data/information is already availabe. If fraudsters can manipulate it to suit their ends, 'others' should be able to utilise/access it for legal purposes. If you can't trust governments/civil sevants to do it who else would you trust ?
I understand that the Church of Latter-Day Saints have quite a database

I'm not refusing to accept the possiblity, I know it's a possibility. I'm objecting to the gradual lack of freedom and anonymity this will bring in.

If you think about it, in Britain at the moment, we sort of already have an ID card - credit cards! The problem is that these are often stolen and the only security is a signature which can easily be forged. So obviously, it makes a lot of sense to have a more secure ID card...

However, what makes this ID card unforgable/unstealable/unusable by any other than the owner? That is the minimum requirement on the card be it fingerprints/DNA/whatever. The problem is that as security increases, so does the criminal's ability to get round it.

As you can see I'm in two minds. We carry loads of cards already (I know I do) and do we really need another? On the other hand it might make things easier like opening bank accounts etc. Equally it might in the long term, make organised crime easier, if (when) they can work out how to get round the security...

Hmmm.
Bambi.

Well I for one am quite happy to keep everything separate. What happens, for example, if all your information is on one card and you lose it?

fords_prefect - your postings 88 & 90
With or without an ID Card your freedom is being eroded and any claim for anonymity has long gone. Information/data is held against your name ,without your knowledge or consent, in data bases and files held by more organisations than you would ever imagine.
An ID Card could not carry and would not need to carry all this information. The first thing that it must do is to provide you with a unique identity. Read what I say to Bambi below and what I said to W****E in posting 84.

Bambi - your posting 89
I agree with what you say. I believe the answer to your dilemma will be found if we go back to basics and learn from the mistakes that have been made in the past. In the beginning a birth certificate. Why was this necessary ? Next having introduced it why was it necessary to then create a national insurance certificate, a medical certificate, an electoral register, a wedding license, a passport, a driving license the list goes on. Couldn't most of these thing, if not all , have been covered by issuing a simple endorsement to your birth certificate ?
Shouldn't we start again based on a modern version of the birth certificate.

"We don't have any privacy anyway, so we may as well let what we think of as privacy be invaded", doesn't really convince me as an argument. It's certainly not a positive argument. I expect you wouldn't like it if someone installed a telescreen (is that what they were called in 'Nineteen Eighty-Four'?) in your home, and allowed someone to watch you 24 hours. But then again - why not? Most of your other life in on CCTV anyway.

DoctorGonzo - your posting 92
Your a bright one to talk about convincing argument. I've just looked back at your earlier contributions (postings 56,61,62 and 68) These postings provide convincing evidence that you have many observations and opinions. Unfortunately I can find no place at all where you put forward a suggestion/solution. It becomes rather obvious that given a problem, argument is your only course of action.
In your posting you even go so far as to create an argument where no argument exists. In fact you seem to be arguing with yourself. How does registering your birth become an invasion of privacy. Do I understand that you want CCTV in all registry offices or are you saying that they have been there since 1984 ?

I apologise if my posting wasn't clear. I'm not suggesting that we should have CCTV cameras in registry offices, not at all. Let's try this again...

* I agree with W*****E that the onus is on those who are pro-ID card to provide a convincing argument for ID cards.
* I have not heard an argument so far that has convinced me that ID cards are a positive thing. I am willing to keep an open mind. If I am convinced, I will change my mind. As it stands, I am against their introduction.
* I don't think that your arguments are convincing. You seem to be suggesting in previous posts that we might as well have them, as we have no real privacy anyway. Whether this is true or not is moot point. My example, perhaps a poor one, was to suggest that you wouldn't want CCTV in your home - "we might as well, we have no privacy anyway".
* My reference to telescreens (which I'm not sure is the correct term) was a reference to George Orwell's book 'Nineteen Eighty-Four'. 'Nineteen Eighty-Four' is a fairly famous twentieth century novel, and has some convincing arguments for not giving up civil liberties, and lots more besides.

" It becomes rather obvious that given a problem, argument is your only course of action"
I assumed that when you posted your original message, you were looking for responses. I do not expect everyone to agree with what I say. Indeed, far from it. But attacking the person who disagrees with you isn't exactly constructive debate, is it? Please, criticise what I post, but it's probably best if we keep the level of argument away from childish attacks.

I'd have to agree with that, although I still think ID cards would be a waste of time and money.

I also suggest, AncientBrit, that you read 'Nineteen Eighty-Four' - you say DrG is bascially looking for a fight but you don't seem to take anyone else's views seriously either. Read the book and you might just start to understand where we're coming from.

DoctorGonzo - your posting 94
I am sorry but but I am not trying to argue a case. I am just expressing an opinion, my own personal opinion, together with what I believe to be constructive ideas to support them. Why on earth should I want to convince you that those opinions are omnipotent ? I happen to agree with the view that if ID cards are to be imposed there needs to be a perfectly good and valid reason for so doing. Extract from my Posting 70 with regard to ID cards. "If I am to carry it around with me then it needs to be presented in a more convenient form and I need to know specifically why I must carry it."

You do not have to develop your argument for me, I understand the points that you try to make, most of which are far from unique. I could easily argue with you personally but I repeat my only objective is to put forward constructive ideas with regard to the introduction of ID Cards not to argue the case as to whether or not they should be introduced. Some of my views are flippant, some are of a more serious nature.
It amuses me that in your posting 94 you finish with words that would again serve to provoke argument. Can I remind you my nickname is Ancient Brit, and that truth always hurts if nearer home. If you had referred to my comments as senile rather than childish it would have caused me more annoyance. Can I remind you that this is a conversation group. I doubt if the word argument is used in a dictionary definition of the word conversation.

fords_prefect - your posting 95
I have read 1984 but it's now 2002 and the SF novel did not become historical fact. Sorry that you seem to be of the opinion that our destiny is full of doom and beyond our control. You should read some of the lighter side of h2g2. As an Ancient Brit I have seen many changes. a lot of which have been for the better. I'm afraid I can not take anything that is said on an anonimous conversation group too seriously, nor should you. Just take it as food for thought not for action. The race to 2084 will go on with or without ID cards. It just happens that in my view it would be a more open race if we all had a true and recognisable identity...

So you're saying you just came here to state your opinion, and don't really care what others have to say about it? Then this could have stopped after post 1 I guess.

BTW argument as in the sense of a good reason.

The same thought occurred to me Xanatic.

If all you wanted to do was express your opinion and not take note/discuss other/alternative opinions why title the thread with a question?

Why note just post your thoughts as a journal entry on your home space?

Sorry to come to this so late - I've been away. I'd just like to add my support to the anti-ID cards brigade, esp Dr G. I need a reason why I should have to give up my privacy. There are many occasions (not criminal)that I have lied about my identity.Soetimes (horror) I lie about my age.
I have lived in seven different countries, including my present post, where carrying ID cards is compulsory and I have never been asked to produce mine for any reason, even at army road blocks.I'm a relatively wealthy, middle-aged white woman.
In all seven counries I have seen suspected illegal immigrants or baggars being beaten up by the police - the only people I have ever seen asked for their ID are young and poor - usually men and very often black.
Even if I was offered a vast sum of money to carry a British ID card, I would not do so.If it ever does become compulsory, I shall deliberately protest and go to jail for not carrying one

AncientBrit, if you start a thread as controversial as this one, please be prepared for opposing views and yes, arguments.

I don't need an ID card to prove my identity. I know who I am, so do the people that matter to me, and that's all I'm bothered about.