Scary Political Prediction of 2004 Now Coming True

[Ankesh]

Giving finger prints is not the same as cutting all your hair or getting a tattoo. Giving finger prints neither hurts you nor changes your appearance.

What I'm debating is the tools and what you're debating is what the government can do with the tools.

They tracked you even though you haven't given them any finger prints - haven't they? They can track you even now - whenever you use credit cards, through your drivers license etc.

There was this story in the news some time back - they found 7 fake passports of a well known gangster - who was in the Top 10 wanted list in India. He could travel the world as he pleased. Now if they had finger printing technology, he wouldn't be able to use 7 different passports. His traveling would have been restricted. He would probably have been caught if he tried to travel through plane. Finger printing is a more secure way of identity checking than using passports.

I'm all for "upgrading" the technology - the tools.

Ankesh,

Thanks for adding some more.

Giving finger prints is not the same as cutting all your hair or getting a tattoo.

It IS the same When taken in the Context YOU asked me the question... "if everybody had X would you do it then" type of question. And so it must be viewed in the context of my answer. Which is, "No, just because everyone in a country has X doesn't mean I will subject myself to it."

Likewise, if travelling to a Muslim country meant I had to wear Traditional clothes or my wife had to wear a Burka or Nijab or Hijab I would not go.

What I'm debating is the tools and what you're debating is what the government can do with the tools.

That's right. And like I mentioned elsewhere... IF my fingerprint was encoded into my passport and so the airport scan simply Cross-Referenced the encoded print with my scanned print, just to Verify I am who I am, and Then the scanned print is deleted off of all computer memory, I am fine with that.

I am also fine with an airport scanned print being cross referenced with existing criminal prints on file, as long as the scanned print is likewise deleted from all computer memory After the scan test is completed. But if That is the case, then such scans can be used Before a person leaves their own country, can't they? Otherwise it would require a World Wide Collaberation for ALL fingerprints of criminals to be in a central world database for it to work.

Also, you cannot discuss the tool without also discussing the Use of that tool. Fingerprint scanning and cashless transactions and IDing, can Only be used one way - with a central database and all computers linked. I WILL lose my privacy. That MUST be taken into account. And you are Ignoring that inconveient fact.

Look. I have No Problem if YOU want to live that way. My problem is that YOU - and all the other people who think the same - see your way FORCED onto me.

As it is, there are people who use their Credit Card for everything and then pay it off each month. Thus, ALL their spending is available to be seen. But that is their CHOICE. What you advocate takes that CHOICE away. And I am asking, but waiting for an answer, to why losing my privacy like this is a good thing?

Think of it like this... if what you sped you money on is Not the business of your nextdoor neighbor, why is it someone else's business who calls themselves a govt?

As much as you might like to think Creep doesn't happen, it ALWAYS does. The Unitended Consequences ALWAYS results. Which makes you question whether they were unintended in the first place.

Michael Ross