| Author | Message | ||
     Blake |
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162-20027837-50 1465.html Pros and cons and conspiracy... discuss? I no like. Mainly on account of everything else I've seen from the administration. I don't trust them at all. They are out to "fundamentally change the United States of America" and I've yet to hear them explain what they mean by that. I'm pretty sure I know, and lacking any credible explanation by the administration, I'm going with my gut. | ||
| Fahren |
I don't like it, either. Although they profess that it will be marvelously more convenient to have a centrally secured system, in lieu of remembering passwords for everything, my gut tells me that it is about control, pure and simple. At least it's not being run by Homeland Security, which would truly frighten me (they were pushing hard to control/run the operation, though). It is supposed to be a non-compulsory system as well, which is fine, except you know how that goes - at some point with computers, it becomes so convoluted to work around a system that becomes more and more the norm, many resisting computer users will just cave in and sign up, for the convenience. | ||
| Aesquire |
No Conspiracy. Simple, direct power grab. "We are not talking about a national ID card," Locke said at the Stanford event. "We are not talking about a government-controlled system. What we are talking about is enhancing online security and privacy and reducing and perhaps even eliminating the need to memorize a dozen passwords, through creation and use of more trusted digital identities." Let's break that down. Uncle will have all your passwords. Or, your only one will be with Uncle. Same thing. Schmidt stressed today that anonymity and pseudonymity will remain possible on the Internet. "I don't have to get a credential if I don't want to," he said. There's no chance that "a centralized database will emerge," and "we need the private sector to lead the implementation of this," he said. Translation. ( since this para is pure lies ) Anonymity will be impossible with any govt. regulated transaction. You will have no choice. A centralized database will be expanded, and favored private sector firms will get very rich. Blake, by credible explanation you mean lies you can pretend to believe? Come on, you know better. The only times Barack tells the truth is in front of a bunch of leftists who support him with cash or muscle. ( the nice money folk in San-Fran, or SEIU thugs ) Or, on occasion, when his ever simmering rage is forced out by a question. ( the "how freaking dare you question me!!?" response ) Of course, using the govt. system will be first optional, then mandatory, then deviations will be punishable. Bet ya. | ||
| Court |
Let me get this right . . . the same folks who can't keep hundreds of Mexicans from coming across the borders, taking jobs, killing innocent people and wreaking havoc what to provide me with security on the internet? No thanks. These dumb son's of bitches who've never held a real working job have no clue what the world is like beyond their government supported educations, housing, jobs and lifestyles. | ||
| Sifo |
If there's a market driven reason for this to exist, let the market figure out how to make it work. A government driven reason to push us in that direction is a clear power grab. This is only made worse by looking at the current administrations record on power grabs. | ||
| Fahren |
C'mon - this goes far beyond party lines. It is not a left or right thing, since Power is Power, be it wielded from left or right. Has BO scrapped the Patriot Act? Has any president ever given back any of the increased powers of the Executive once they are created? Would a future president drop the internet ID program? Power/Control is a non-partisan issue. | ||
| Sifo |
The Patriot Act was bi-partisan and had a very real reason. It also had an expiration date. It was not only extended, but strengthened under liberal rule in all three branches of our government. This is after years of these same liberal complaining about the scope of it. You really need a better example to show it being a non-partisan issue. The internet ID program will not have an expiration date and will certainly get expanded upon. You can call it non-partisan if you like, but lets just wait and see who winds up supporting this idea. Get ready for some party line votes on this "non-partisan" issue. | ||
| Just_ziptab |
Internet security? Why not spend the time and money to fully persecute scammers and hackers.Internet ID will be a simple "work around" for those that want it.Somebody will get my new internet security ID and the next thing you know.........black SUV's will be all over me........for something I didn't do. | ||
| Sifo |
Government sponsored internet ID will be a store for hackers to get a treasure trove of information to steal IDs and commit huge amounts of fraud. RUN LIKE HELL! | ||
| Court |
>>>>>black SUV's will be all over me. I've had them at the house . . . . with photos of me, my cellphone bill, credit card bills and whereabouts for the last 8 weeks. Trying using the words "Timmes Squarrre" and "Bommmb" (you correct the spellings, I've been through this) in a couple e-mails. I was building a 42 story building, Times Squarrre Tower, in the center of Timems Square and my Foremans's name was Mike Bombadier. If you don't want to type . . . about 10 cellphone conversations will likely give you a chance to meet the 3 nice gentlemen who came to my house. | ||
| Blake |
>>> At least it's not being run by Homeland Security, which would truly frighten me (they were pushing hard to control/run the operation, though). I think you have it backwards. At least our security organizations are limited, and we are protected by the 4th amendment. The Dept of Commerce has no such limitations by way of an egregiously corrupted interpretation of the commerce clause. They will not be intruding into your personal effects; they will be doing their duty regulating interstate commerce. >>> Get ready for some party line votes on this "non-partisan" issue. No voting, it is being instituted by presidential decree. It's not a law, rather a directive to one of the offices under authority of the executive. "We are the people we've been waiting for."
| ||
| Blake |
Court, You may be off the hook on that particular turn of phrase since our communications infrastructure became flooded with news of the actual Times Square Bombing attempt. Might not want to be talking about "targets" and politics in the same breath though.  For instance... "Does Target aim to sell Obama's books?" (Message edited by Blake on January 09, 2011) | ||
| Blake |
>>> If there's a market driven reason for this to exist, let the market figure out how to make it work. It already exists in various forms and is offered by the likes of Microsoft, Symantec and the like. As Patrick notes, they are nothing but liars. | ||
| Cityxslicker |
I wonder which of the 6 identities I have that I should use to 'be certified and trusted'...... if your tinfoil paranoia hasnt caused you to create at least one alias, one false address, one mis directed employment history..... you are behind the curve  | ||
| Buellerandy |
So what you mean to say is that your real name is Neo?  | ||
| Cityxslicker |
This aint no party, this aint no disco. | ||
| Imonabuss |
This is terifying. Basically although there is a sh**load of drivel on the web, it also is a totally free communication means which is full of good information. Fight this like crazy. What he is up to is government control of the media and personal freedom at the same time, in it's most quintessential form. Expect this to be flavored with all sorts of scare words like "keeping your children safe", etc. | ||
| Aesquire |
It's for your own good.  | ||
| Crackhead |
So a hacker just has to obtain one "key" and have access to everything, yea that is smart. | ||
| M1combat |
I'm sure they'll put guys with guns around the server right? Should be plenty secure from internet hackers then... What could go wrong? | ||
| Cataract2 |
I feel so much safer now... | ||
| Crackhead |
I think this will never happen. The gov can't get the Key system working on all their own programs when they are located on the same sever behind their own fire wall. You don't want to know how many passwords I have. | ||
| Hootowl |
Will my new online ID be as secure as my Social Security Number is today? | ||
| Sifo |
They will probably just consolidate them together for ease of tracking you, so yes, you can rest assured that the same level of security will be continued. You didn't expect improvements, did you? "It's good enough for government work!" | ||
| Hdbobwithabuell |
Sweet!! I got dibs on selling forged internet ID's to illegal immigrants!!! | ||
| Ezblast |
ID'sRUS.com! (Message edited by ezblast on January 10, 2011) | ||
| Cityxslicker |
The national Id card was buried in the healthcare bill, it is indeed coming, the want to implement it as a 'secure id token' to verify your benefits, history, and of course premium payment. Da Komrade, you have many new freedoms, we will tell you what they are. |
