tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post113164151758649217..comments2023-10-16T15:59:02.445+01:00Comments on NEIL HARDING: The Burden of Proof.Neil Hardinghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01333739272733802133noreply@blogger.comBlogger57125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131792404454765202005-11-12T10:46:00.000+00:002005-11-12T10:46:00.000+00:00I'm sorry, you seem to misunderstand. Neil is actu...I'm sorry, you seem to misunderstand. Neil is actually doing a better job of putting forward the government's case than the government itself, for several reasons:<BR/><BR/>Neil's income probably doesn't depend on pandering to the racist elements of the working class who want the darkies kept out of the country and think ID cards will help.<BR/><BR/>Neil simply doesn't <I>know</I> enough about biometrics and payment systems to be able to qualify as lying about them when he gets his facts wrong. He's under no duty to the public to get this stuff right, and by the combination of these two reasons is therefore in morally superior position to the government ministers pushing the scheme.<BR/><BR/>When something has to be explained to him several times over, it's plausible that he just doesn't get it, rather than that he's been briefed with a careful statement which will get him out of the problem.<BR/><BR/>The density of false statements in Neil's pronouncements (even when his parroting of government lies is taken into account) is significantly lower than that of the government's pronouncements on the ID cards subject.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131790103371933942005-11-12T10:08:00.000+00:002005-11-12T10:08:00.000+00:00Reading through a bit of the archives, I have come...Reading through a bit of the archives, I have come to the conclusion that you are probably all wasting your time trying to convice Neil of anything. Whatever input might go into his pensees happens before he writes his posts not after. A quick search of the literature, recent news stories and editoral comment will show you that there practically no sources of pro-ID cards articles so we have to assume we're in cognative dissonance territory here viz: <BR/><BR/>I am good<BR/>I voted for Rex Toni<BR/>Rex Toni is good.<BR/>Rex Toni wants ID cards.<BR/>ID cards must be good.<BR/><BR/>[the negation of that being ID cards bad => Rex toni bad => either I didn't vote for him or I am bad]<BR/><BR/>you should have been suspicious at the start because there would have to be some reason why there is only one pro-ID cards blogger out there.<BR/><BR/>Possibly further progress will only be acheived by locating Neil's sources and reubutting them. If he were to be kind enough to post them here that would be excellent, otherwise I suggest you spend some time looking for a pro ID card article or press release preferably written by or for a goverment minister.<BR/><BR/>Post a link here and then rebutt it, maybe that might work better.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131767398523809962005-11-12T03:49:00.000+00:002005-11-12T03:49:00.000+00:00Anon: "One of my biggest regrets is sitting in a p...Anon: "One of my biggest regrets is sitting in a pub (illegally) watching NuLabour getting into power, and thinking 'at last, a change'... But now seeing what a terrible mess they've made of that opportunity."<BR/><BR/>Oh come on. Its not that bad, can you imagine what it would have been like if Major had carried on. Look at the mess that govt was in, tearing itself apart. <BR/><BR/>Think of all the good things that wouldn't have happened. <BR/><BR/>1. Bank of England independence. The economy has done pretty well for the last 8 years, low unemployment, inflation etc. <BR/><BR/>2. The minimum wage and guaranteed four weeks holiday.<BR/><BR/>3. What about all the extra doctors and nurses and teachers etc? All the extra investment that has gone on in the NHS, education. Even if you are not entirely happy with the improvements in terms of value for money, its better than it ending up as tax cuts for the wealthy like it would have under Major.<BR/><BR/>4. I don't know whether this tickles your fancy but the improvements in <A HREF="http://brightonregencylabourparty.blogspot.com/2005/11/city-rose-back-in-1989.html" REL="nofollow">gay rights</A> have been pretty spectacular.<BR/><BR/>5. I don't know if this is a coincidence but take a look at a picture of your town centre in the mid 90s and compare it with today. From personal experience I've noticed the massive improvements everywhere I've lived over the last eight years and I don't think its isolated. Birmingham, Walsall, Wolverhampton, Preston, Manchester and London. These are the ones I've noticed big improvements, but I heard places like Cardiff and others have been transformed as well.<BR/><BR/>6. We have regained our position as the fourth biggest economy so we can't be doing too much wrong.<BR/><BR/>7. Friends all seem to be significantly better off than when I knew them 8 years ago. Maybe this is just down to technology but I'm not so sure. I remember friends in some right poor living conditions during the 80's and their lot never seemed to improve then.<BR/><BR/>8. The biggest difference I've noticed has been that the poorest pensioners seem so much better off. I know some of the wealthier pensioners complain about the council tax and I can understand that, but generally most pensioners have never had it so good. The winter allowance, free local public transport, free TV licences and of course the expenditure on the NHS benefits them the most.<BR/><BR/>9. Then there are families with children, tax credits (despite their bureaucracy and inefficiency) have made a difference here. Then childcare/surestart, maternity/paternity leave, and the increases in the education budget. I know everyone thinks the pass rates have been fiddled, but I'm not so sure. <BR/><BR/>10. Free access to Museums. Not to be underestimated how this has helped millions of people. Museums and Galleries are enjoying their best period ever.<BR/><BR/>I'll stop there because I don't want to sound like a Labour Party Broadcast for too long. <BR/><BR/>I like Ken Livingstone's answer to when he is asked on the doorstep, what this government has done for them? He replies 'Maybe I should come insidem because this could take some time'.<BR/><BR/>People don't remember things that have gone right very well, they just bank them and move on, but they tend to remember what a government does wrong, especially when we have a conservative supporting media constantly slagging this Labour government off.<BR/><BR/>Anyway its always worth remembering that a lot of the criticism of this government is for being too much like the Tories, it won't help by replacing this government with the nasty party.Neil Hardinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01333739272733802133noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131751622571552732005-11-11T23:27:00.000+00:002005-11-11T23:27:00.000+00:00No problem, at least you've made an honest attempt...No problem, at least you've made an honest attempt at debate, unlike your government. <BR/><BR/>One of my biggest regrets is sitting in a pub (illegally) watching NuLabour getting into power, and thinking 'at last, a change'... But now seeing what a terrible mess they've made of that opportunity.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131751499779429982005-11-11T23:24:00.000+00:002005-11-11T23:24:00.000+00:00Martin: "Yes, because it is only when every police...Martin: "Yes, because it is only when every police officer can ask a computer "show me all the black people in Burnley who may have been near the crime scene" that members of ethnic minorities can truly have any peace of mind"<BR/><BR/>If they are going to do that, they will do it anyway, with or without an NIR. <BR/><BR/>Circumstantial evidence is just that, and a good lawyer would point that out. It is not anywhere near enough for a conviction.Neil Hardinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01333739272733802133noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131751124260487642005-11-11T23:18:00.000+00:002005-11-11T23:18:00.000+00:00"ok, so add inability to detect sarcasm to your li..."ok, so add inability to detect sarcasm to your list of thought crimes.."<BR/><BR/>I did wonder, but by the way some of the threads have been going on here, I thought I'd better take your comment seriously, just in case. <BR/><BR/>"As for the NHS.. why is your government so desperate to bankrupt it, cripple it, let it be sold for scrap to the private sector & generally bollocks up one of the last great Labour ideals?"<BR/><BR/>Triangulation. Thats what crosses my mind. I think this 'private good, public bad' idea that TB has, can only be taken so far. This does seem a step too far to me. It comes to something when a Labour government with a pretty big majority has to rely on the Tories to get legislation through. This will be a disaster. I'm a big supporter of what TB has done (Iraq, PFI and lack of PR referendum aside) but I think his time might be coming near. Trouble is I'm not so sure of Gordon Brown either. Oh well. In a dream world Ken Livingstone, what a great PM he would have made.Neil Hardinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01333739272733802133noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131749374048918072005-11-11T22:49:00.000+00:002005-11-11T22:49:00.000+00:00ok, so add inability to detect sarcasm to your lis...ok, so add inability to detect sarcasm to your list of thought crimes..<BR/><BR/>As for the NHS.. why is your government so desperate to bankrupt it, cripple it, let it be sold for scrap to the private sector & generally bollocks up one of the last great Labour ideals?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131748771430628722005-11-11T22:39:00.000+00:002005-11-11T22:39:00.000+00:00"It's given us contracts, lawyers, an entire justi..."It's given us contracts, lawyers, an entire justice system, large portions of the insurance industry, locksmiths, biometrics" <BR/><BR/>I rest my case. Wouldn't the world be much better if we didn't need any of these and everyone was honest? All these are necessary but it doesn't mean its not a waste. It's impossible to get rid of, but if it wasn't for all this dishonesty, the money could be spent on better things like the health service.<BR/><BR/>Martin.<BR/>When you accuse someone of having immigration views to the right of the Tory party and the same as the fascist Pym Fortyn that sounds like a thinly veiled accusation of racism to me.<BR/><BR/>So Pym Fortyn and people to the right of the Tories want immigration restrictions reduced and MORE immigrants allowed in, do they? <BR/><BR/>Because that would have to be reality for them to share my views on immigration.<BR/><BR/>I'm sorry I called you a wanker and said I wished people with your views would leave the country. I was mistaken to do that, it was written in a fit of anger at your accusations and I retract it and I apologise. But I think you shouldn't go round 'implying' someone is a racist who isn't.<BR/><BR/>"I don't think you're a racist, and I've already said as much; I think you are one of the few non-racist sincere advocates of ID cards"<BR/><BR/>Well that clears that up, I think.<BR/><BR/>I think I'm one of the 'few non-racist sincere advocates of ID cards', that is actually bothered to argue their case. But that is not the same thing as what you said. <BR/><BR/>I would guess that the vast majority out there, are either fairly in favour of ID cards or not particular bothered either way. <BR/><BR/>Most can't be bothered to get passionate about it. Of the small minority that do get passionate about it, the vast majority of those are against ID cards. <BR/><BR/>This is why the government needs to make a much better case in favour of ID cards and not be complacent, otherwise they risk losing the popularity of the scheme, I think we would both agree on that.Neil Hardinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01333739272733802133noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131744288003083862005-11-11T21:24:00.000+00:002005-11-11T21:24:00.000+00:00Neil: "It is hard work being so outnumbered."But I...Neil: "It is hard work being so outnumbered."<BR/><BR/>But I thought anti-ID people were in the minority? :)<BR/><BR/>Neil: "Dishonesty is rarely a good thing."<BR/><BR/>How can you say this? It's given us contracts, lawyers, an entire justice system, large portions of the insurance industry, locksmiths, biometrics and many more that contribute billions.<BR/><BR/>Point being is that we don't live in a perfect world, and a handshake backed up by a knotted club doesn't really cut it any more.<BR/><BR/>So how does the ID card get to the root causes of dishonesty, or is it yet another palliative piece of legislation that offers little real benefit?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131743592262933982005-11-11T21:13:00.000+00:002005-11-11T21:13:00.000+00:00"ID cards will be a force for good in the fight ag..."ID cards will be a force for good in the fight against racism"<BR/><BR/>Yes, because it is only when every police officer can ask a computer "show me all the black people in Burnley who may have been near the crime scene" that members of ethnic minorities can truly have any peace of mind about their position in our society.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131742660878611392005-11-11T20:57:00.000+00:002005-11-11T20:57:00.000+00:00Peter Clay: "That's not my solution at all! I rese...Peter Clay: "That's not my solution at all! I resent you mischaracterising my position so you can paint me as a racist."<BR/><BR/>This is getting silly, I wasn't accusing anyone of being a racist.<BR/><BR/>You said;<BR/><BR/>"Can you imagine being an ethic minority who fails a biometric check in a public place?"<BR/><BR/>Using the logic that it's the security check at fault rather than the racist assumptions;<BR/><BR/>I used this logic to the argument about black people stopped in flashy cars.<BR/><BR/>I pointed out that the only solution to the problem was to tackle the racist assumptions not stop black people having flashy cars, which is what your logic about ID cards would suggest.<BR/><BR/>It was the logic I suggested that could be racist, not the person using it.<BR/><BR/>"Even with a perfectly non-racist police, the iris recognition technology has a higher failure rate for black people:"<BR/><BR/>This is a valid point, if the discrepancy is large, maybe iris recognition technology will have to improve or we can't use it for ethnic minorities.<BR/><BR/>"People have been trying to [change racist police attitudes] since at least the Brixton riots and before. It's not yet succeeded."<BR/><BR/>Maybe by highlighting the problem more, which ID cards will do, we'll be able to tackle it better?<BR/><BR/>Look at France, by ignoring even the concept of ethnicity they have made the problem worse.<BR/><BR/>Only by monitoring the problem, do we solve it. That is why asking people for their ethnicity on job applications, on the census is the way to monitor progress in race relations. We can only tackle problems when they are highlighted. ID Cards will be a force for good in the fight against racism.Neil Hardinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01333739272733802133noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131741754889226102005-11-11T20:42:00.000+00:002005-11-11T20:42:00.000+00:00Neil, I didn't say you were a racist; take it back...Neil, I didn't say you were a racist; take it back.<BR/><BR/>I keep pointing out that you're on <I>their side</I> in this argument, that's all.<BR/><BR/>Sorry about the screwup with not giving my name on one or two of the posts.<BR/><BR/>Now stop calling me a wanker and advocating my expulsion from the country. <BR/><BR/>What does it say about you if you think people should be kicked out of the country just because of their political views?<BR/>Does history afford you any examples of countries which did that? Were they nice countries?<BR/><BR/>When you say "inferring" (that you are a racist), do you actually mean that, or "implying"? (I'm not a stickler for this sort of thing, but it obviously makes a difference in this case).<BR/><BR/>I don't think you're a racist, and I've already said as much; I think you are one of the few non-racist sincere advocates of ID cards, and I've given reasonable grounds for that assertion already. I think it's fair to point out when someone is saying the same sort of things on immigration as Pim Fortuyn did, though.<BR/><BR/>To the extent that I've made any error at all here, I don't think it justifies repeatedly calling me a wanker and wanting to kick me out of the UK.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131740908096506432005-11-11T20:28:00.000+00:002005-11-11T20:28:00.000+00:00Anon, This is such a big mis-understanding, I don'...Anon, This is such a big mis-understanding, I don't know where to start.<BR/><BR/>I didn't realise I used the word 'assimilated' and I apologise. In the context I was using it, it was just meant to mean 'settled' nothing else.<BR/><BR/>I was responding to a specific comment by Martin who inferred I was a racist, I apologise I didn't make that clear. When someone calls you a racist, when I campaign very strongly against this, I was very insulted.<BR/><BR/>If you look at the articles I've written on here about immigration, I think it is very easy to see I am very anti-racist. I argue for a more open immigration policy. My comment about getting rid of wankers like Martin, was because of his comment calling me a racist. The actual quote is this;<BR/><BR/>"I want to see MORE immigrants come to this country not less. How is that to the right of the Tories? It's a pity we can't get rid of wankers like you and replace you with a few people from other countries."<BR/><BR/>It was written in a fit of anger at the accusation. I'm really upset if you interpreted this at repatriation. I was assuming Martin was English, and my comment was suggesting; lets get rid of English people with his attitude and replace them with people from abroad. It was intended to demonstrate how pro-immigration and anti-racist I am. But in hindsight I can see how it could be misconstrued.<BR/><BR/>I find it really sad that someone like Martin and Chris are resorting to using this racist smear to try and divert attention from the real arguments.Neil Hardinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01333739272733802133noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131738541393436172005-11-11T19:49:00.000+00:002005-11-11T19:49:00.000+00:00"I don't believe you are actually for this particu...<I>"I don't believe you are actually for this particular scheme. I think you are for some other scheme which would give some of the benefits of the current scheme without the drawbacks."<BR/><BR/>Basically, Yes, but I ...</I><BR/><BR/>Ok it was me that asked this question. I'm going to stop being anon as there are several others posting and it's getting confusing.<BR/><BR/>I'm actually quite pleased you've said this, I feel that a proper debate can take place now. The goverments scheme as it stands is intolerable for all kinds of reasons to me, and I would emigrate rather than co-operate. <BR/><BR/>This is not the same thing as saying I would never co-operate with any id card system though, although I am in principle against the idea. If a scheme could be proposed that did some good, and SOME Identity theft might be reduced by this for example, and did little harm then I would be willing to go along with it. However as I've said I would be surprised if such a scheme could be laid out. Theres a balance between liberties of the public and power for the government, that I don't think can be squared on this one. <BR/><BR/>The government and police have repeatedly in recent years abused (for example) anti-terrorism legislation. There was the high profile Labour party conference incident as well as numerous occasions of peaceful protestors being stopped from protesting under anti-terrorism legislation. In view of this I am extremely reluctant for the government to be given new legal powers. However if the ID card doesn't give the government any new powers it's a bit pointless and a waste of money.<BR/><BR/>This is why I think the whole thing should be written off as a bad idea and the money spent on something else.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131736936333055772005-11-11T19:22:00.000+00:002005-11-11T19:22:00.000+00:00Your solution would be for black people to stop bu...<I>Your solution would be for black people to stop buying flash cars...isn't it your attitude that is more racist?</I><BR/><BR/>That's not my solution at all! I resent you mischaracterising my position so you can paint me as a racist.<BR/><BR/>Even with a perfectly non-racist police, the iris recognition technology has a higher failure rate for black people: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4580447.stm<BR/>http://www.blink.org.uk/pdescription.asp?key=7477&grp=21&cat=99<BR/>http://www.naar.org.uk/newspages/051031.asp<BR/><BR/><I>My solution is to change the police's racist attitude.</I><BR/><BR/>People have been trying to do that since at least the Brixton riots and before. It's not yet succeeded.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131736114001181152005-11-11T19:08:00.000+00:002005-11-11T19:08:00.000+00:00Dear Neil,please desist from calling me a liar, or...Dear Neil,<BR/><BR/>please desist from calling me a liar, or what I've said a lie. At the very best, allege that it's false, but unless you have grounds to believe that what I'm saying is <I>intentionally</I> or recklessly misleading, as opposed to mistaken, do not impugn my integrity. I shall not comment upon the dirtier insult you proffered.<BR/><BR/>You say you want "to get rid of [people] like [me]"; I assume you mean voluntary repatriation to my country of origin as opposed to anything more violent. Maybe you are aware that I'm not English and not born in this country, and my departure from the country of my birth was not conducted completely in accordance with all the particular legal niceties then in force. Does this sound familiar? There's a reason I care about the technicalities of passport applications, and it's not a happy one.<BR/><BR/>Remember, Neil, whose company you enjoy when you support repatriation. Remember what side of politics they're on.<BR/><BR/>Now let's see why I thought you were to the right of the Tories. I mean, my reasons <I>before</I> you posted so intemperately. It was these statements of yours:<BR/><BR/><I>Much as I agree that economic migrants enrich the country, much as I agree that the persecuted need safe countries, you have to have some form of restriction. There are practical limits to the numbers that can be assimilated over time in any one country [...]</I><BR/><BR/>Note that you also, misleadingly, state:<BR/><BR/><I>I am sure I have never used the term 'assimulated', show me where I've used it?</I><BR/><BR/>I assume this is a typo on your part, and not some deliberate spelling mistake.<BR/><BR/>And here you go again<BR/><BR/><I><BR/>You can't pretend that the UK should or even could take every refugee on the planet without causing significant problems for our infrastructure and economy.<BR/></I><BR/><BR/>So maybe you're not to the right of the Tories; but for me to claim so would have been merely untrue, not an "outright lie". But you still sound like Pim Fortuyn. The country is full! These new people don't share our culture! O tempora, O mores!<BR/><BR/>As it happens, I think your realism on immigration is something I could agree with, though this "quota" / "restriction" stuff is all a bit complex and I don't understand it - it sounds like the analogue of the "quantitative restriction" / "measure equivalent to quantitative restriction" trade barrier problem the EU keeps having to deal with.<BR/><BR/>I do really care about civil liberties, but I just retain the traditional understanding of that term, as covering freedom of speech and freedom of association, not issues of property, redistribution, privacy, equality and so on. That's why I'm not out helping the poor (except inasmuch as I'm trying to save them from having to fork out a hundred quid for these cards).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131736035150666572005-11-11T19:07:00.000+00:002005-11-11T19:07:00.000+00:00Re your 8 questions. They're remarkably similar to...Re your 8 questions. They're remarkably similar to the questions you already asked & answererd over on the NO2ID forums.<BR/><BR/>But<BR/><BR/>1&2. Private databases aren't really relevant as there's a greater element of choice whether those services are used, and to an extent, what ID you present when purchasing them. <BR/><BR/>For government databases, yes, they exists, and people with the correct authority can already request details from them. So the NIR is not required, other than to make it 'more convenient', with greatly increased cost & risk.<BR/><BR/>3&4 Questions kind of unclear. Biometric technology is not as reliable as the government believes. <BR/><BR/>What people challenge is both the technical & commercial ability of the government (and suppliers) to implement the scheme for the costs & claims made.<BR/><BR/>5 I doubt any reputable scientist would ever claim 'NEVER', but many reputable scientists have already pointed out the errors & challenges that face this scheme.<BR/><BR/>6 As repeatedly pointed out, that fraud figure includes frauds that an ID card would not & could not prevent. Also, why is it up to the Government to solve & pay for the banks/credit cards/retailers fraud problems? Its a spurious arguement, and could just as easily counter argue with the potential increase in fraud along the lines of SSN fraud in the US.<BR/><BR/>7 Technically, in the UK, they're not, simply convenient. Another spurious arguement. Why should I support anyone that believes in 90 day detention without charge, or turning the NHS into a simple 'commissioning' business?<BR/><BR/>8 Cars? So? 'if it will save just one life..' <BR/><BR/>OK, lets ban those as well, and trains, and peanuts, and milk, and bees..<BR/><BR/>People can't show *exactly* the detriment caused by the ID scheme, just as neither you or the government can show the benefits. No scheme like this exists anywhere in the world, but plenty of people can show the risks based on elements of the scheme.<BR/><BR/>Really simple question in return.<BR/><BR/>If the ID Card was implemented along the lines of the LSE report, it would provide biometric checks, be secure (if issued carefully), and do everything the government claims for it's scheme. It would cost far less to implement & maintain, and have far fewer civil liberties implications as there'd be no NIR.<BR/><BR/>Why is this not a valid alternative? What is so important about the NIR given all the data it contains, as you so often point out, already exists?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131735967084801242005-11-11T19:06:00.000+00:002005-11-11T19:06:00.000+00:001.At present the people with access to my medical ...1.<BR/><BR/>At present the people with access to my medical records are restricted to the medical profession. The NIR will extend this to all police officers and civil servants.<BR/><BR/>2. At present the police do not have my banking records until they issue a warrant because they have suspicion for a crime. Under the NIR these will all be collated for easy review.<BR/><BR/>3. Biometric technology has two failure modes. The risk of false positive (identifying someone as someone else) and the risk of false negative (failing to identify someone as themselves). For a perfect ID scheme both these number would have to be < 1/1 billion. At the moment, DNA testing is not able to tell identical twins apart and I believe DNA testing is still better than Iris testing - certainly it's harder to forge. Combining biometrics (counterintuitively) does not make the system stronger.<BR/><BR/>4. Biometric technology is very effective at telling apart people who don't try and forge it. Given fingerprint scanners, iris scanners have all been fooled it's likely it will only incovenience the innocent while not stopping the guilty.<BR/><BR/>5. Biometrics can be effective in an ID scheme. <BR/><BR/>6. You seem to be confused between the works 'known' and 'predicted'. The cost of ID fraud in 2008 is not yet known. Pointless speculation dismissed.<BR/><BR/>7. I don't know. Is it necessary for all anti-ID card people to believe passports aren't necessary to not want ID cards? (hint, the answer is no).<BR/><BR/>8. It is possible that cars have a benefit greater than the deaths of 3000 people per year - for example - the ambulance service. Similarly, you have to show the benefits of the ID card scheme are greater than the costs. At present *your reference* for the cost benefit suggests that ID cards are unlikely to pay back, and even if they do will pay back to private companies - not the government.<BR/><BR/><BR/>And in response. <BR/><BR/>If the ID card scheme is going to save eveyone money and we all want it, surely we could set up the private ID card company and you could buy an ID card if you want one. If it's so great for the private companies they'll give you discounts for having it, and the market can do everything? <BR/><BR/><BR/>Lastly, suppose I get a good photograph of you and make myself some contact lenses with your irises in, and then register myself into the ID card scheme with your irises using my contact lenses.<BR/><BR/>You now can't be registered because your biometric is already in the database and you'll be carted off to jail for trying to register multiple identities. <BR/><BR/>Time to ban cameras?<BR/><BR/>(well, we've already done online banking, cardholder not present transactions ...)<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>As another thought, suppose Woman A (not british) marries Man B (british) and has a child with Man C but registers the birth as being of Man B - entitling the person to an ID card and citizenship. Do you think we should use the DNA biometric to stop this happening?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131734923298712562005-11-11T18:48:00.000+00:002005-11-11T18:48:00.000+00:00"Can you imagine being an ethic minority who fails..."Can you imagine being an ethic minority who fails a biometric check in a public place?"<BR/><BR/>The problem is not the security check, its the racist assumptions. You are not helping minorities by shifting blame onto a scheme and ignoring the real problem.<BR/><BR/>Black people in flash cars get stopped more by police.<BR/><BR/>Your solution would be for black people to stop buying flash cars.<BR/><BR/>My solution is to change the police's racist attitude.<BR/><BR/>Which is right? isn't it your attitude that is more racist?Neil Hardinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01333739272733802133noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131734582905823332005-11-11T18:43:00.000+00:002005-11-11T18:43:00.000+00:00B4L, "but is anyone learning anything?"I know a lo...B4L, "but is anyone learning anything?"<BR/><BR/>I know a lot more about the technology of biometrics now. I've obviously still got a lot to learn, but its been good.<BR/><BR/>I've also learned a lot about civil liberties and that while they shouldn't be overlooked, they should be justified.<BR/><BR/>I think opponents sometimes in their defence of privacy end up defending dishonesty. Dishonesty is rarely a good thing. <BR/><BR/>There is also no perfect civil liberties, defending them without justification is as bad as blind faith in a religious or ideological doctrine. Civil liberties are sometimes less important than social justice.Neil Hardinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01333739272733802133noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131734265608019492005-11-11T18:37:00.000+00:002005-11-11T18:37:00.000+00:00What about the civil liberties of the poor?It's an...<I>What about the civil liberties of the poor?</I><BR/><BR/>It's anecdotal evidence, sure, but here's some French poor angry young men complaining about ID checks being used as a tool against them:<BR/><BR/>http://www.guardian.co.uk/france/story/0,11882,1637213,00.html<BR/><BR/>We already know that the police use stop-and-search powers disproportionately in a racist manner. It seems likely to me that the poor will suffer disproportionately from any problems that arise in the scheme, and from the insulting "ausweis bitte" of being asked to prove identity. Can you imagine being an ethic minority who fails a biometric check in a public place? Everyone's going to assume that you've got a forged card and are trying to escape HM Immigration.<BR/><BR/>Do you think ID cards will improve the relationships between ethnic minorities and the police?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131734146029820192005-11-11T18:35:00.000+00:002005-11-11T18:35:00.000+00:00"I don't believe you are actually for this particu..."I don't believe you are actually for this particular scheme. I think you are for some other scheme which would give some of the benefits of the current scheme without the drawbacks."<BR/><BR/>Basically, Yes, but I also believe the govt's scheme will adapt to criticisms and practical problems on implementation and will be made to work well. <BR/><BR/>I think the scheme will evolve. Just like the first eyes were just pieces of thin skin and pretty useless, they were still more useful than having no eyes at all, and of course they evolved into what we have today.<BR/><BR/>Can of any project that has been perfect on paper and not had to be changed during the practical implementation?<BR/><BR/>"Unfortunately I don't think from all the evidence I've seen that such a scheme exists."<BR/><BR/>You could well be right, but I severely doubt it. The sheer massiveness of ID fraud and the usefulness of easy ID are very powerful reasons in my opinion. Even without biometric tachnology, I think an ID scheme would be useful. The biometrics have the potential to radically improve security. The technology will only get better and probably radically so. Even if opponents win this battle and postpone them for a few decades, it's likely to be back on the agenda soon, when another more foresighted country has implemented them and made them work to huge success.Neil Hardinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01333739272733802133noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131733037971091212005-11-11T18:17:00.000+00:002005-11-11T18:17:00.000+00:00"The government don't know what they are doing."In..."The government don't know what they are doing."<BR/><BR/>In a sense you are right. Every new project has risks that are unquantifiable and potential benefits that are unquantifiable. This is a gamble. But the government are not blind to the practical difficulties of the scheme as you suggest.<BR/><BR/>You guys are just pointing out all the things you think could 'potentially' go wrong with this scheme. You are also assuming total inflexibility in the govt's plans, and a total inability to change direction when problems occur. <BR/><BR/>This is just not credible in my opinion and doesn't follow the history of new projects in the past. Lots of beneficial projects wouldn't have come to fruition if this logis had been taken. For instance, the Euro had a number of risks attached both known and unknown, but a political decision was taken based on the balance that the scheme would be a success in the long term. None of the catastrophes predicted about the practical implementation of the Euro that Euro opponents shouted about has occurred. The long term future is less sure, but on balance the future still looks good.<BR/><BR/>Yes, the ID scheme could go wrong. Unlike your side, I do recognise both sides of the argument. But on the balance of the evidence and the questions you have been unable to answer, I still feel justified in supporting the govt's scheme. That's not to say I won't change my mind, but that is my present position. In fact I am surprised considering the passion of opponents that their case is so weak.Neil Hardinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01333739272733802133noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131732053540502342005-11-11T18:00:00.000+00:002005-11-11T18:00:00.000+00:00"In consequence, the scheme will implement a blank..."In consequence, the scheme will implement a blanket per person tax, in order to save private companies money"<BR/><BR/>The government are looking at this, don't be surprised if the govt make private companies share some of the cost.Neil Hardinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01333739272733802133noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14115431.post-1131731755353847322005-11-11T17:55:00.000+00:002005-11-11T17:55:00.000+00:00Chris: "Do you think, therefore, that your analogy...Chris: "Do you think, therefore, that your analogy may be missing a vital piece?"<BR/><BR/>Maybe 'Burgess Shale' is the Home Office trying to bury negative info about the scheme and 'Piltdown Man' is the claim that the missing link between encryption and biometrics has been found. I hope those analogies are good enough.<BR/><BR/>Anon: "Attempting to refute all of these arguments must be like fighting a fog."<BR/><BR/>It is hard work being so outnumbered.<BR/><BR/>"Hi - I don't think Neil's doing the ID card scheme justice."<BR/><BR/>I'm trying my best, I'm obviously not an expert, but I'm learning new info every day on this, I think I've raised many points in favour of the scheme and aginst their objections that haven't been answered by opponents, such as; <BR/><BR/>1. How, when we already have 44 million people on medical, criminal, banking, passport and driving licence databases that the Government have access to, will an NIR increase the Govt's invasion of our privacy.<BR/><BR/>2. What are the detrimental effects of the invasion of our privacy by CCTV, mobile phones, ISP records, banking audit trails, congestion charge tracking etc. etc? And how is this less detrimental than an NIR?<BR/><BR/>3. If biometric technology is as poor as you suggest and can never be used in an ID scheme, why do you think it could be implemented by the government?<BR/><BR/>4. Why or how (will/can) biometric technology be used if it doesn't work?<BR/><BR/>5. Where are there any links to reputable scientists who say that biometric technology can NEVER be used in an ID scheme?<BR/><BR/>6. Known ID fraud at present growth will be £750 million a year by 2008. The estimated maintenance cost of the ID scheme will be £85 million a year. Considering known ID fraud is probably a significant underestimate of the real problem, how do these figures suggest the scheme won't be financially beneficial?<BR/><BR/>7. Why should I support anyone arguing that passports aren't necessary?<BR/><BR/>8. Cars kill 3000+ annually in this country and injure many more. If it is right to override the interests of a small minority for the greater good in this case, why, when you can't show me anywhere near this level of detriment to people's lives as a result of ID cards, is it right not to have them?<BR/><BR/>These are just a few I can think of now, there are plenty more.<BR/><BR/>Answer these points satisfactorily and you can win me over to your side. You have spectacularly failed to answer these questions up till now.<BR/><BR/>"How extraordinary. We knew that Neil was to the right of the Tories on immigration and lines up with the racists to promote ID cards"<BR/><BR/>Don't even say this in jest. This is a total and utter lie and you know it. If you are resorting to these tactics you must be seriously worried.<BR/><BR/>I want to see MORE immigrants come to this country not less. How is that to the right of the Tories? It's a pity we can't get rid of wankers like you and replace you with a few people from other countries. If you really cared about people's civil liberties you would be campaigning against the real poverty and inequality we face, not some chattering class abstract principle that doesn't actually mean anything practical. What about the civil liberties of the poor? I know these comments are strong but if you going to say outright lies about me that are a slur to my character, you are asking for it.Neil Hardinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01333739272733802133noreply@blogger.com