Posted on the Politech mailing list: This liberal from the "Progressive Policy Institute" is promoting (to any federal offical he can) that we should all have "smart cards" that hold all our personal info. Eventually, of course, this will include firearms info.

The end is particularly offensive.

His email addy is: [email][email protected][/email]

//////////////////////////////////////

Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 17:15:54 -0500
From: Rob Atkinson
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Progressive Policy Institute wants biometric license-smartcards

Declan,

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the comments below. Though I
know the debate over improving the ID system is heated, I must say that I
was taken aback by some of what I've read. When I had lunch with Ralph
Hoefelmeyer at the Smart Card Alliance meeting, I thought we had an open
and polite give-and-take on the issue (we even beamed business cards to
each other - hmm, what does that say about privacy?). Then he publically
denounces me and others who believe in third way governance (such as Bill
Clinton and Tony Blair) as Nazis. It's a prime example of the fact that
opponents of smart ID cards can gain no ground by shedding light on the
issue, so they set the debate on fire. I believe all of the issues raised
by list members are addressed in our reports (www.ppionline.org) but I will
make a few points here:

--Consolidating various cards onto your driver's license makes you no more
prone to losing it than consolidating various cards in your wallet. In
fact, under our proposal it's more convenient to have them on one smart
card: you go to the DMV to get a new license, then redownload the other
applications from your PC. No multiple phone calls, no waiting for new
cards to arrive by snail mail, and most importantly, no worries that
someone will use your card (since they can't match the onboard biometrics),
thereby forcing you to fight with the credit bureaus to clear up the
identity theft confusion. Moreover, no one has to put multiple
applications on one card, they can get additional smart cards from private
providers for other applications if they choose.

--Many people respond to our specific proposal with variations on the same
unfalsifiable generality: no card is fraud-proof, no database is
hack-proof, no government agency is bribe-proof, no computer is
error-proof, and so on. These are all true as far as they go -- nothing
made by humans is flawless -- but these "arguments" ignore the fact that
our proposal will make all of these bad things harder than the current
system. Smart ID cards are far more secure and far harder to fake than the
current gold standard for identification, which is a card using decades old
technology with an erasable 2D bar code painted on the back. Inability to
achieve perfection does not justify a refusal to improve.

///////CONTINUED////////

--To elaborate on the database issue, I'd like to point out that the fact
that every database is hackable does not stop people from submitting highly
personal data to other people on a daily basis. Every time I use my credit
card, visit my doctor, or pay my taxes I run the risk that somebody will
either hack in or gain authorized access for an impermissable
purpose. However, unlike a few of the most vocal people in this debate,
that knowledge does not paralyze me with fear, because I am able to balance
the (very low) risk against the (very high) benefits. Moreover, I think
it's silly to think that the DMV databases will become permanent targets of
hackers, since under our proposal those databases will contain no more
information than is currently written on the front of the card you flash
every time you want to buy a beer, plus an encrypted "ephemeral" biometric
that is of no use to anyone because it cannot be recreated
latently. Moreover, we call for strict privacy prote!
ctions for driver's liscence data, including a prohibition on DMVs from
selling any information stored on the card.

--As for using smart ID cards to track your movements, I would point out
that upgrading the card does not change the rules under which The
Government (whatever that means) can ask to see the card. The Government
can track your movements today using a pen and paper to jot down your
driver's license number (or SSN, or license plate, or library card), but
that has not turned the U.S. into the dystopia that so many privacy
advocates bemoan in Cassandra-like agony. Moreover, even contactless cards
will not give out high-powered signals they way the toll booth transponders
do, so the idea that The Government can track our movements using remote
sensors is almost as paranoid as the idea that The Government would ever
bother to do so; after all, the red light cameras only catch the license
plates of red light runners, not every car that passes through the
intersection. If you're that worried about it, however, I suppose you can
keep The Government from tracking your smart ID card b!
y storing it under your aluminum foil hat.

I believe that the debate over public policy needs to take place in the
real world, where costs and benefits are weighed. If we use ludicrously
unlikely worst-case scenarios and logical extremes as definitive reasons
not to do something, we would never do anything. The fact that Politech
readers use computers and connect them to the Internet (no system is
unhackable!) shows that they have some ability to weigh reasonable risks
against reasonable benefits. I'd expect to hear some of these arguments
from heavily-armed militia members who don't use the toilets in their
trailers because they think public sewers are a U.N. conspiracy, but it
irks me to hear them from people who should know better. If you and your
readers think that makes me dismissive of privacy concerns, fine. But it
doesn't make me a Nazi.

Regards,

Rob Atkinson


Rob Atkinson
Vice President, and
Director, Technology and New Economy Project
Progressive Policy Institute
600 Pennsylvania Ave., S.E.
Suite 400
Washington, DC 20003
202-608-1239
fax 202-544-5014
email: [email protected]
web: www.ppionline.org

someone needs to rip this guy a new a$$hole.

what a f()cking dickhead moron.

What an interesting coincidence...


Relax. If you were a Philosopher-King, your opinion on this would be important. As you're just a drone in our society, you have no voice or permission to be heard. We know what is good for you and promise that this once we open Pandora's Box, we will use the technology we find there only for good, and never for evil.

Biometric smart National ID cards? Just think how much easier life will be when you can rent a DVD and buy liquor with the same card! Once you've had that card scanned at the mantrap of the MultiVend (a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Progressive Policy Institute) store entrance, of course. We Philosopher-Kings would never use the genetic information stored on those cards to cull the weaker members of the herd, we promise. It's for your own good.

And gun registration information is just to help the police catch criminals. We promise we won't come back later to confiscate those guns. Pay no mind to what's happening in New York and Illinois. Those are bad people, not progressive, productive hive workers like you! [:D]

Nothing to see here.

Move along, please.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

I knew someone would have fun with this. Too bad it's such grim fun.

Declan McCullagh, who runs the Politech mailing list, is the Washington correspondent for Wired Magazine. He's not a gun guy, but he's a good guy--very pro-privacy. His mailing list is highly recommended: [url]http://www.politechbot.com/[/url]