tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6606798.post6710062165000056281..comments2024-03-27T16:39:43.522+00:00Comments on Liberal England: Roberta Blackman-Woods and the abolition of slaveryJonathan Calderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00730157683743989696noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6606798.post-5468986107274545382010-08-28T14:56:31.257+01:002010-08-28T14:56:31.257+01:00The have such "e-ID" in Sweden already, ...The have such "e-ID" in Sweden already, issued by the major banks and the former telecoms monopoly. I have nothing against that idea at all, in fact it is useful and convenient. What I object to is having the government fingerprint me and get me to provide a lot of personal information, which would then be plonked on a massive database available for the police to trawl if they are ever short of suspects.<br /><br />Correct me if I'm wrong, but the biometric ID cards were not going to be capable of proving our identity over the internet, were they?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11171985623642790407noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6606798.post-91236064553575665442010-08-26T06:43:13.554+01:002010-08-26T06:43:13.554+01:00Well, the upgraded passport was unveiled yesterday...Well, the upgraded passport was unveiled yesterday. Whether it is "the next phase of biometric passports" referred to by Roberta we shall see.<br />The case for being able to hold a secure ID token, capable of being used to secure your activities on-line, is very strong. Other countries that have historically had non-electronic ID documents are moving in that direction (e.g. Germany), but here it was the "we are watching you" and "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" rubbish that prevented the true case being made. There is in the USA now a float at the federal level of the concept of an electronic token for securing your identity on-line, but also with the realisation that it doesn't have to be government issued as long as it conforms to a nationally, maybe internationally, agreed technical specification that means that on-line services can always validate it. There could thus be many issuers - and you could hold several of them [1] as long as, when accessing public services where your "real" ID (i.e. recognised by govt) is needed, you use a token that matches the identity by which govt knows you.<br /><br />[1] Often for an on-line service it is only authentication that matters, so no need to expose any more personal data (maybe none) than is essential for continuity when receiving the service.dreamingspirehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00324207120279777521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6606798.post-6836828165378271912010-08-25T21:33:04.292+01:002010-08-25T21:33:04.292+01:00Tarleton was a guerilla commander of Loyalists in ...Tarleton was a guerilla commander of Loyalists in the American War of Independence. Is that silly "glorifying terrorism" law still on the books? If so, arrest the publican of that pub!Richard Gadsdenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10545595590359552775noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6606798.post-20764685062059096332010-08-25T20:41:31.774+01:002010-08-25T20:41:31.774+01:00Well the LibDems worked their socks off in Durham ...Well the LibDems worked their socks off in Durham (and Newcastle) but Labour got back in both cities and they have certainly got the MPs they deserve!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com