quote:
Originally posted by Adeptus
There are two distinct areas of concern here: data collection and retention by the provider of the service verifying such an ID (e.g. operator of the hypothetical chat room, presumably a private entity) and data collection by the government issuing the ID. The two concerns are different and I am not sure which you are calling the "system".
Nope, they aren't different, both need to apply the very same rules.
quote:
Originally posted by Adeptus
However, existence of rules does not guarantee they will be followed (especially by governments)
I don't know in what country you live in, but in the real world even the government does follow (its own) rules.
You let it seem like the government is an entitiy which does what it want. This is certainly not true and, to put it very bluntly, is only the fantasy of paranoid people or those who watch to much movies.
quote:
Originally posted by Adeptus
If you consent to the proposed uses for the collected information today, will you have the power to compel all involved entities to erase it tomorrow, should the rules for its use and disclosure change?
Yes. That is a very important and big part of the privacy law and law on collecting personal information. It always has been and will always be so.
quote:
Originally posted by Adeptus
Of more immediate concern, however, are the private entities -- the chatroom, web board, blog site operators and so forth -- who would be obtaining a lot more information through the use of the ID system (if they were to use it), compared to your IP address and whatever you choose to tell them, now.
1) That is exactly why they made the eID in the first place: To have a solid means to verify if someone is minor or not for example.
2) As I said earlier, not all entities can read the same info. Some will only be able to read X, others can only read Y, etc...
quote:
Originally posted by Adeptus
quote:
And even if it did, who cares? Do you have anything to hide from the "system"?
That is the classic argument used by those defending the erosion of individual privacy.
There is
nothing being erosed at all.
quote:
Originally posted by Adeptus
quote:
Don't believe you are actually surfing totally anonymously (by your definition) atm. Even on this forum your IP is logged.
Of course. However, comparing that to authentication of a government issued ID is ludicrous.
It is exactly the same. Why? Because even the governments need to keep themselfs to the privacy laws and stuff...
Again, the government is
not the allmighty big brother trying to the erase the privacy of people as yuo so often see in movies and on the net.
quote:
Originally posted by Adeptus
For one, the IP address doesn't directly expose anything other than the general location of the user. Matching an IP address to a real life identity presently requires contact with and cooperation of the user's Internet service provider. The proposed ID system exposes the real life identity directly.
Nope, it does
not. Please before going any further take a step in the real life, research why they have the eID, what it is, how it is going to be used, how it will be implemented, what entities can (not) do with it, read up on how governments work, how they also need to keep themselfs to the law, etc.
quote:
Originally posted by Adeptus
I think it is clear our disagreement (as well as your disagreement with the O.P. of the poll and its negative responders) is not about the technical details, but priorities and philosophy. There are people who are willing to trade their privacy for perception of safety, but there are also those who firmly oppose such compromises and believe it will lead to neither.
Without knowing "technical details", how something will work, you can not discuss the results or philosphy behind it.
Of course there were
some privacy issues to be worked out, but be assured that they are/were worked upon before this was/is put in general public! And no, governments (at least here, in democracies) will not be able to read all the info they want just like that and each sub-instancy of the government would only be able to access the info they need. The same with private entities.
I would've agreed with all you've said (mostly), if, and only IF 1) the eID is what you let it seem to be (which is not), 2) is being used like you let it seem to be (which is not), and 3) if the goverments are indeed the all mighty corrupt privacy erasing monsters as you let it be (which is not).
If it was like you believe it is, it would never have been developped and been put in production in the first place because it would indeed be a major invasion of privacy.
/ 
