Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

jbartone · Jul 17, 2005, 11:52 PM

It's an issue here in Australia currently, and I believe it's being considered in the UK and the USA too, but everyone can come in and comment.

Well the government here is, in the wake of the London terrorist attacks, considering introducing a national ID card, linking together all of our current personal & private data (drivers licenses, tax file numbers, medicare, etc etc) into one database. It would also contain a biometric element (eg. fingerprint)

The government also claims it will help protect us against terrorism, and against ID thieves. HOW exactly? I've yet to see any good way that this will help keep the public safe against terrorism, or even identity thieves. Heck, wouldn't having all your data into ONE card make it easier for them?

Secondly, can you imagine some dumbass public servant setting up a system as complex as this? They have enough trouble with Centrelink (our welfare agency) as it is. It will cost billions upon BILLIONS of dollars to create. Then, knowing government agencies, it will STILL be vulnerable to attacks by hackers/scumbag bureaucrats. It will be a fiscal black hole, and in the end will acheive nothing but making things EASIER for ID thieves.

First a national ID card, what next? Will they make it compulsory to carry everywhere?

"Sir, your papers please!"

This is something I feel strongly about, even to the point that if John Howard, as much as I support him, tries to introduce something like this I would vote for ANYONE over him. It's already starting to create a split within Howard's own party.

News articles: http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117...56-421,00.html
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/...?oneclick=true
http://seven.com.au/news/topstories/93792

OldManMac · Jul 18, 2005, 12:09 AM

This idea has been proposed by GWB as well, although it hasn't made the headlines lately. Larry Ellison from Oracle even offered to develop and give the software to the government for free!

Sadly, everything about you is already available in one database or another. I'm opposed to the national ID card as well, and the majority of the American public seems to agree, so it may not float here. What this is really all about is feel good legislation, so that our "representatives" can point and say, "See, we're doing something to stop terrorism at home as well." It's one more useless proposal being propogated by someone who can see dollar signs in his eyes.

Hawkeye_a · Jul 18, 2005, 01:14 AM

I dont see a downside to having National ID cards. Sure the infrastructure might have some starting-up issues such as cost,etc. But it sure beats carrying around all your documents. I reckon this way anytime you deal with social security or government orginizations or travelling...all you need is this card.

Sure there's the whole 'fake ID' thing....but i think technology is in place to deal with that sort of stuff...i mean if they have fingerprint activated phones, who not actually use that technology where its actually of some use ?

Cards are prone to the same 'validity' restraints as regular documents.... but it does offer a higher level of convenience in my opinion.

As far the whole 'Big brother' arguments...... most of us who live in the U.S., U.K. and Australia already have Social security numbers, credit card numbers or 'Tax file numbers'. they're watching us anyway lol....i think if theyre setting up this system to counter terrorism, it'll be worth it if they pull it off.

Also, i think it's a very positive step to counter terrorism on our shores. And if you look at the alternative, which is sending troops abroad and starting wars, it seems like its the cheaper of the two.

Cheers

jbartone · Jul 18, 2005, 01:26 AM

See, there's the problem. I don't see how it could possibly help us against terrorists at all? I mean look at the London bombers, was there anything whatsoever to suggest that they were going to strap bombs to them and blow up public transport? They were all born in London too AFAIK. One was a primary school teacher for crying out loud!

Athens · Jul 18, 2005, 03:46 AM

these national ID debates are so stupid look at the facts. If you have no ID at all when a cop requests it guess what your in jail until you can prove who you are, why do we need 10 plastic cards in are wallets when we could have 1. A drivers licence is already a national ID anyways, it cantains your attributes, your picture and is required for many things. I like the idea of having just one card to carry around and even more biometrics to keep it safe from some one else using it. The personal data is already in computers now so it dosent really matter any more.

jbartone · Jul 18, 2005, 06:32 AM

Originally Posted by Athens

these national ID debates are so stupid look at the facts. If you have no ID at all when a cop requests it guess what your in jail until you can prove who you are, why do we need 10 plastic cards in are wallets when we could have 1. A drivers licence is already a national ID anyways, it cantains your attributes, your picture and is required for many things. I like the idea of having just one card to carry around and even more biometrics to keep it safe from some one else using it. The personal data is already in computers now so it dosent really matter any more.

I doubt that. So you're saying that if a random cop comes up to you and asks for ID, and you refuse, he'll throw you in jail? I certainly doubt that is the case, both here and in Canada.

And no, a drivers license is lightyears away from what our government is proposing with a National ID. They want to roll every single bit of our personal and private data into one single database. I don't trust some dumbass public servant in setting up and maintaining a secure system like that. And is it REALLY worth the tens of billions of dollars something like this will cost to set up, and maintain (allow a few extra billion for the inevitable cost blowout) just so that you can carry a few less cards?

It's one step on the slippery slope to becoming a police state!

OreoCookie · Jul 18, 2005, 06:47 AM

I don't know about the idea to put everything from a driver's license to an id on a single card, but having a (secure) national id would cut back on those teens with fake ids. This is basically unheard of in Germany. It contains basically the same information as a passport and is issued by the same authorities.

Far more secure than the US driver's license I had (it was printed right on the spot).

Doofy · Jul 18, 2005, 06:47 AM

The problem isn't the ID cards as such (assuming you don't mind living in a police state). The problem is the fact that it's going to require a centralised database. And our government here in the UK is just stupid enough to put that database on Windows. It'll become the holy grail for hackers.

Note: Due to use of lax security and WiFi, at least six hospitals in the south of the UK have already been hacked into by warXers. Easy matter to change a patient's records from there.

Athens · Jul 18, 2005, 06:47 AM

Originally Posted by jbartone

I doubt that. So you're saying that if a random cop comes up to you and asks for ID, and you refuse, he'll throw you in jail? I certainly doubt that is the case, both here and in Canada.

And no, a drivers license is lightyears away from what our government is proposing with a National ID. They want to roll every single bit of our personal and private data into one single database. I don't trust some dumbass public servant in setting up and maintaining a secure system like that. And is it REALLY worth the tens of billions of dollars something like this will cost to set up, and maintain (allow a few extra billion for the inevitable cost blowout) just so that you can carry a few less cards?

It's one step on the slippery slope to becoming a police state!

Take a trip on skytrain with a open bottle of booze on a event night, leave your ID at home and you end up in jail until you tell them who u are and they can varify it. I know I held out 5 hours before I caved in.

OreoCookie · Jul 18, 2005, 07:53 AM

Originally Posted by Athens

these national ID debates are so stupid look at the facts. If you have no ID at all when a cop requests it guess what your in jail until you can prove who you are, why do we need 10 plastic cards in are wallets when we could have 1. A drivers licence is already a national ID anyways, it cantains your attributes, your picture and is required for many things. I like the idea of having just one card to carry around and even more biometrics to keep it safe from some one else using it. The personal data is already in computers now so it dosent really matter any more.

I don't know about the Canadian one, but the American one I had was not secure at all. Plus there are (at least?!?) 50 different ones. As long as you don't have to have it with you unless you need it. For instance in Germany, you don't have to carry it with you. Law only says, you have to help confirm your identity which is a simple radio call of the cop who checks your name and all that. For other things (like withdrawing a big amount at the bank) you do need it and the driver's license doesn't cut it (because it doesn't have your address on it).

But because they are printed in this fancy-schmancy factory, it's actually safe.

Doofy · Jul 18, 2005, 08:10 AM

Missing the point with regards to "carry" ID. At least how it's proposed here in the UK.

You won't need to carry your ID to prove your identity because plod will simply fingerprint you and check it with Ingsoc's central database. Assuming a script kiddie hasn't got into the system.

dcmacdaddy · Jul 18, 2005, 09:48 AM

I see this as a technological tool and like all tools the device itself is inherently without morals: It can be used for good or evil. Take a hammer, for instance, you can build a house with it, you can club someone's head in with it, take your pick.

I like the idea of a national ID card (based on the existing driver's license model). I am just not sure the government buereaucrats, especially here in the US, are up to managing the system.

For me the pros to the debate are uniform ID standards nationwide, inclusion of fingerprints and basic health info--major diseases, allergies to medicines--in case of an accident, ease of transference--when you move you go to your local ID office and let them know your new location, all your government records coud then be updated with a single form.

For me, the cons to the debate are, likely increases possibility for fraudulent activity, government accountability/oversight of the program, the desire to "contract out" the services which means we get a system that is "lowest cost" NOT "best value", political infighting that would prevent a truly uniform system from being implemented.

What I would like to see is a standardized, uniform national ID card that replaces individual state driver's licenses. Each state could still customize their card with images/logos/graphics representative of their state but we would have one centralized system with one standard format. Make some of the information held by the system optional: Say, thumb-prints are mandatory but a full set of finger-prints could be embedded in the system as a user-determined option.

What I would want most though is new laws that provide for HEAVY AND SEVERE penalties for abuses of the national ID system. Laws that apply equally to those who accidentally make mistakes (some contractor who accidentally releases a bunch of personal information) to those who intentionally make mistakes (someone hacking into the system and stealing data). There should be severe dis-incentives for anyone to allow the system to be compromised in any way. So, the government contractor overseeing the project would face jail time, no questions asked, when there is an accidental leak of data: With such a system mistakes could not be tolerated. The same thing applies to the crook: Some punk kid hacker who gets caught stealing data gets a one-way ticket to a Federal "pound-me-in-the-ass" prison.

OreoCookie · Jul 18, 2005, 10:34 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Missing the point with regards to "carry" ID. At least how it's proposed here in the UK.

You won't need to carry your ID to prove your identity because plod will simply fingerprint you and check it with Ingsoc's central database. Assuming a script kiddie hasn't got into the system.

Yes, I understand your point. But then you oppose this database and not a national ID, right? (I would oppose such a database, be it based on MS or whatnot, as well.)

Doofy · Jul 18, 2005, 10:46 AM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

Yes, I understand your point. But then you oppose this database and not a national ID, right? (I would oppose such a database, be it based on MS or whatnot, as well.)

I generally think it's a bad thing all-round.
It's utterly, utterly pointless - complete waste of taxpayers' money to gloss over problems which the government is too chicken to confront head-on.

RAILhead · Jul 18, 2005, 10:46 AM

I have no issue with it.

Maury

Doofy · Jul 18, 2005, 10:52 AM

Originally Posted by RAILhead

I have no issue with it.

Not even when they decide that it'd be easier for you to carry around if they just implanted it in the back of your right hand?

Doofy · 11:33 AM

Plus, if you thought you were good at avoiding spam until now...

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/pol...icle294845.ece

Personal details of all 44 million adults living in Britain could be sold to private companies as part of government attempts to arrest spiralling costs for the new national identity card scheme, set to get the go-ahead this week.

The Independent on Sunday can today reveal that ministers have opened talks with private firms to pass on personal details of UK citizens for an initial cost of £750 each.

Your very own cookie which will follow you around wherever you go and whatever you do. Lovely.

dcmacdaddy · Jul 18, 2005, 11:08 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Not even when they decide that it'd be easier for you to carry around if they just implanted it in the back of your right hand?

(I know you are replying to Maury but I wanted to reply to this as well.)

Well, as for implants, I don't think the technology is that devleoped yet, too many things could happen to the device. But, in another 50 years or so an implant might not be a bad idea. I'll get back with you then.

I REALLY want the implantable translator device so that I can speak the native langauge of whomever I am conversing with. Of course, that is much more complicated than a simply ID chip. You would need to tie the translaotr into both the auditory and speech mechanisms within the brain. I am guessing that technology is 150 years down the road. Too late for me to use but still a cool idea nonetheless.

OreoCookie · Jul 18, 2005, 11:23 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

I generally think it's a bad thing all-round.
It's utterly, utterly pointless - complete waste of taxpayers' money to gloss over problems which the government is too chicken to confront head-on.

The way I see it, having an id, a secure one, has lots of benefits if you leave this whole database issue aside. For as long as I can think Germany has ids, and for certain types of identification (e. g. at a bank or so) you need either this id or a passport.

It has its own benefits and the idea doesn't have anything to do with the quite recent war against terrorism. I don't know about the driver's licenses in the UK (my comments were only about the US), but if you don't have a driver's license in Britain, how do you authenticate yourself if necessary (say, to open up a bank account)?

Doofy · Jul 18, 2005, 11:38 AM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

I don't know about the driver's licenses in the UK (my comments were only about the US), but if you don't have a driver's license in Britain, how do you authenticate yourself if necessary (say, to open up a bank account)?

Birth certificate / passport.

RAILhead · Jul 18, 2005, 11:41 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Not even when they decide that it'd be easier for you to carry around if they just implanted it in the back of your right hand?

That won't happen.

Maury

Hugi · Jul 18, 2005, 12:26 PM

Icelandic citizens and companies have had national ID numbers for the past 20-30 years. It is extremely convenient to be able to identify oneself using one number throughout the entire government system.

Privacy has sometimes become a problem with this system, but never a serious one. It is now prohibited by law to compare two databases using the national ID, without the express permission of the Icelandic Data Protection Authority, a government institute.

If you're interested in the issue, the DPA has an excellent website in English.

Edit: Well, ok, the website might not be excellent - but it's _a_ website

OreoCookie · Jul 18, 2005, 02:40 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Birth certificate / passport.

Isn't that cumbersome. In Germany, we basically only need our birth certificate if we want to get married. As I mentioned before, the id is issued by the same authorities as the passport, and except for the address, it doesn't contain any other information.

Doofy · Jul 18, 2005, 02:47 PM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

Isn't that cumbersome.

No, not really.
Unless you live in a police state there are very few times that you actually have to identify yourself to such an extent.

Weyland-Yutani · Jul 18, 2005, 03:07 PM

A passport is pretty much this terrible ID isn't it? What exactly is the problem? We already have all people in databases don't we? Credit cards register where we buy and for how much. Social security knows where we live and the phone companies know our number..

A national ID containing name and biometrics isn't really that different from a passport in a more handy size with biometrics. The databases exist today, are probably run on Windows and hackable. Meh.

Go ahead I say. I don't see any problems with a national ID. Personally I use my passport for identification, but I'd welcome a more handy card.

cheers

W-Y

OreoCookie · Jul 18, 2005, 03:44 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

No, not really.
Unless you live in a police state there are very few times that you actually have to identify yourself to such an extent.

I can count on one hand how often I was checked this year: twice, at the border to Slovakia (instead of a passport). But in Germany, it's been a while. As I am in my mid-20s, I don't get checked at clubs or so, ditto for buying alcohol in shops. You have a skewed perception about the uses, it's really minimal.

OreoCookie · Jul 18, 2005, 03:45 PM

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani

A national ID containing name and biometrics isn't really that different from a passport in a more handy size with biometrics. The databases exist today, are probably run on Windows and hackable. Meh.

Needn't even contain any biometrics.

Doofy · Jul 18, 2005, 03:49 PM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

I can count on one hand how often I was checked this year: twice, at the border to Slovakia (instead of a passport). But in Germany, it's been a while. As I am in my mid-20s, I don't get checked at clubs or so, ditto for buying alcohol in shops. You have a skewed perception about the uses, it's really minimal.

No, that's what I was saying. You barely need to prove your identity at the moment, so what's the point in having an ID card?

Chuckit · Jul 18, 2005, 03:50 PM

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani

A passport is pretty much this terrible ID isn't it?

Not hardly. A passport isn't even a legal ID in the state of California.

Doofy · Jul 18, 2005, 03:53 PM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

Needn't even contain any biometrics.

I think you need to go Google for the information which will be on the proposed UK card. Biometrics, every address you've ever lived at, every job you've ever had, every run-in with the police you've ever had (however small, even if you were innocent), every visit you've ever had to the doctor, etc.. I'm pretty sure that the only thing stopping them from putting in your every visit to the pooper is the fact they can't physically store that amount of information... ...yet.

Weyland-Yutani · Jul 18, 2005, 04:04 PM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Not hardly. A passport isn't even a legal ID in the state of California.

So when you land at LAX coming from wherever you show your drivers-licence at the customs? Not hardly.

A passport is a valid ID everywhere. California included.

cheers

W-Y

Chuckit · Jul 18, 2005, 05:04 PM

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani

So when you land at LAX coming from wherever you show your drivers-licence at the customs? Not hardly.

A passport is a valid ID everywhere. California included.

It can be used to allow INS not to jump on your ass. It is not a general ID for most purposes. It isn't valid to identify yourself to buy alcohol or cigarettes or when writing checks or using a credit card. Or so I've been told when people have rejected my passport as an ID for these purposes.

Weyland-Yutani · Jul 18, 2005, 06:24 PM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

It can be used to allow INS not to jump on your ass. It is not a general ID for most purposes. It isn't valid to identify yourself to buy alcohol or cigarettes or when writing checks or using a credit card. Or so I've been told when people have rejected my passport as an ID for these purposes.

Ah yes. I have experienced the same thing in some countries in some places. Was in Sweden once and wanted to pay with a credit card in a grocery store. The clerk refused to accept my passport as a proper ID. She just didn't know better. I had to talk to the manager to get that corrected.

A passport is one of the few IDs that will be accepted everywhere as an ID in the countries that accept your passport at all. That is, if you managed to enter a country with your passport, then it will work as an ID inside the country too. It has to.

In the country that it is issued it is most certainly a proper ID. If you have a US passport ChuckIt, then you have a document from the federal government in your country that vouches for your identity. In your own country and in all others that accept a passport from your country.

People who have rejected your passport as a valid ID for any purpose that would require personal ID are simply ignorant. Store clerks - even managers - aren't exactly the cutting edge of intellectuals and if it is true that less than 15% of Americans have a passport a general ignorance of its purose and authority is not surprising.

In short, there is no document available in any country that has more authority as an ID than a passport.

(a practical question: when I visit the US - california included - what do you think I could use as an ID when paying with credit cards, buying alcohol etc etc.? Provided I couldn't use my passport, what ID would the Californians accept from me?)

cheers

W-Y

Chuckit · Jul 18, 2005, 06:51 PM

They say IDs must include more identifying information (height, weight, etc.) than passports do. It's apparently a fairly recent law. I've talked to several people about it, and they're all pretty consistent. Haven't bothered to look up the law, though, because California law gives me a headache and I don't really care all that much.

iLikebeer · Jul 18, 2005, 09:03 PM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

I don't know about the idea to put everything from a driver's license to an id on a single card, but having a (secure) national id would cut back on those teens with fake ids. This is basically unheard of in Germany. It contains basically the same information as a passport and is issued by the same authorities.

Far more secure than the US driver's license I had (it was printed right on the spot).

It would also cut down on illegal immigrants with no insurance on the roads. Right now in most states, all you need is an in-state mailing address and faked birth certificate/social security card. Having a national ID to check against would be a good first step.

Originally Posted by chuckit

Not hardly. A passport isn't even a legal ID in the state of California.

A passport is the best ID you can possibly carry, except for risk of it being lost or stolen. They can go for hundreds or even thousands of dollars on the black market, because they are good everywhere. Unfortunately, a lot of the people that are in a position to card you for alcohol, cigarettes, and entering a bar aren't always the brightest people around. I once had a bouncer look at my passport for 5 minutes before he told me it was no good. I asked for the manager, he came out and told the bouncer he was a retard.

Edit*: What form of ID do you think most foreign tourists and even some students use to buy a beer when they visit the US?

Hugi · Jul 18, 2005, 09:06 PM

Come to think of it, if the US had a national ID similar to Iceland's, your immigrance problem probably wouldn't be a problem at all. Hmmmmm....

nonhuman · Jul 18, 2005, 10:22 PM

Whether or not a passport is an acceptable form of identification is up to the establishment doing the carding. If I own a bar and I decide that I'll only accept in-state drivers licenses as valid id, then I'm free to do so. I may be turning down business, but it's my prerogative to do so.

iLikebeer · Jul 18, 2005, 10:32 PM

Originally Posted by nonhuman

Whether or not a passport is an acceptable form of identification is up to the establishment doing the carding. If I own a bar and I decide that I'll only accept in-state drivers licenses as valid id, then I'm free to do so. I may be turning down business, but it's my prerogative to do so.

That may be so, but that has nothing to do with whether it is a legal ID in the state of California. You could do all kinds of things as the business owner; but they don't affect the state laws, which is what he was talking about.

OreoCookie · Jul 19, 2005, 05:16 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

No, that's what I was saying. You barely need to prove your identity at the moment, so what's the point in having an ID card?

I don't know about Britain, but loosing a passport or even your birth certificate, it's a biatch, because it takes a long time to get one. An id card is smaller, hence you can always carry it around (if you choose to do so). It's safer than the American driver's licenses I've seen (it has the same security features as the passport).

If proper laws/rules are in place, you only need to show it when you really see a point. I needed to show it to open up a bank account. Or when I withdrew $2500 to buy a computer a few years ago. It's got nothing to do with a police state (here). (BTW, I forgot, I had to show my id this year in Germany, too – to identify myself during an exam.)

OreoCookie · Jul 19, 2005, 05:20 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

I think you need to go Google for the information which will be on the proposed UK card. Biometrics, every address you've ever lived at, every job you've ever had, every run-in with the police you've ever had (however small, even if you were innocent), every visit you've ever had to the doctor, etc.. I'm pretty sure that the only thing stopping them from putting in your every visit to the pooper is the fact they can't physically store that amount of information... ...yet.

No, I don't need to google up info. Biometrics isn't a point of a national id. In Germany's next-gen passport, they want to start including biometric data as well, but that doesn't make the concept of a passport a bad thing (tm).

I agree that the list you gave here just contains negatives, but I don't think this has something to do with national ids.

analogika · Jul 19, 2005, 05:52 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

No, not really.
Unless you live in a police state there are very few times that you actually have to identify yourself to such an extent.

Verifying ID is necessary all the time, unless you live off barter in a small rural community.

Like every time you use a credit card. Or rent a car. Or withdraw a fairly large amount of money from a bank account via teller. Or apply for financing. Or a video rental card. Or a library card. Or get a job. Or when your subscription public transport ticket gets inspected on the train.

Sheesh, I use my ID card all the time, and Germany isn't really what I'd call a "police state".

But yes, the problem isn't the card itself - that makes perfect sense and is very, very useful in everyday life - the problem is the centralized database.

-ch.

Doofy · Jul 19, 2005, 06:03 AM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

No, I don't need to google up info. Biometrics isn't a point of a national id. In Germany's next-gen passport, they want to start including biometric data as well, but that doesn't make the concept of a passport a bad thing (tm).

I agree that the list you gave here just contains negatives, but I don't think this has something to do with national ids.

Yep. The UK "total information" IDs are the test for EU-wide "total information" IDs. Expect it in Germany soon (Likewise, the recently proposed car tagging system is an EU driven proposal with the UK as a test bed).

Doofy · Jul 19, 2005, 06:07 AM

Originally Posted by analogika

Verifying ID is necessary all the time, unless you live off barter in a small rural community.

I haven't needed ID for 4 years (moving bank accounts, moving video store). Before that I can't remember how long it is since I used it (this is talking non-passport use ID).

Originally Posted by analogika

Like every time you use a credit card.

? No such thing here. Hand card over, sign on the dotted line (or more recently, type PIN into machine).

OreoCookie · Jul 19, 2005, 06:29 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Yep. The UK "total information" IDs are the test for EU-wide "total information" IDs. Expect it in Germany soon (Likewise, the recently proposed car tagging system is an EU driven proposal with the UK as a test bed).

Again, this has nothing to do with ids per se. It's an attempt to infringe the privacy, all for the honorable goal to fight terrorism. Turning over passenger lists to US authorities, erosion of civil rights, this is the problem. (We are already getting biometric passports soon, probably there is more to come.)

OreoCookie · Jul 19, 2005, 06:31 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

I haven't needed ID for 4 years (moving bank accounts, moving video store). Before that I can't remember how long it is since I used it (this is talking non-passport use ID).

Then I think you have a security issue with your bank.

Doofy · Jul 19, 2005, 06:34 AM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

Then I think you have a security issue with your bank.

Explain please.

analogika · Jul 19, 2005, 06:34 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

I haven't needed ID for 4 years (moving bank accounts, moving video store). Before that I can't remember how long it is since I used it (this is talking non-passport use ID).

? No such thing here. Hand card over, sign on the dotted line (or more recently, type PIN into machine).

Actually, stores that accept credit cards are *supposed to* verify ID. Hardly any do, as you've noticed, but that's the reason CC abuse is so rampant.

H&M have started requiring valid ID for Maestro (debit) card payment - which includes a PIN.

Requiring ID for card payment, btw, is a GOOD thing.

But bully for you for not needing any sort of ID in four years.

That certainly runs entirely contrary to my experience.

analogika · Jul 19, 2005, 06:36 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Explain please.

If you've moved bank accounts without having to ID yourself, then you either have a fairly close, personal relationship with your bank clerk, or your bank has some very serious security problems.

Doofy · Jul 19, 2005, 06:41 AM

Originally Posted by analogika

If you've moved bank accounts without having to ID yourself, then you either have a fairly close, personal relationship with your bank clerk, or your bank has some very serious security problems.

Arh. I see. You've both misread it due to my poor formatting.
I meant... I haven't had to use ID since moving banks and video store four years ago.

analogika · Jul 19, 2005, 06:44 AM

Ah - got it.

My bank clerk knows me personally, as well, though, but bank regulations still require valid ID when withdrawing over €1000 (which doesn't happen too often, granted, but it *does* happen).