On 22 November 2011 10:17, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

Adhar and the UIDAI are a fraud of the first order.

Mr. NN is an arrogant, ignorant marketroid,

There appears to be not one, but TWO points on which jtd and I agree 100% :-)

Aadhar is a massive money sink that MMS and his cohorts have imposed upon the unsuspecting billion point two of us. It is jostling for space among things like the nuke deal, BRAI, AI bailouts etc. at the top of the list of India-unfriendly things our UPA friends have come up with in the recent past.

Binand

On Tuesday 22 November 2011 18:25:02 Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:

On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 3:16 PM, Swapnil Bhartiya

swapnil.bhartiya@gmail.com wrote:

...

http://www.muktware.com/bitsnbytes/2983

I worked on the story and found oss is only a smoke screen. The entire UID project seems to be a pure Microsoft stack.

This document provides step-by-step instructions to install the AADHAAR Enrolment Client and Biometric components needed for Biometrics capturing. The document is not intended to be a user manual for the AADHAAR Enrolment Client. The application has been built to work with the given pre-requisites.

1.1 Installation Pre-requisites • Operating System: Windows XP SP3 OR Windows 7 (only 32-bit editions) • Windows Installer 4.5 • Microsoft .Net Framework 3.5 SP1 • Microsoft SQL Server 2008 R2 Express • Aadhaar QSS SDK Setup • Vendor Device Manager

You can see how the UID project has made Microsoft technologies mandatory. You can't use it without Microsoft. There is no mention of Linux in this important document.

The API is open:

http://uidai.gov.in/UID_PDF/Front_Page_Articles/Documents/Publications/Aadh aar_ABIS_API.pdf http://uidai.gov.in/UID_PDF/Front_Page_Articles/Documents/Publications/Aadh aar_Biometric_Capture_Device_API.pdf http://uidai.gov.in/images/FrontPageUpdates/aadhaar_authentication_api_1_5_ rev1_1.pdf

And you also have:

https://developer.uidai.gov.in https://developer.uidai.gov.in/site/documents https://developer.uidai.gov.in/site/downloads

The middleware is implemented using AMQP, which is an open standard (using RabbitMQ). AFAICT, the servers are going to be linux based. Google for "linux site:uidai.gov.in" without the quotes. Given all of the above, you ought to be able to write your own client too.

The core "deduplication" application, template creation, authentication algos are closed AND patented.

Besides they have been lying through their teeth from day 0.

On Wednesday 23 November 2011 08:12:26 Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:

On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 2:09 AM, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

...

The core "deduplication" application, template creation, authentication algos are closed AND patented.

Oh, you mean this authentication algorithm?

https://developer.uidai.gov.in/site/node/19 http://uidai.gov.in/images/FrontPageUpdates/aadhaar_authentication_api_1_5_ rev1_1.pdf

No. You are assuming that everything after you send a packet to the backend is proper. Read about alcohol breath analysers and cases filed in the US against the mfg. to get an idea.

Since Aadhar has no competitors that I am aware of, I would like to know why you think Time to Market is a significant factor here.

As a nation, we need a ID system that can be trusted ASAP.

With a system like this, a person can not have multiple IDs. At the moment, situation of IDs like License is so bad even government is not willing to accept that as valid.

Why? What is the compelling reason for this line of thought?

So that one person can not have multiple IDs. We need this or any other biometric based system.

In current system, it is very easy to create fake identities. With biometric systems, a locality of 1,000 people can not have more than 1,000 ration cards or other IDs that entitle them ti various Govt subsidies or grants.

tighten up the ration card issuance procedure. Add biometrics to the ration card. The solution is not to have a country-wide, all-encompassing ID system.

Binand

PDS is only one of the IDs, every ID has this problem. For example, Driving License. At the moment, its futile to confiscate someone's License since that person can go to a different RTO and get a License made there.

Similarly, one person can get multiple PAN cards and manipulate IPOs.

A centralized biometric system can solve some of these issues.

It does not matter if that system if aadhar or something else, but need that soon.

-Shamit

On Thu, 2011-11-24 at 09:15 +0530, Shamit Verma wrote:

...

Why? What is the compelling reason for this line of thought?

So that one person can not have multiple IDs. We need this or any other biometric based system.

I could possibly understand why the govt could want your fingerprints on file, but I strongly object to them having mine - I am not a criminal (or at least I have not been caught yet)

On 24 November 2011 13:54, Shamit Verma subs.linux.mum@vshamit.com wrote:

All this system does is, it centralizes this storage and reduces cost since each govt agency does not have to roll its own solution.

Government should not run with only cost control as the objective. Government has a bunch of legal, social and constitutional obligations that often trump cost considerations.

Binand

On 11/24/2011 01:54 PM, Shamit Verma wrote:

...

I strongly object to them having mine - I am not a criminal (or at least I have not been caught yet) --

That train has already left the station. E.g. If you renew Driving License in most large cities RTO stores digital fingerprints+ photograph. If you register any property transaction in Mumbai, you have to supply digital fingerprints.

Do they simply store prints or do they have software and a process that identifies difference in prints against the same name as well as similarity of prints against different names? Everytime a new entry is made, it has to be checked with all existing records.

All this system does is, it centralizes this storage and reduces cost since each govt agency does not have to roll its own solution.

I agree. Centralisation makes compilation of inputs and analysis of data easier.

On Thursday 24 November 2011 09:15:44 Shamit Verma wrote:

...

Why? What is the compelling reason for this line of thought?

So that one person can not have multiple IDs. We need this or any other biometric based system.

In current system, it is very easy to create fake identities. With biometric systems, a locality of 1,000 people can not have more than 1,000 ration cards or other IDs that entitle them ti various Govt subsidies or grants.

LOL. Your faith and ignorance of biometrics, identity, entitlements, corruption, governance, etc is touching. Please get an education on these before faffing.

You might start here http://thinkinganarchist.blogspot.com/2011/10/uinique-identity-biometrics-an... and follow the youtube, rediff and cryptome.org links.

That should bury your faith on biometrics.

-- http://mm.ilug-bom.org.in/mailman/listinfo/linuxers

On Thu, 2011-11-24 at 19:21 +0530, Sameep wrote:

...

You might start here

http://thinkinganarchist.blogspot.com/2011/10/uinique-identity-biometrics-an...

...

and follow the youtube, rediff and cryptome.org links.

Don't you think that , unless the people who are taking your details and finger prints are blind , they would notice a bunch of wax strips hanging from your fingers ? Besides looking at you moisturizing your fingertips with your breath .

one thing nice about this list is the touching faith people have in the innate goodness of human beings in general and govt officials in particular.

On 11/25/2011 11:54 AM, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

On Friday 25 November 2011 11:36:30 kenneth gonsalves wrote:

...

On Thu, 2011-11-24 at 19:21 +0530, Sameep wrote:

...

Don't you think that , unless the people who are taking your details and finger prints are blind , they would notice a bunch of wax strips hanging from your fingers ? Besides looking at you moisturizing your fingertips with your breath .

one thing nice about this list is the touching faith people have in the innate goodness of human beings in general and govt officials in particular.

Maybe they have not got shafted yet. Or just that they grew up being subservient and think that it is "normal business" in a democracy to be dog tagged and nose ringed.

As long as no individual however powerful is exempted and everyone is treated equally in the UID system, this system is necessary for a democracy to be healthy. If bio-metrics means dog tagging and nose ringing, why do people use it for security systems?

On 11/25/2011 11:09 PM, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

On Friday 25 November 2011 22:24:52 Rony wrote:

...

On 11/25/2011 11:54 AM, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

...

On Friday 25 November 2011 11:36:30 kenneth gonsalves wrote:

...

On Thu, 2011-11-24 at 19:21 +0530, Sameep wrote:

...

Don't you think that , unless the people who are taking your details and finger prints are blind , they would notice a bunch of wax strips hanging from your fingers ? Besides looking at you moisturizing your fingertips with your breath .

one thing nice about this list is the touching faith people have in the innate goodness of human beings in general and govt officials in particular.

Maybe they have not got shafted yet. Or just that they grew up being subservient and think that it is "normal business" in a democracy to be dog tagged and nose ringed.

As long as no individual however powerful is exempted and everyone is treated equally in the UID system, this system is necessary for a democracy to be healthy. If bio-metrics means dog tagging and nose ringing, why do people use it for security systems?

Because security is not identity. AND YOU do the id when you require access. It is not a random joe who pulls you up and tells you to auth. And it is for a tiny set - hence workable. And it requires re registration every few months, which is done easily by people who know you in your organisation. And you are not denied entitlement even if auth fails....

The point is that bio-metrics is a scientific biological identity not something sub human.

Even with all the above caveats, it barely works. Now multiply this by 1.2^9 on a daily basis and you know what you are up against. A stupid hare brained waste of public money by a marketroid hell bent on personal glorification.

With a population of more than 1 billion people, any National level scheme will be huge and expensive. If the current process of doing this ID is wrong then experts can suggest better alternatives to achieve the desired results.

On 25 November 2011 22:24, Rony gnulinuxist@gmail.com wrote:

As long as no individual however powerful is exempted and everyone is treated equally in the UID system, this system is necessary for a democracy to be healthy.

If a biometric system is needed for a democracy to be "healthy", how did we get along without it so far? How are the other healthy democracies of the world, that have said resounding NOs to such systems, functioning?

This "biometrics is a must" is a mirage. The only purpose the government wants the UID for is wholescale snooping of the general populace. Everything else - improved PDS, improved security, improved efficiency etc. - are all hogwash. Mr. Chidambaram has another, still more draconian proposal that he is pushing through - it is called the "National Intelligence Grid". Take a look:

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2081647.ece

Now imagine the scenario in the country where Aadhar and Natgrid talk to each other. Do you think anyone (forget even people like Anna Hazare) can survive as an independent-thinking and opinion-forming free and proud individual in such an eventuality? The combination is exactly what George Orwell predicted in his novel, 1984 - go read the book too.

Binand

2011/11/26 Raj Mathur (राज माथुर) raju@linux-delhi.org:

In 1906, an Indian was put into jail for resisting a Government's efforts to issue biometric (fingerprint) identity cards to his nation. Incidentally, it was his first experience of jail (he had many more later).

That was a different issue. It was about issuing IDs specifically to Asian migrants. National ID is issued to all residents of country without discrimination.

In a perfect world, ID would be issued only to "legitimate" residents.

On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Binand Sethumadhavan binand@gmail.com wrote:

Or, a team of anthropologists discover a tribe of people living in the deep jungles of Chattisgarh. The tribe has a population of a few hundred. What do you do?

Issue them ID.

In a day perhaps 50,000 foreign nationals enter India -legally-. None of them have Aadhars. Do you plan to cover them? Remember, several of them would be in India as tourists or businessmen and would be in the country for only a week or so.

Just like other countries with national IDs handle this issue. Till you are a visitor, your visa or TAX ID serves as ID. Once you get resident status you get national ID like SSN.

Countries like US have already started capturing fingerprints and hand geometry of ALL legal visitors. And its trivial for federal law enforcement to validate an I-90 in minutes because of this system.

On Saturday 26 November 2011 12:59:01 Binand Sethumadhavan wrote:

On 26 November 2011 12:39, Shamit Verma subs.linux.mum@vshamit.com wrote:

...

...

Or, a team of anthropologists discover a tribe of people living in the deep jungles of Chattisgarh. The tribe has a population of a few hundred. What do you do?

Issue them ID.

But you don't know they are legal or illegal residents. I chose those two states specifically - in the case of Chattisgarh, it is the government's claim that non-Indians are living and training the Maoists.

...

Just like other countries with national IDs handle this issue. Till you are a visitor, your visa or TAX ID serves as ID. Once you get resident status you get national ID like SSN.

First of all, remember that the US SSN is neither a national ID nor is it compulsory. Secondly, I wouldn't quote the USA as a prime example of a country that respects or honours its citizens' or visitors' privacy expectations. I wouldn't use it as an example of a country that has a good control on public spending either.

He sounds like a UIDAI mouthpiece. All the same rubbish spouted by their spokespersons.

On 26 November 2011 14:04, Shamit Verma subs.linux.mum@vshamit.com wrote:

We need "some" national ID that is better than existing ones. Be it UIADI or something else.

We don't need another ID solely for the purpose of pumping huge amounts of public money into it. All we need to do is to fix the loopholes in the existing ones.

You still have not given a coherent reason WHY we need one. One that cannot be solved by tightening up existing controls.

Binand

On 26 November 2011 14:11, Shamit Verma subs.linux.mum@vshamit.com wrote:

Because fixing each and every system is going to cost more.

I explained a while back that the government should operate a level higher than the usual maximise(profit = revenue - cost) motif. The purpose of government is not to return dividends to shareholders. The government has a bunch of legal, social and constitutional obligations that may require it to spend more money than required.

For example, by your argument the government can decide that cost of holding elections can be reduced by holding them only once every 10 years.

Binand

On 26 November 2011 14:44, Shamit Verma subs.linux.mum@vshamit.com wrote:

As a citizen, I would prefer cheaper fuel then spending money on solving one problem many times.

Right. And let the constitution and legal framework all be damned, right?

Binand

On 11/26/2011 02:09 PM, Binand Sethumadhavan wrote:

On 26 November 2011 14:04, Shamit Verma subs.linux.mum@vshamit.com wrote:

...

We need "some" national ID that is better than existing ones. Be it UIADI or something else.

We don't need another ID solely for the purpose of pumping huge amounts of public money into it. All we need to do is to fix the loopholes in the existing ones.

You still have not given a coherent reason WHY we need one. One that cannot be solved by tightening up existing controls.

Isn't the UID the process of tightening up existing controls?

On 11/26/2011 12:59 PM, Binand Sethumadhavan wrote:

On 26 November 2011 12:39, Shamit Verma subs.linux.mum@vshamit.com wrote:

...

...

Or, a team of anthropologists discover a tribe of people living in the deep jungles of Chattisgarh. The tribe has a population of a few hundred. What do you do?

Issue them ID.

But you don't know they are legal or illegal residents. I chose those two states specifically - in the case of Chattisgarh, it is the government's claim that non-Indians are living and training the Maoists.

Check their history till they can be cleared.

On 11/27/2011 09:39 AM, Binand Sethumadhavan wrote:

On 26 November 2011 23:25, Rony gnulinuxist@gmail.com wrote:

...

...

government's claim that non-Indians are living and training the

Check their history till they can be cleared.

Please Rony - let us have a little less naivete. How do you check the history of say, a 100 tribals whom no one has seen before, to detect the one or two illegals among them?

Certain allowances will always have to be given for those below poverty line who are cut off from civilisation.

On 11/27/2011 12:42 PM, Binand Sethumadhavan wrote:

On 27 November 2011 12:25, Rony gnulinuxist@gmail.com wrote:

...

...

history of say, a 100 tribals whom no one has seen before, to detect the one or two illegals among them?

Certain allowances will always have to be given for those below poverty line who are cut off from civilisation.

So you will issue Aadhars to all of them? You now have violated the fundamental assumption on the basis of which the conjob called Aadhar has been sold to the public - that it will be issued only to those who qualify and deserve it.

No 2 persons will have the same bio-id so it should not matter. Even if they give false names, they will have to stick to it for the rest of their official lives.

Who qualifies for and deserves Aadhar?

On Sun, 2011-11-27 at 12:25 +0530, Rony wrote:

On 11/27/2011 09:39 AM, Binand Sethumadhavan wrote:

...

On 26 November 2011 23:25, Rony gnulinuxist@gmail.com wrote:

...

...

government's claim that non-Indians are living and training the

Check their history till they can be cleared.

Please Rony - let us have a little less naivete. How do you check

the

...

history of say, a 100 tribals whom no one has seen before, to detect the one or two illegals among them?

Certain allowances will always have to be given for those below poverty line who are cut off from civilisation.

which is the majority of the population

2011/11/26 Raj Mathur (राज माथुर) raju@linux-delhi.org:

SSN is just that: needed for social security.  If you're Gill Bates, you don't need an SSN since it's unlikely you'll ever be on the dole.  It's not mandatory.

Not sure how did you get that impression. For example, you can not even get a post-paid cell phone or credit card without SSN.

SSN was not created for this purpose, but in absence of national ID it has become a de-facto national ID.

On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Binand Sethumadhavan binand@gmail.com wrote:

That is simply not true. The reason credit card/cell phone providers require an SSN is to check your credit history - after all, both services (CC/post-paid) involves extending credit to you. If you are willing to cover the risk involved (by say, making a security deposit) then you certainly can obtain either service in the US without an SSN.

That is the point, your employment + credit is linked to SSN.

So, if you want to work (legally) or get any form of credit (including house on rent) you need this ID.

On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Binand Sethumadhavan binand@gmail.com wrote:

There is no need for an SSN to work. Only to get dole if you are out of work. If you are the type who will never be, then you have no need for the SSN.

Lets hear from horse's mouth:

"The SSN was originally devised to keep an accurate record of each individual’s earnings, and to subsequently monitor benefits paid under the Social Security program. However, use of the Social Security number as a general identifier has grown to the point where it is the most commonly used and convenient identifier for all types of record-keeping systems in the United States."

http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/78

Jut like you cant get a job without PAN in India, SSN is required so that employer can notify IRS about tax.

Btw, house on rent is not a form of credit because typically the rent is collected in advance.

Companies that rent apartments need to check credit history so, most will decline unless you have good credit rating (queried by SSN) or are willing to put up much higher deposit.

On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 4:18 PM, kenneth gonsalves lawgon@thenilgiris.com wrote:

On Sat, 2011-11-26 at 14:32 +0530, Shamit Verma wrote:

...

Jut like you cant get a job without PAN in India

crores of people have a job without having a PAN.

How do they file tax? By getting a job I mean "Getting a job legally".

On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 9:33 AM, kenneth gonsalves lawgon@thenilgiris.com wrote:

...

...

crores of people have a job without having a PAN.

How do they file tax? By getting a job I mean "Getting a job legally".

I was wondering which country you were living in -

How does that change the facts? That is legally every employer is supposed to deduct taxes and that can not be done unless employer knows PAN.

On Sun, 2011-11-27 at 10:40 +0530, Shamit Verma wrote:

...

...

How do they file tax? By getting a job I mean "Getting a job legally".

I was wondering which country you were living in -

How does that change the facts? That is legally every employer is supposed to deduct taxes and that can not be done unless employer knows PAN.

maybe where you live - not in India. All you need to do is to give a declaration to the employer that you are below the taxable limit and he will not deduct. (and in a lot of sectors even this is not necessary). Most states do not tax agricultural income.

On Saturday 26 Nov 2011, Shamit Verma wrote:

"The SSN was originally devised to keep an accurate record of each individual’s earnings, and to subsequently monitor benefits paid under the Social Security program. However, use of the Social Security number as a general identifier has grown to the point where it is the most commonly used and convenient identifier for all types of record-keeping systems in the United States."

http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/78

This discussion is growing more and more OT, but nothing there says that the SSN is mandatory for any purpose other than Social Security. Nor is a passport mandatory in India, nor a PAN card, nor a driver's licence nor a voter ID card. However, UIDAI is trying to make the UID mandatory for central government-provided services, the most recent example being inability to get an LPG refill (yes, refill -- not a new connection) without a UID.

Anyhow, the news is that a case has been filed in the Bengaluru High Court to have the UIDAI and all its works declared illegal. The case was filed yesterday (November 25). Interesting to see what happens.

Regards,

-- Raj

On 11/26/2011 03:20 PM, Shamit Verma wrote:

2011/11/26 Raj Mathur (राज माथुर)raju@linux-delhi.org:

...

...

http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/78

This discussion is growing more and more OT, but nothing there says that the SSN is mandatory for any purpose other than Social Security.

In the US SSN is needed for quite a lot of things. It's more like an ID card as Americans don't want a National ID. You have to have a SSN here.

Swapnil

The SSN is not, repeat NOT an ID card.

What is an ID card? Something that identifies your identity!

I was only responding to the comment which said that in the US SSN is not used for anything other than IRS related issues.

When we enter the US base, if we don't have the ID, SSN is asked.

If the government and businesses in the US use the SSN for identification, then it is their problem.

It's not their problem. It's what happens.

:-)

Swapnil

On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 9:31 AM, Binand Sethumadhavan binand@gmail.com wrote:

Well, the US laws are clear on this point. If an agency (govt. or private) asks for your SSN for identification purposes, you have the *right* to ask back why your number is needed, how it will be used and

Yes laws allow one to deny disclosure of SSN. But law also allows denial of service in such case.

So, you go to rent an apartment, company that owns the building would ask for SSN to run a credit and bankruptcy check. You are within your right to deny giving out SSN, And company is also within their right to deny apartment to you.

All they need to do in case of SSN being compromised is to pay for 2 years of credit monitoring service.

I have rented in three states (NY/NJ/CA) and every state's model agreement clearly states this fact.

Similarly, employer would not give you a job unless he can report earnings to IRS.

On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Binand Sethumadhavan binand@gmail.com wrote:

No, we debated this yesterday. It is illegal to deny service if a consumer refuses to provide an SSN, provided there is no federal statute that mandates the use of an SSN. The provider can ask for additional deposits to reduce his risk, that's all.

This is what US congress report says:

"Section 7 of the Privacy Act does not impose any restrictions on private sector use of the SSN. Thus, private businesses and organizations may still request an individual’s SSN in exchange for goods or services, and no general federal law regulates such transactions. Private sector use of the SSN is widespread,60 including activities such as using SSNs for data exchanges to assess credit risk, tracking patient care among multiple providers, locating bankruptcy assets, and providing background checks on new employees. Many colleges and universities, and agencies that administer standardized tests such as the Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT)"

http://www.privacy.wv.gov/privacy-program/Documents/CRS_Report_re_SSN_Laws.p...

Don't lie outright, to prove your point. The company that owns the building is NOT within its right to deny apartment to you, just because you refused to provide an SSN. See:

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ny-supreme-court/1063727.html

Need for SSN is for credit checks. Unless landlord is individuals, most companies have language that is legal. Condition is to "Pass a Credit Rating Check" and that can not be done without SSN.

And this report clearly states that (with references)

"In some cases, an accommodation may be reached whereby a business agrees to use an identifier other than a person’s SSN, but there is no federal law that prohibits the private entity from requiring a person’s SSN as a condition to providing goods or services."

On 11/26/2011 12:18 PM, Binand Sethumadhavan wrote:

On 26 November 2011 12:04, Shamit Verma subs.linux.mum@vshamit.com wrote:

...

In a perfect world, ID would be issued only to "legitimate" residents.

Fantastic. Let us say all 1.2B of us have Aadhars.

Now suppose one fine morning you come across a person who does not have an Aadhar somewhere in the desert of Rajasthan. What do you do?

Ask him/her to get his/her Adhar done. This is the procedural part of the issue.

Or, a team of anthropologists discover a tribe of people living in the deep jungles of Chattisgarh. The tribe has a population of a few hundred. What do you do?

Get their Adhar done.

In a day perhaps 50,000 foreign nationals enter India -legally-. None of them have Aadhars. Do you plan to cover them? Remember, several of them would be in India as tourists or businessmen and would be in the country for only a week or so.

Foreign nationals have passports.

On Saturday 26 November 2011 11:24:56 Raj Mathur (राज माथुर) wrote:

On Saturday 26 Nov 2011, Binand Sethumadhavan wrote:

...

Now imagine the scenario in the country where Aadhar and Natgrid talk to each other. Do you think anyone (forget even people like Anna Hazare) can survive as an independent-thinking and opinion-forming free and proud individual in such an eventuality? The combination is exactly what George Orwell predicted in his novel, 1984 - go read the book too.

At the risk of repeating oneself:

In 1906, an Indian was put into jail for resisting a Government's efforts to issue biometric (fingerprint) identity cards to his nation. Incidentally, it was his first experience of jail (he had many more later).

Exactly 100 years later, Government of India first mooted a proposal to issue biometric identities to all its residents. What has changed so drastically in one century that we can go diametrically against this earlier pioneer's vision?

The name of the Indian was M K Gandhi, and the government that jailed him was South Africa.

I might add that SA did issue id cards, though not biometric. It was used to target people. SA was perhaps on par with Nazi Germany - another card issuer - in it's official human rights violations. More recently it was Serbia which used a national id card database in it's genocide pogrom. The case is on trial in the international courts.

One of the earliest documented persecutions happened in the year of the birth of the dude JC 2500 yrs ago in Judea. National census for tax collection was the avowed goal. But it was used to target certain sects of jews.

Those who fear their people are the ones who want to implement an id system.

On Thursday 24 November 2011 19:21:25 Sameep wrote:

...

You might start here http://thinkinganarchist.blogspot.com/2011/10/uinique-identity-biometrics -and-all.html and follow the youtube, rediff and cryptome.org links.

Don't you think that , unless the people who are taking your details and finger prints are blind , they would notice a bunch of wax strips hanging from your fingers ? Besides looking at you moisturizing your fingertips with your breath .

Sigh. THERE IS NO ONE AT THE FP READER TO SEE YOUR F....... FINGER.

On Friday 25 November 2011 11:57:51 Sameep wrote:

...

Sigh. THERE IS NO ONE AT THE FP READER TO SEE YOUR F....... FINGER.

Yes there is.

Where? Auth hasnt even begin - save some miniscule, statistically insignificant pilots (the usual UIDAI ploy which will be tom tommed as a a grand success).

Also read my next mail.

As an interesting aside: The UIDAI specified error margins and duplicate verification system is such a hoot, that they cant even verify themselves how many false rejects or accepts are there. As per their specifications there will be well above 200 million duplicates or rejects, which translates to 200 million fakes - you dont know wether the Fprint is fake or the data is fake.

Inorder to test you will have to register a statistically significant number, which is representative of our population. Then after a year or so you will have to get this same bunch to re-register. Then repeat after 1 year. Then and only then will you have meaningful data. The UIDAI has not done any such thing. Thei pilot was on 25000 people in 3 locations total 75000, and deliberately removed those with poor biometrics as "corner cases".

BUT a study in Seoul by the driver licenec department found that 50% of the registered could not authenticate after a period of 2 years. Women rejects (household work) were significantly higher. I hope you dont miss th fact that these are urban middle class. Not the cattle class sub human village yokels on whose back the UIDAI crooks are making a pile.

If you choose to be an idiot, that is your choice, but be an informed idiot.

On Friday 25 November 2011 18:40:32 Shamit Verma wrote:

...

On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 12:30 PM, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

As an interesting aside: The UIDAI specified error margins and duplicate verification system is such a hoot, that they cant even verify themselves how many false rejects or accepts are there. As per their specifications there will be well above 200 million duplicates or rejects, which translates to 200 million fakes - you dont know wether the Fprint is fake or the data is fake.

It is a start. Like any system, there would be technical failures which will have to be corrected.

Yes. Do it with your money, not with public money. And dont make utterly nonsensical claims. If you were a company (Read Infosys), making such claims, you would get sued proper. Infosys was sued by the S'pore government when they did this. Ofcourse such niceties skips the brainless UIDAI and their supporters.

E.g. more stable biometric like DNA can be captured at the time of issuing birth certificate and that could be initiation of a person's national ID.

YAI Read - that involves going to google or the library, and studying those - before faffing.

-- http://mm.ilug-bom.org.in/mailman/listinfo/linuxers

On Friday 25 November 2011 22:38:12 Rony wrote:

On 11/25/2011 08:39 PM, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

...

On Friday 25 November 2011 18:40:32 Shamit Verma wrote:

...

...

On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 12:30 PM, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

As an interesting aside: The UIDAI specified error margins and duplicate verification system is such a hoot, that they cant even verify themselves how many false rejects or accepts are there. As per their specifications there will be well above 200 million duplicates or rejects, which translates to 200 million fakes - you dont know wether the Fprint is fake or the data is fake.

It is a start. Like any system, there would be technical failures which will have to be corrected.

Yes. Do it with your money, not with public money. And dont make utterly nonsensical claims. If you were a company (Read Infosys), making such claims, you would get sued proper. Infosys was sued by the S'pore government when they did this. Ofcourse such niceties skips the brainless UIDAI and their supporters.

The bad implementation of a good idea does not make the idea bad.

So what was wrong with the old system that this one corrects?

On 25 November 2011 22:58, Rony gnulinuxist@gmail.com wrote:

The UID will improvise on the limitations of the PAN card.

Let us examine this. What are the limitations of the PAN card, and how does the UID eliminate them?

The PAN card (or more accurately, the PAN itself) is used to contain tax evasion. You have to quote your PAN everywhere you spend money. There are large data crunching computers that cross-link this data, and attempt to see if an individual is spending (cheques/credit cards/ATM withdrawals etc.) more than what he is earning (salary, interest, capital gains, rent...) and flag such cases for investigation. Can the UID improve on this? Remember, the finance minister is on record saying that ever since the introduction of the PAN, tax collection has gone up by so much that he could cut tax rates and still earn the government the same amount of money. How will the UID improve on this scenario where it appears to me that the card is actually working well?

The other side of this story involves tax-evasion transactions (black market, hawala, whatever). People pay for goods and services in cash, fudge documents to hide it, no tax paid, hoard such cash in bank lockers and hiding places at houses, send it out of the country through the hawala route, bring it back again via the DTAA with Mauritius in the form of P-notes and such. How exactly does the UID fix this problem? Are we going to make Aadhar mandatory for all Mauritians as well?

Binand

On 26 November 2011 11:49, Shamit Verma subs.linux.mum@vshamit.com wrote:

Yes, improvement is the assurance that one person would not be not be issued multiple cards.

http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/pan-scam-i_292341.html

This article explains how the fake PAN card is obtained. Please can you explain how the UID will stop the process?

Binand

On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Binand Sethumadhavan binand@gmail.com wrote:

I forgot to mention this. The need for multiple PAN is usually only to apply for and obtain, multiple demat accounts.

That plus all sorts of "benami" assets obtained with fake identities.

On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Binand Sethumadhavan binand@gmail.com wrote:

Benami assets don't require you to have multiple PANs. All you need is a benami and a GPoA. Nothing in the Aadhar scheme would prevent the benami system.

If registration+financial transactions are linked to national ID, it would be more difficult to hide such activities.

It would not prevent such activities, but would be one of the tools that can be used to curb.

On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Binand Sethumadhavan binand@gmail.com wrote:

Please explain how Aadhar will stop this.

Being a centralized system, land purchase in name of B would be reported to Tax authorities based on national ID.They can validate if B has shown enough income to afford this land. And if he is paying taxes on that income.

Similarly, PoA would have IDs of both B and A. This can again be used to track properties that are controlled by A.

Right now, A can "invent" hundreds of fictitious B's since IDs do not require biometrics. ID that is used in case of property transactions happens to be PAN.

On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 2:45 PM, Binand Sethumadhavan binand@gmail.com wrote:

Now you are talking of the system envisaged by PC - linking Aadhar to Natgrid. See how easy it is to make that jump? And reach the kind of surveillance state the likes of which the world has not seen before?

That already happens. All property transactions are reported.

But due to face PAN cards, this does not work in practice. B and A can both get as many PAN cards as they want.

On Saturday 26 November 2011 14:38:41 Shamit Verma wrote:

On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Binand Sethumadhavan binand@gmail.com

wrote:

...

Please explain how Aadhar will stop this.

Being a centralized system, land purchase in name of B would be reported to Tax authorities based on national ID.They can validate if B has shown enough income to afford this land. And if he is paying taxes on that income.

Land registration is a state subject. IT is a central subject. Why? Do homework.

Similarly, PoA would have IDs of both B and A. This can again be used to track properties that are controlled by A.

Right now, A can "invent" hundreds of fictitious B's since IDs do not require biometrics. ID that is used in case of property transactions happens to be PAN. -- http://mm.ilug-bom.org.in/mailman/listinfo/linuxers

On Saturday 26 November 2011 19:29:22 Shamit Verma wrote:

On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 5:08 PM, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

...

Land registration is a state subject. IT is a central subject. Why?

That does not matter. All property transactions over 30 lakh have to be reported by registrar to IT.

This is part of "Annual Information Return" and these transactions are part of "High Value Transactions" that have to be reported to IT.

Roam around a leetile outside your glass cage. You might yet learn a thing or two. Do you know how much land an be purchased under multiple Rs. 30 Lakhs?. I know of one minister in the Maharashtra state cabinet holding over 1000 acres, benami. And this guy is relatively small fry. Another one's kith and kin holds proly 10% of Maharashtra.

How come they never get reported. Oh btw RTIs filed say they dont hold any land or miniscule holdings.

The first flawed presumption is that people dont have identity The second flawed presumption is that biometrics are unique The third flawed presumption is that biometrics are constant The fourth flawed presumption is that corruption is caused at the last mile The fifth flawed presumption is that tracing transactions will stop corruption The sixth flawed assumption is that the state is a protector The seventh flawed assumption is that data is rarely misused The eighth flawed assumption is that entitlements are refused due to lack of identity The ninth flawed assumption is that the existing id's are broken so a new one is a must The tenth flawed assumption is that issue processes can be made substantially better by tech fixes inherent in the 9th assumption

I could go on forever. But it requires a greatly nuanced understanding of power, democracy, governance, history, our society and lastly technology. No amount of technology cotton wool is going to help.

We havent even got around to talking of probable corruption in the UIDAI!!!! L1 technolgies the sole supplier of the core de dup and iris scan tech - there are multiple vendors, but only one tech source (an absolutely similiar situation to M$, patents, monopoliy games and underhand dealings included), has been convicted of fraud in Georgia for willfully issuing duplicate driving licences (LAMAO). The directors of this company were former homeland security officials, who awarded huge contracts to L1, and on retirement joined L1 (ROTFL at you innocent ignorants).

My dear sirs Mr. NN is no innocent corporate honcho, and the UIDAI is not the god send you all think it is. It is an abomination whose hydra heads you havent even begun to see. Research the money on EDGAR and if you are clever you will learn.

On 26 November 2011 23:54, Rony gnulinuxist@gmail.com wrote:

A little deviation from the topic, a nuclear powered submarine of the US Navy can travel and stay submerged for 30 years without re-surfacing (As seen on TV). If we can harness similar technologies to run railway engines and ships and trucks for many years without re-fuelling it would be such a lovely thing. But we will have the nay sayers who will oppose nuclear technology completely instead of focussing on making it safer and more innovative.

Rony:

Do you know what it costs to run such a nuclear-powered submarine? Do you know what the health impact of such close proximity to a reactor is, on the sailors on board? Do you know how much the US spends on its military in a year? (hint: $680 billion in 2010, India's GDP is $1630 billion) Do you know that a submarine runs far away from nearest land mass, whereas a train runs through several urban centers? Do you know that several countries (developed world) do not allow US nuclear submarines anywhere near their coasts (Spain, for example)? Do you know that existing nuclear technology cannot be ever made safe in the way you want it to be? Do you know that the US is sitting on piles of nuclear waste, without a clue how to dispose it off? That it is willing to offer third-world countries $$$ just to buy it off? Do you know that the US nuclear industry is getting so much backlash from the home population that the only place they want to expand to is the developing world that can afford it (India, for example)?

If you did not know any of the above, please don't bring the nuclear issue to this discussion. It can be discussed separately and perhaps in another forum.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=presidential-commission-see...

Binand

On 11/27/2011 12:14 PM, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

IF we had to factor in the clean up and compensation costs, none of us would want that lovely thing. Fukushima total generated power USD25billion total recovery cost 75billion (with very very lax accounting norms) and climbing.

Past accidents should be used to make future systems safer, not throw them out altogether.

On 11/27/2011 12:36 PM, Binand Sethumadhavan wrote:

On 27 November 2011 12:34, Rony gnulinuxist@gmail.com wrote:

...

Past accidents should be used to make future systems safer, not throw them out altogether.

And what exactly needs to be done to make a Jaitapur or Koodankulam "safer" than a Chernobyl or Fukushima?

First the protesters get hold of proper nuclear scientists who they know, trust and can represent their views. These scientists then interact with the concerned authorities and study the plans for the plants. If they feel there is any design flaw they let it be known to the designers and ask them to make corrections or suggest corrections based on their own experience. The protesting part should come in only if the corrections are refused and there are plans to go ahead with the faulty design.

On 27 November 2011 13:08, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

On second thought it might actually be a good idea to have  reactors all over

extinction and actually save the earth. Nature and life will do just fine without the parasites known as humans.

The only flaw in your argument is that a nuclear disaster would take life and nature away from the planet in its wake and not just the humans. :-)

Binand

On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 1:08 PM, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

On Sunday 27 November 2011 12:34:06 Rony wrote:

...

On 11/27/2011 12:14 PM, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

...

IF we had to factor in the clean up and compensation costs, none of us would want that lovely thing. Fukushima total generated power USD25billion total recovery cost 75billion (with very very lax accounting norms) and climbing.

Past accidents should be used to make future systems safer, not throw them out altogether.

Ah. So let a few million babies with birth defects be born due to some accident on existing reactors, then we will find out ways to make it safe. In the meantime we will continue with the halflife problem for 250 odd years.

Nice going.

On second thought it might actually be a good idea to have  reactors all over the planet 50 km apart.  You will be guaranteed a disaster in all of them (only that you would not know - state secrets, in every country ;-E. Indian reactors are totally safe lol). Which should cull our population to extinction and actually save the earth. Nature and life will do just fine without the parasites known as humans.

BTW, far more number of people die in road and rail accidents in India and around the world than nuclear reactors going bust.

Should we ban all road and rail travel? after all auto-mobiles and rail are also considered technology.

With regards,

On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 11:34 PM, Binand Sethumadhavan binand@gmail.com wrote:

On 27 November 2011 23:12, Dinesh Shah (દિનેશ શાહ/दिनेश शाह) dineshah@gmail.com wrote:

...

BTW, far more number of people die in road and rail accidents in India and around the world than nuclear reactors going bust.

Should we ban all road and rail travel? after all  auto-mobiles and rail are also considered technology.

This particular meme seems to be absolutely standard around the world, to be used in all scenarios where one wants to enforce one's point of view. And of course, it is plain wrong.

Really?

Road accidents can be certainly reduced by banning road travel, and that is obviously not a decision you want to make. So you will start by identifying particular stretches of roads that seem to be more dangerous than others and (a) ban traffic on those stretches, or (b) improve those stretches to eliminate the accident-causing factors. Since banning is still not an option, you will turn to the latter.

Why can the same argument apply to nuclear technology?

If you do that in a structured way, you will also further emerge with metrics like "accidents per 1000 vehicles" or "accidents per 1000 route-km" and so on, that will allow you to meaningfully compare two separate stretches of roads.

Right

And then you will attempt to do a similar analysis with a planned nuclear reactor. You will end up realizing that in terms of the metric that can be meaningfully compared - like  "deaths per 1000 population" or "deaths per year of operation" - your average nuclear reactor is several orders of magnitude more dangerous that your average state highway.

Pointers/Links to those stats?

Now you will start factoring in the probability of a failure. At which point, after investigating the geological and other factors, you will hopefully realize the killer legacy our current incumbent in the PMO is hell bent on leaving for our children.

Again. Figures and pointers to those studies facts please.

BTW, I am no fan of incumbent PMO. In fact I don't like the governments.

That is why I strongly like and advocate less government. Lesser Govt. Better Govt. :-)

Binand

With regards,

On Sunday 27 November 2011 23:34:27 Binand Sethumadhavan wrote:

On 27 November 2011 23:12, Dinesh Shah (દિનેશ શાહ/दिनेश शाह)

dineshah@gmail.com wrote:

...

BTW, far more number of people die in road and rail accidents in India and around the world than nuclear reactors going bust.

Should we ban all road and rail travel? after all  auto-mobiles and rail are also considered technology.

This particular meme seems to be absolutely standard around the world, to be used in all scenarios where one wants to enforce one's point of view. And of course, it is plain wrong.

Road accidents can be certainly reduced by banning road travel, and that is obviously not a decision you want to make. So you will start by identifying particular stretches of roads that seem to be more dangerous than others and (a) ban traffic on those stretches, or (b) improve those stretches to eliminate the accident-causing factors. Since banning is still not an option, you will turn to the latter.

If you do that in a structured way, you will also further emerge with metrics like "accidents per 1000 vehicles" or "accidents per 1000 route-km" and so on, that will allow you to meaningfully compare two separate stretches of roads.

And then you will attempt to do a similar analysis with a planned nuclear reactor. You will end up realizing that in terms of the metric that can be meaningfully compared - like "deaths per 1000 population" or "deaths per year of operation" - your average nuclear reactor is several orders of magnitude more dangerous that your average state highway.

Now you will start factoring in the probability of a failure. At which point, after investigating the geological and other factors, you will hopefully realize the killer legacy our current incumbent in the PMO is hell bent on leaving for our children.

Well said.

There was a similiar strawman argument "more people die of shark bites than nuclear accidents''. Ofcourse ofcourse. BUT the death rate is near 100% when your boat meets with an accident in shark infested waters. And more importantly it stops with you. You see, your wife on the beach does not get killed 30 years later automagically.

Unfortunately one has to deal with these type of factually wrong statements all the while.

On 28 November 2011 00:40, Dinesh Shah (દિનેશ શાહ/दिनेश शाह) dineshah@gmail.com wrote:

Since you don't like road accident argument I will change to fire. We have learned a great deal to use and control fire. Still fire causes death and destruction. We sure don't want to stop using fire for current and future gen?

Once again - you don't ban. You analyze WHY people are dying. You figure out that lack of fire fighting equipment, lack of emergency exits, insufficient crowd control etc. all contribute. You tighten these controls. You make fire license mandatory for malls and theatres. You implement quarterly inspections. You create penalties for non-compliance. And so on.

The one thing you don't do is to put up a rule that one needs an Aadhar to buy a matchbox.

What I am trying to put forward is simple case - all technology, including nuclear is inherently neutral in nature. It's the way it's uses that makes it either branded good or bad.

Correct. And using nuclear reactors to generate power in a country as crowded as India is one of those "bad" usages. There certainly are "good" (for certain values of good) usages - like powering long range submarines, perhaps interplanetary exploration vehicles etc. - nobody's denying that.

Binand

On Monday 28 November 2011 01:14:01 jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

On Monday 28 November 2011 00:40:22 Dinesh Shah wrote:

...

On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 12:23 AM, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

...

On Sunday 27 November 2011 23:34:27 Binand Sethumadhavan wrote:

...

On 27 November 2011 23:12, Dinesh Shah (દિનેશ શાહ/दिनेश शाह)

dineshah@gmail.com wrote:

...

BTW, far more number of people die in road and rail accidents in India and around the world than nuclear reactors going bust.

Should we ban all road and rail travel? after all  auto-mobiles and rail are also considered technology.

This particular meme seems to be absolutely standard around the world, to be used in all scenarios where one wants to enforce one's point of view. And of course, it is plain wrong.

Road accidents can be certainly reduced by banning road travel, and that is obviously not a decision you want to make. So you will start by identifying particular stretches of roads that seem to be more dangerous than others and (a) ban traffic on those stretches, or (b) improve those stretches to eliminate the accident-causing factors. Since banning is still not an option, you will turn to the latter.

If you do that in a structured way, you will also further emerge with metrics like "accidents per 1000 vehicles" or "accidents per 1000 route-km" and so on, that will allow you to meaningfully compare two separate stretches of roads.

And then you will attempt to do a similar analysis with a planned nuclear reactor. You will end up realizing that in terms of the metric that can be meaningfully compared - like  "deaths per 1000 population" or "deaths per year of operation" - your average nuclear reactor is several orders of magnitude more dangerous that your average state highway.

Now you will start factoring in the probability of a failure. At which point, after investigating the geological and other factors, you will hopefully realize the killer legacy our current incumbent in the PMO is hell bent on leaving for our children.

Well said.

There was a similiar strawman argument "more people die of shark bites than nuclear accidents''. Ofcourse ofcourse. BUT the death rate is near 100% when your boat meets with an accident in shark infested waters. And more importantly it stops with you. You see, your wife on the beach does not get killed 30 years later automagically.

It looks like whatever argument put forward here is not convenient to your, it becomes "strawman argument". :-)

Since you don't like road accident argument I will change to fire. We have learned a great deal to use and control fire. Still fire causes death and destruction. We sure don't want to stop using fire for current and future gen?

Sure. Read shark part again. Fire stops destruction at the end of fire. Ones kith and kin and random joes walking past the fire site wont die 10 years from now.

A nuclear disaster - actually even when not a disaster - does not end with the destruction of the reactor. It continues for a few centuries afterwards. It does not stop at the site. It keeps spreading wider and wider. It concentrates it self in the food chain (read about strontium, cesium, cobalt).

...

...

Unfortunately one has to deal with these type of factually wrong statements all the while.

Really? I would like to know which are wrong statements? (so I can learn to make right statements :-) )

Read about radioactivity and half life. Also those readings from Geiger counters tell you less than half a story. In Japan, NGOs took apart car air filters and tested for radioactivity. The radioactivity was 100 times higher in 100% of the cases and 100 times higher in a significant number of cases.

a 1000 times higher in a number of cases.

On 11/28/2011 01:14 AM, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

A nuclear disaster - actually even when not a disaster - does not end with the destruction of the reactor. It continues for a few centuries afterwards. It does not stop at the site. It keeps spreading wider and wider. It concentrates it self in the food chain (read about strontium, cesium, cobalt).

Just thinking aloud. I have always wondered why they have not build deep underground reactors so that any unfortunate accident can be contained under the soil rather than getting exposed in the air to the people. Life can go on as usual on the top without displacing people.

On 11/28/2011 12:23 AM, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

On Sunday 27 November 2011 23:34:27 Binand Sethumadhavan wrote:

...

Now you will start factoring in the probability of a failure. At which point, after investigating the geological and other factors, you will hopefully realize the killer legacy our current incumbent in the PMO is hell bent on leaving for our children.

Well said.

There was a similiar strawman argument "more people die of shark bites than nuclear accidents''. Ofcourse ofcourse. BUT the death rate is near 100% when your boat meets with an accident in shark infested waters. And more importantly it stops with you. You see, your wife on the beach does not get killed 30 years later automagically.

Unfortunately one has to deal with these type of factually wrong statements all the while.

Accept the fact that Nuclear technology is here to stay. Now you have two options.

One, be extreme in your views and actions and be cut off from any chances of using your knowledge to shape Govt. policies and actions.

Two, follow the middle path to let projects happen but keeping in mind all safety and humanitarian aspects that will arise from them, make the Govt. comply to these first.

By the way, how many nay sayers of UID on this list have actually met NN of Infosys and held long discussions on this UID matter? Has he responded negatively?

On 11/29/2011 11:28 AM, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

On Monday 28 November 2011 22:13:06 Rony wrote:

...

By the way, how many nay sayers of UID on this list have actually met NN of Infosys and held long discussions on this UID matter? Has he responded negatively?

HE has NEVER EVER met one single person who was opposed to his pet gratification. He (and other UIDAI officials) have been invited innumerable number of times. Even in their own press cons, they keep mouthing the same old lies which have been proved false. I had demoed that spoof and made a presentation of the lie that is biometrics to the IAS official incharge of the UID in K'tka. He almost immediately became defensive and refused to believe that he UID scanners were "cheap". The chai - a very well known and respected name - had to put him in his place. I had asked for a meeting with UiDAI officials and UIDAI scanners to demo the shortcomings and vulnerabilities. The official promised one shortly. 1 year later not only has no such meeting happened, UIDAI officials have never attended another public meet organised by opposers. Indeed the UIDAI thinks all those research papers and opposition views are extreme and we should roll over and believe in he UIDAI "cause".

No research supporting their claims, no research refuting our presented data, just rollover and bootlick. Replies to RTI actually prove that deduplication is a total farce and there is no way of verifying a false accept or a false reject. Other RTIs reveal a total lack of the most cursory due diligence in innumerable matters.

The rate of deduplication and issue has to be 1 UIN per .385 secs for a population of 1.2^9. This rate will continue to climb. The UIDAI was several orders of magnitude below this rate requirement. So they find shortcuts. They start to use demographic data alongwith biometrics. Now this whole exercise rest on the use of biometrics to remove ambiguities in demographic data. Instead they rip up their own underlying principle. The answer to your "stuck with false identity" mail, apart from my tech explanation, can be refuted more simply by this new shortcut.

I doubt if anyone of them will accept any invitations to opposing views. How have the media persons reacted to this? They could raise important questions in the papers, TV channels and compel NN and Co. to offer explanations. Whether we agree to this UID idea or not, I believe that the process to implement this should be democratic and not hushed. Otherwise it will become another Commonwealth Games fiasco.

On 11/27/2011 01:08 PM, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

On Sunday 27 November 2011 12:34:06 Rony wrote:

...

On 11/27/2011 12:14 PM, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

...

IF we had to factor in the clean up and compensation costs, none of us would want that lovely thing. Fukushima total generated power USD25billion total recovery cost 75billion (with very very lax accounting norms) and climbing.

Past accidents should be used to make future systems safer, not throw them out altogether.

Ah. So let a few million babies with birth defects be born due to some accident on existing reactors, then we will find out ways to make it safe. In the meantime we will continue with the halflife problem for 250 odd years.

Nice going.

On second thought it might actually be a good idea to have reactors all over the planet 50 km apart. You will be guaranteed a disaster in all of them (only that you would not know - state secrets, in every country ;-E. Indian reactors are totally safe lol). Which should cull our population to extinction and actually save the earth. Nature and life will do just fine without the parasites known as humans.

Exactly the way software giants spread FUD.

On 27 November 2011 00:01, Shamit Verma subs.linux.mum@vshamit.com wrote:

For example, railway tickets. While black marketing sill goes on, its extent is greatly reduced by e-tickets. This is something that was enabled by technology.

Would like some authoritative reference for this. The counters at the PRS centers are still there, and are still equally crowded. How did the black marketing go down?

Similarly, traceable transaction across real estate, and finance does not solve the problem by itself. But it makes job harder for corrupts.

Naive, naive, naive. All it makes is *detection* harder, because you end up looking only at the traceable ones and not at the Mauritius-routed ones.

Binand

On 11/27/2011 09:48 AM, Binand Sethumadhavan wrote:

On 27 November 2011 00:01, Shamit Verma subs.linux.mum@vshamit.com wrote:

...

For example, railway tickets. While black marketing sill goes on, its extent is greatly reduced by e-tickets. This is something that was enabled by technology.

Would like some authoritative reference for this. The counters at the PRS centers are still there, and are still equally crowded. How did the black marketing go down?

Computerisation and online railway booking has really made life easier for the people. Many still don't use it but that is their lookout.

On Saturday 26 November 2011 11:30:09 Binand Sethumadhavan wrote:

On 25 November 2011 22:58, Rony gnulinuxist@gmail.com wrote:

...

The UID will improvise on the limitations of the PAN card.

Let us examine this. What are the limitations of the PAN card, and how does the UID eliminate them?

How exactly does the UID fix this problem? Are we going to make Aadhar mandatory for all Mauritians as well?

;-E. The fish netted if this was implemented will tear the country.

On Friday 25 November 2011 22:34:21 Rony wrote:

On 11/25/2011 12:30 PM, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

...

If you choose to be an idiot, that is your choice, but be an informed idiot.

No personal remarks please.

I should have used "one" instead of "you".

On 11/25/2011 12:16 PM, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

The amounts of money in petty corruption on the last mile, is dwarfed by several orders of magnitude by corruption higher up the disbursement chain. This happens because the power heirachy is set to keep control at the top, with a miniscule minority and is the root cause of corruption. ID schemes like the UID reinforce this structure and add additional dangerous elements for tracking and collecting infomation illicitly. The Mumbai police have been involved in illegal surveillance and extortion. Such tactics were (and are) used during the emergency to target political opponents.

When the voter ID cards were made, we had to visit the designated centers and get our photograph taken on the spot. Keeping aside the bad quality of the images and the spelling mistakes in names, if the UID system IDs are taken in a proper planned manner in proper well equipped centers that the chances of wrong doing will be minimum. Every system has its risks and chances of cheating but we have to select the one that has the minimum chances of it and benefits are maximum. Electronic meters can be tampered with but they are still welcome. Wireless communication can be compromised but we cannot do without it.

On 11/25/2011 11:02 PM, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

On Friday 25 November 2011 22:32:29 Rony wrote:

...

Every system has its risks and chances of cheating but we have to select the one that has the minimum chances of it and benefits are maximum. Electronic meters can be tampered with but they are still welcome. Wireless communication can be compromised but we cannot do without it.

EXACTLY. This one is the opposite of what you say after spending 150000 Cr. You read that right 15 with 4 zeros. And twists the entire concept of a democratic system. The UK scrapped an exact same system as the risks were too high and benefits non existent.

No one is denying the need for proper planning and trial runs before actually implementing the system.

On 11/24/2011 06:56 PM, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

On Thursday 24 November 2011 09:15:44 Shamit Verma wrote:

...

...

Why? What is the compelling reason for this line of thought?

So that one person can not have multiple IDs. We need this or any other biometric based system.

In current system, it is very easy to create fake identities. With biometric systems, a locality of 1,000 people can not have more than 1,000 ration cards or other IDs that entitle them ti various Govt subsidies or grants.

LOL. Your faith and ignorance of biometrics, identity, entitlements, corruption, governance, etc is touching. Please get an education on these before faffing.

You might start here http://thinkinganarchist.blogspot.com/2011/10/uinique-identity-biometrics-an... and follow the youtube, rediff and cryptome.org links.

That should bury your faith on biometrics.

If the process of creating the id is done at a proper centers that has medical experts (need not be doctors) to check the fingers and eyes before taking the scan then this cheating will be under control.

On Fri, 2011-11-25 at 22:19 +0530, Rony wrote:

...

That should bury your faith on biometrics.

If the process of creating the id is done at a proper centers that has medical experts (need not be doctors) to check the fingers and eyes before taking the scan then this cheating will be under control.

and I suppose that you also believe that you need to know how to drive in order to get a driving license?

On 26 November 2011 23:09, Rony gnulinuxist@gmail.com wrote:

...

and I suppose that you also believe that you need to know how to drive in order to get a driving license?

Kill the wrong process not the purpose of it.

This is what we should do. Kill the wrong process, and implement a right one. Not build another process that is equally if not more flawed on top of it and then hope that these two wrong processes will cancel out each other.

Binand

On Sunday 27 November 2011 17:06:57 Dinesh Shah wrote:

On Nov 27, 2011, at 9:33, Binand Sethumadhavan binand@gmail.com wrote:

...

On 26 November 2011 23:09, Rony gnulinuxist@gmail.com wrote:

...

...

and I suppose that you also believe that you need to know how to drive in order to get a driving license?

Kill the wrong process not the purpose of it.

This is what we should do. Kill the wrong process, and implement a right one. Not build another process that is equally if not more flawed on top of it and then hope that these two wrong processes will cancel out each other.

Good. Now we should be able to make some headway. Experts here please suggest appropriate solution to this identity problem?

If we can provide an alternative and "correct" solution no one can deny to adopt that one!

Oh. Is the problem defined? Or do we proceed on the brain dead assumption that people dont have identities. Identity is one that I choose to identify myself as. The state has no say in the matter. The problem the state is trying to solve is wholly of it's own invention. Which is to selectively channelise resources to it's choosen ones.

Why does one need a freaking ration card to buy ration when trillions of tons of food lies rotting. Not to mention the cattle quality starvation quantity dished out in he PDS.

Why do I need proof of identity to open a bank account with my money, on which the bank profits.

Why does a small borrower need hundreds of docs to borrow from a bank, when trillions of Rs. of loans to sakhar karkhanas are written off?

Why do I need proof of identity to enter a death trap known as public health service, as though the government was conferring luxury services.

Why do I need proof to buy a freakin cell phone connection. OH oh Security. Never mind that bombs go off as and when the bombers please and the cops get rapped in court for fake encounters.

Talk of manufacturing solutions to non existent problems. Cart, horse etc.

Just get off this nonsense of people not having identity. The state wants to target selectively groups it may wish to confer benefits on or supress. Hence this manufactured need. The so called leakages stem from the fact that the qualification criteria for PDS, health and other entitlements are pegged so low that huge swathes of our people who should be actually entitled to these services are denied that. Not because they dont have identity, but because the state chooses to play a cynical vote / power channelling game. The ones who can "afford" better services already avail of them by paying top dollars. The utterly inhumane Rs.32/- per day per person is a case in point.

It angers me no end that the richest professionals in the country along with the government are riding on the backs of the poor, without the slightest thought to the above mentioned reasons. Foisting a wholly artificial and manufactured "identity crisis", and plastering onto that all sorts of panaceas for corruption, poverty elevation, rural employment, banking etc. Not a single study has been undertaken to show that identity is the problem. Infact existing studies show that it is the native power structures and arbitrary rules that have caused the problem. Yet we insist on keeping the arbitrary rules in place and spending humongous amounts of money to climb those artificial barriers, instead of demolishing and flattening those barriers, providing equal universal access to basic neccessities of food clothes, medicine, education etc.

One does not need a name to eat or learn or be nursed back to health. But one does require steely resolve to bring ones self out of ones glass tower and stand with the poorest of the poor. The last few persons to do that were M. K. Gandhi and Dr. B. R. Ambedkar. One would do well to read carefully their views on our society and understand the burden of identity amongst the poor.

On 27 November 2011 22:50, Dinesh Shah (દિનેશ શાહ/दिनेश शाह) dineshah@gmail.com wrote:

Will you allow me to open a bank account in your name and do any kind of transactions in that account?

So is it OK to buy a cell phone in your name make obscene calls to these cute girls in my neighbourhood? :-)

These two are warped arguments used by our security agencies to hide their lax investigation techniques. Don't you lend your phones to family/friends to make calls? A name is not something anyone owns. Why is it impossible for two Dinesh Shahs to exist in the same locality banking at the same bank?

Binand

On Monday 28 November 2011 00:10:24 Dinesh Shah wrote:

On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 11:37 PM, Binand Sethumadhavan binand@gmail.com

wrote:

...

On 27 November 2011 22:50, Dinesh Shah (દિનેશ શાહ/दिनेश शाह)

dineshah@gmail.com wrote:

...

Will you allow me to open a bank account in your name and do any kind of transactions in that account?

So is it OK to buy a cell phone in your name make obscene calls to these cute girls in my neighbourhood? :-)

These two are warped arguments used by our security agencies to hide their lax investigation techniques.

Really?

...

Don't you lend your phones to family/friends to make calls?

I do to my FAMILY and FRIENDS not any Tom, Dick or Harry who I do not know (I can not ID him/her)

...

A name is not something anyone owns. Why is it impossible for two Dinesh Shahs to exist in the same locality banking at the same bank?

Exactly! Without positive identity linking me to my account, how bank is going to be sure the person withdrawing money from my account is not that other Dinesh Shah? :-)

(BTW, Signature is a biometric ID,even though it can be spoofed or duplicated)

LOL. Wrong. It is not. You were not born with a signature nor did your genes and or nature form your signature. Biometrics refers specifically to measurement of biological characteristics inherent in living creatures, in our case humans.

On Sunday 27 November 2011 22:50:09 Dinesh Shah wrote:

Disclaimer: Long post with lots of in-line reply.

On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 8:51 PM, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

...

On Sunday 27 November 2011 17:06:57 Dinesh Shah wrote:

...

On Nov 27, 2011, at 9:33, Binand Sethumadhavan binand@gmail.com wrote:

...

On 26 November 2011 23:09, Rony gnulinuxist@gmail.com wrote:

...

...

and I suppose that you also believe that you need to know how to drive in order to get a driving license?

Kill the wrong process not the purpose of it.

This is what we should do. Kill the wrong process, and implement a right one. Not build another process that is equally if not more flawed on top of it and then hope that these two wrong processes will cancel out each other.

Good. Now we should be able to make some headway. Experts here please suggest appropriate solution to this identity problem?

If we can provide an alternative and "correct" solution no one can deny to adopt that one!

Oh. Is the problem defined? Or do we proceed on the brain dead assumption that people dont have identities. Identity is one that I choose to identify myself as.

Agreed. But the identity YOU choose to be identified with should be acceptable to others with whom you would like to transact.

...

The state has no say in the matter.

What is state? The government? the geographically bounded region of earth? The Constitution? Laws? Customs? Culture? People?

Very well defined: The government.

...

The problem the state is trying to solve is wholly of it's own invention. Which is to selectively channelise resources to it's choosen ones.

Agreed. Caste/Religion based reservation is shining example of that.

Total rubbish. Caste based reservations is to ameliorate discriminatory conditions caused by society over long periods of our history. There are no religious reservations that I am aware of.

...

Why does one need a freaking ration card to buy ration when trillions of tons of food lies rotting. Not to mention the cattle quality starvation quantity dished out in he PDS.

Agreed.

...

Why do I need  proof of identity to open a bank account with my money, on which the bank profits.

Will you allow me to open a bank account in your name and do any kind of transactions in that account?

There are innumerable bank accounts that have common names. They are diffrentiated by a account number. So someone opening an account as jtd cant affect my account. And yes he can do any type of transaction in that account because it is his money. When the bank has to give me a loan od etc the bank has to perform due diligence. That there are various vicarious caveats like foreign exchange imposed with wholly ulterior motives by the state is a different matter and has nothing at all to do with identity.

...

Why does a small borrower need hundreds of docs to borrow from a bank, when trillions of Rs. of loans to sakhar karkhanas are written off?

Precisely. You literally need tons of paper to get any thing done in this country.

You read half the line. You dont need tons of paper to get your loans written off if you are a politico. And 2 tons of paper wont writeoff a penny if you arent a politico. Everything to do with a certain type of identity, but definetly not the sort you think.

...

Why do I need proof of identity to enter a death trap known as public health service, as though the government was conferring luxury services.

Without this how will you recover your health insurance money? you have a health insurance right? :-)

Health insurance in KEM hospital? which universe are you living in? Public health service is free.

...

Why do I need proof to buy a freakin cell phone connection. OH oh Security.

So is it OK to buy a cell phone in your name make obscene calls to these cute girls in my neighbourhood? :-)

Please spare me cheapskate statements that has no basis in facts and figures. Those calls will be a number to the 10th decimal place. And follows the exact same flawed logic of jailing everyone because of a few madcaps.

...

Never mind that bombs go off as and when the bombers please and the cops get rapped in court for fake encounters.

Agreed.

...

Talk of manufacturing solutions to non existent problems. Cart, horse etc.

???

...

Just get off this nonsense of people not having identity. The state wants to target selectively groups it may wish to confer benefits on or supress. Hence this manufactured need.

That already exist in the form of caste and religion based reservation system so why complain against UID?

Rubbish. Read my earlier statement.

At least they are not saying they will only issue ID to select people of select caste and/or religion or economic groups.

WOW. what a wonderfully gutter level bench mark.

...

The so called leakages stem from the fact that the qualification criteria for PDS, health and other entitlements are pegged so low that huge swathes of our people who should be actually entitled to these services are denied that.

Agreed.

...

Not because they dont have identity,

Well?

...

but because the state chooses to play a cynical vote / power channelling game.

Agreed.

...

The ones who can "afford" better services already avail of them by paying top dollars. The utterly inhumane Rs.32/- per day per person is a case in point.

Indeed. This is most ridiculous thing to do.

...

It angers me no end that the richest professionals in the country along with the government are riding on the backs of the poor, without the slightest thought to the above mentioned reasons.

Are you referring to UAIDA or all other professionals?

The UIDAI and their supporters who think that a dog tag number is a fine identity tool.

...

Foisting a wholly artificial and manufactured "identity crisis", and plastering onto that all sorts of panaceas for corruption, poverty elevation, rural employment, banking etc.

That is the mis-sell on part of the Govt. and UAIDA. They should have limited their scope and role to just providing the Unique ID.

...

Not a single study has been undertaken to show that identity is the problem.

But do you agree that having plethora of IDs is a problem?

Nobody has a plethora of ids, again with a miniscule minority who will easily be able to obtain multiple ids in a any new system. And i fail to see how having a plethora of documents (if that is what you are referring to) is a problem. If anything it is actually dividing the problem.

Or even no study have been conducted for that issue either?

Many many studies on multiple ids within a particular documents context. Guess what? atleast in the case of pds the number of duplicates was less than 8% and was easily corrected.

...

Infact existing studies show that it is the native power structures and arbitrary rules that have caused the problem. Yet we insist on keeping the arbitrary rules in place and spending humongous amounts of money to climb those artificial barriers, instead of demolishing and flattening those barriers, providing equal universal access to basic neccessities of food clothes, medicine, education etc.

Agreed. How can we help remove those arbitrary rules?

Lobbying by NGOS and civil rights activists.

Remember that all existing rules and laws are framed and passed by our "honourable" elected representatives. (MPs, MLAs, etc.)

And we are playing right into their hands with this UID business.

...

One does not need a name to eat or learn or be nursed back to health.

Agreed. But in a society we need more than that and you can not avail (lawfully) of any if people in your society/community does not know you.

People know each other very well. Infact the identity problem is non existent in our daily lives precisely because of this - relationships and trusted referrals. It is only when we bring in artificial KYC and entitlement norms that we begin to have problems. Instead of correcting these artificial barriers, tax payers money is being blown up. More importantly what ever it is that the state profeers, must be available to all without having to run through the entitlement gauntlet. Kerala state has made the PDS system universal. Everyone can avail of PDS food. Without an artificial scarcity, there is no market for corruption.

...

But one does require steely resolve to bring ones self out of ones glass tower and stand with the poorest of the poor.

How? By becoming poor?

Not by actually becoming poor permanently, but by living with them on the same resources and constraints, so that the real underlying reasons can be understood. Rather than glass house telescopic observations, that grandiously and gratuosly concluded that people dont have identities.

...

The last few persons to do that were M. K. Gandhi and Dr. B. R. Ambedkar. One would do well to read carefully their views on our society and understand the burden of identity amongst the poor.

I have sure read MKG but not Dr. BRA. May be it's time I pick some books by/on Dr. BRA.

However, we are still not near providing any "concrete" solution in place of UID.

There is no problem of identity in the first place.

At least they claim they have some goal and vision to reaching out to those poorest of poor and help them.

LAMAO. Those liars have taken all of you for a real 150000Cr ride. Well at last count Rs.1500Cr + 750Cr ride. HAHAHA.

What are we offering? (except spending time on discussing endlessly the futility of UID)?

As i said The problem to all of the "poor", "corruption", "banking", "inclusion", "exclusion" etc is not identity. What we are doing is trying to prevent spending tax payers money on a stupid scheme which has no definition, ill thought goals and wholly fake promises. That in itself will be a commendable achievement.

There are a whole plethora of problems that have a large number of diverse and regionally localised causes. One cannot ask a pointless question of "What is the solution?" without defining each of these problems and causes. Then one can answer with a number of specific solutions.

Not this snake oil, cure all "identity is the root of everything", based on a simple simon question and c grade movie inspired technology.

Can we, as community (Free/Open Source) offer something credible?

Sure. Define the problems.

Even for the case of verifying identity, a web of trust based on signed keys would be utterly trivial to implement, cost perhaps 400 cr for a 100% coverage, keeps control with the individual and has none of the vulnerabilities and threats inherent in a centralised system. Dr. Nagarjuna already has most of it in place.

Of course this system does not make fancy claims of crating heaven on earth. Merely establishes a web of trust.

On Monday 28 November 2011 00:55:23 Binand Sethumadhavan wrote:

On 28 November 2011 00:15, jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:

...

There are no religious reservations that I am aware of.

Andhra Pradesh has a 4% reservation to certain religious categories. West Bengal is implementing something similar.

Links links. I must read this.