Re: DL in exchange for fingerprint

At 12:23 PM 9/19/96, Jeff Barber wrote:
>Oh joy.  You no longer need to be arrested to get fingerprinted
>in Georgia.  On the front page of Wednesday's Atlanta Journal, under
>the headline "Now you can get driver's license in minutes":
...
>Just what I would have called it: a great idea.  Is it true that 31
>other states take your fingerprint as part of the license application?
>I feel sick.

California has it, so that's what about 20 million drivers have to put up
with. I'd expect all the states to have this within a few years.

(Yes, I disliked being thumb-printed, but I could see no viable
alternative. I'm sure Duncan has some scheme to declare himself a Botswanan
exchange student, but I decided being thumb-printed was the lesser hassle.)

By the way, the next rev of the California driver's license will reportedly
have one's *Social Security Number* printed on the card! So much for the
statement clearly printed on my card:

"For social security and tax purposes -- not for identification."

Paraphrasing that famous quote, just which part of "not for identification"
don't they understand?

(Indeed, I am asked for my SSN in many places. A few times I've refused to
give it. Once the clerk just said, "Fine, I have it here on my computer
anyway." Refusing to give it is probably no longer meaningful, due to
massively cross-linked data bases.)

Again, we desperately need an infrastructure of "credentials without identity."

--Tim May

We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^1,257,787-1 | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

Timothy C. May wrote:
> 
> (Yes, I disliked being thumb-printed, but I could see no viable
> alternative. I'm sure Duncan has some scheme to declare himself a Botswanan
> exchange student, but I decided being thumb-printed was the lesser hassle.)

Sure, it's always less hassle doing what they want.  Privacy doesn't
come for free.  It's easier to let the police search you in the street
than it is to make them arrest you so that you can make a formal
complaint.


> By the way, the next rev of the California driver's license will reportedly
> have one's *Social Security Number* printed on the card! So much for the
> statement clearly printed on my card:
> 
> "For social security and tax purposes -- not for identification."

So?  My passport reads "let the bearer travel without let or hindrance"
- yet I still get enormous grief every time I enter the country that
issued it.


> Paraphrasing that famous quote, just which part of "not for identification"
> don't they understand?

Hmm - who are you paraphrasing here? (Just curious).


> (Indeed, I am asked for my SSN in many places. A few times I've refused to
> give it. Once the clerk just said, "Fine, I have it here on my computer
> anyway." Refusing to give it is probably no longer meaningful, due to
> massively cross-linked data bases.)
> 
> Again, we desperately need an infrastructure of "credentials without identity."

Or widespread disinformation - don't stand up for your "right" not to
disclose your SSN - simply give them one with errors in - that way their
whole database starts to lose value.


Gary
--
"Of course the US Constitution isn't perfect; but it's a lot better
than what we have now."  -- Unknown.

pub  1024/C001D00D 1996/01/22  Gary Howland <gary@systemics.com>
Key fingerprint =  0C FB 60 61 4D 3B 24 7D  1C 89 1D BE 1F EE 09 06

>By the way, the next rev of the California driver's license will
>reportedly have one's *Social Security Number* printed on the card!
>So much for the statement clearly printed on my card:

Illinois already has such a law, in fact you must have an SSN to  
even get a DL.  Fortunately, the law allows a citizen-unit to choose  
if they want their SSN on their DL (imagine that, a choice!) - the  
flip side is that you have to specifically ask them not to print  
them - they won't ask you.

One would hope that CA's law might provide a similar out...

--Kurt

On Fri, 20 Sep 1996, Kurt Vile wrote:

> 
> >By the way, the next rev of the California driver's license will
> >reportedly have one's *Social Security Number* printed on the card!
> >So much for the statement clearly printed on my card:
> 
> Illinois already has such a law, in fact you must have an SSN to  
> even get a DL.

False.

You must present a SSN card or a "suitable substitute."

A w2 form with a (not necessarily YOUR) SSN is sufficent.  Note that not
all w2's actually HAVE your SSN because in some cases the Taxpayer
Identification number is distinct from the SSN.

I might add that standard w2 forms are available about anywhere.
They are also generally filled out by typewriter.

--
I hate lightning - finger for public key - Vote Monarchist
unicorn@schloss.li

Kurt Vile wrote:
> >By the way, the next rev of the California driver's license will
> >reportedly have one's *Social Security Number* printed on the card!
> >So much for the statement clearly printed on my card:
> Illinois already has such a law, in fact you must have an SSN to
> even get a DL.  Fortunately, the law allows a citizen-unit to choose
> if they want their SSN on their DL (imagine that, a choice!) - the
> flip side is that you have to specifically ask them not to print
> them - they won't ask you.
> One would hope that CA's law might provide a similar out...

Oh, yeah.  This "optional" SSN is a great idea, yeah.  So late at night, 
you get pulled over, and the officer notes that YOU (one of less than a 
thousand people who don't have the DL-SSN) don't actually have the 
DL-SSN.  Well, just don't get pulled over....