The objective is to make available via web-based applications every government service that can be rendered in that manner. Taxes, registration of deeds, social security, change of address, acquiring a passport, renewing or changing your driver's license, and most municipal services are among the things that can be handled entirely online. I actually settled everything that I had to settle with the government when I emigrated without having to show up in person anywhere, and without submitting any physical paperwork.Kmar wrote:
What type of government online services?
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- US to issue 'unique internet ID for all Americans'
Excellent idea, this. Hackers could never penetrate a government database of citizen IDs.
Coordinate this unique ID with the newly found net neutrality bs and what do we have?
everyone knows you have shitty internet service!
Quite like mine right now. Anytime the government starts poking about in what's working we all know what happens ... more taxes, less freedom, absence of quality.
there is nothing wrong with net neutralityStingray24 wrote:
Coordinate this unique ID with the newly found net neutrality bs and what do we have?
Let the Vast Machine begin.
Net neutrality should be promoted more tbh.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
there is nothing wrong with net neutralityStingray24 wrote:
Coordinate this unique ID with the newly found net neutrality bs and what do we have?
I like it, but I don't want it hosted by the Feds. They'll just find a way to soak up more money to maintain the service.
you mean like they have done with our firearms database? lol... this is a good idea... but not practicalStingray24 wrote:
Excellent idea, this. Hackers could never penetrate a government database of citizen IDs.
Seems fair, many of them are crazy and own guns - need to keep track of them.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
The details are pretty much non-existent at this point, but this is what the government has to say:That sounds kinda close to a national ID to me. Wish they'd tell us more though."We are not talking about a national ID card," Locke said at the Stanford event. "We are not talking about a government-controlled system. What we are talking about is enhancing online security and privacy and reducing and perhaps even eliminating the need to memorize a dozen passwords, through creation and use of more trusted digital identities."
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162- … 01465.html
Fuck Israel
Protect and Defend the Consitution bro!eleven bravo wrote:
vote with your 2nd amendment, right rightLotta_Drool wrote:
This is the government, they are paving the way to tax internet useage.
government = taxes, this is all you need to know.
Totally, no hacker anywhere, has ever hacked an US gov't sanctioned web service or whatever the fuck you wanna call it. How could this possibly go wrong? "insert too lazy to look up how to insert roll eye smiley" I see no ulterior motives here, at least they "supposedly" need our permission to look up SSN for specific purposes.
I've received about fifty pieces of mail over the years regarding a VA employee having their laptop stolen with my social security number and other information located on it They keep apologizing and telling me to watch out for identity theft.mcjagdflieger wrote:
Totally, no hacker anywhere, has ever hacked an US gov't sanctioned web service or whatever the fuck you wanna call it. How could this possibly go wrong? "insert too lazy to look up how to insert roll eye smiley" I see no ulterior motives here, at least they "supposedly" need our permission to look up SSN for specific purposes.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
I seriously hope that is sarcasmmcjagdflieger wrote:
Totally, no hacker anywhere, has ever hacked an US gov't sanctioned web service or whatever the fuck you wanna call it. How could this possibly go wrong? "insert too lazy to look up how to insert roll eye smiley" I see no ulterior motives here, at least they "supposedly" need our permission to look up SSN for specific purposes.
exactly, I don't trust the government with managing personal information. cause government fucks up (like that laptop case, other scandals, etc.). and I don't like people fuckin with my personal information.JohnG@lt wrote:
I've received about fifty pieces of mail over the years regarding a VA employee having their laptop stolen with my social security number and other information located on it They keep apologizing and telling me to watch out for identity theft.mcjagdflieger wrote:
Totally, no hacker anywhere, has ever hacked an US gov't sanctioned web service or whatever the fuck you wanna call it. How could this possibly go wrong? "insert too lazy to look up how to insert roll eye smiley" I see no ulterior motives here, at least they "supposedly" need our permission to look up SSN for specific purposes.
this makes it even easier for politicians to abuse power
And they don't have the decency to pay for a Lifelock subscription for you pffffJohnG@lt wrote:
I've received about fifty pieces of mail over the years regarding a VA employee having their laptop stolen with my social security number and other information located on it They keep apologizing and telling me to watch out for identity theft.mcjagdflieger wrote:
Totally, no hacker anywhere, has ever hacked an US gov't sanctioned web service or whatever the fuck you wanna call it. How could this possibly go wrong? "insert too lazy to look up how to insert roll eye smiley" I see no ulterior motives here, at least they "supposedly" need our permission to look up SSN for specific purposes.
What benefits do you see in it?AussieReaper wrote:
Net neutrality should be promoted more tbh.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
there is nothing wrong with net neutralityStingray24 wrote:
Coordinate this unique ID with the newly found net neutrality bs and what do we have?
The issue is that the need for net neutrality regulation would typically exist only in the presence of regulated or natural monopolies. As long as ISPs operate predominantly from either position, and particularly when operating on infrastructure paid for by the taxpayer, then regulation must exist to guarantee that these monopolies aren't abused.Stingray24 wrote:
What benefits do you see in it?AussieReaper wrote:
Net neutrality should be promoted more tbh.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
there is nothing wrong with net neutrality
It's not a matter of small government or big government on the individual issue. It's a matter of recognising that you either maintain the regulation necessary to prevent abuse, or that you don't regulate at all. Net neutrality is just part of the former.
Last edited by mikkel (2011-01-11 18:11:48)
Net neutrality simply prevents companies from slowing traffic down to their competitors. It prevents Google cutting a deal with TWC that slows all non-Google traffic on the network to drive business to Google. This wouldn't really be an issue if a large part of the country didn't live in monopoly conditions. For example, before Verizon FiOS launched in this area, TWC had a monopoly on high speed internet. If they had cut a deal I wouldn't have had a competitor to run to. This is what net neutrality prevents.Stingray24 wrote:
What benefits do you see in it?AussieReaper wrote:
Net neutrality should be promoted more tbh.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
there is nothing wrong with net neutrality
Where I disagree with it is with piracy and other crap that people seem to vehemently defend. That's the other part of net neutrality, all traffic is supposed to be treated equally. Well, sites like piratebay shouldn't be included in that because they sell illegal products and people acting as torrent nodes slow down the network for everyone else. To get around this, ISPs could and should go back to a system where you pay for your traffic, not these one-sized-fits-all unlimited accounts that they currently peddle.
So, the only regulation that's needed is preventing companies from striking deals that hurt their customers like the Google-TWC example. Nothing else on the internet needs regulating.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
The problem is that once the government gains the ability to prevent deals, it's unlikely to stop there. The FCC already ignored the courts and the legislature by taking this first step. Allowing an unelected and unaccountable board of political appointees to take the reins doesn't seem to be the most prudent idea.
That's the party line, yeah.Stingray24 wrote:
The problem is that once the government gains the ability to prevent deals, it's unlikely to stop there. The FCC already ignored the courts and the legislature by taking this first step. Allowing an unelected and unaccountable board of political appointees to take the reins doesn't seem to be the most prudent idea.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Knowing politicians, it's a reasonable assumption, right?
It is the nature of the beast for government to expand. What they need to do is break the local monopolies people are stuck with instead. That would end all the issues.Stingray24 wrote:
Knowing politicians, it's a reasonable assumption, right?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
The village where I grew up tried to let another cable company offer service via their own lines...but they were unable to move in because of mandatory service pole gaps between electric, cable, phone lines and the ground...there wasn't actually enough space on the poles to put up new lines. Just allowing competition won't necessarily allow other service providers to move into any given area.JohnG@lt wrote:
It is the nature of the beast for government to expand. What they need to do is break the local monopolies people are stuck with instead. That would end all the issues.Stingray24 wrote:
Knowing politicians, it's a reasonable assumption, right?
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- US to issue 'unique internet ID for all Americans'