Re: insidious biometrics, identity crises

[Simon Batistoni <simon@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 28/08/03 00:50 +0100, Jo Walsh wrote:
> there are reams of good technical reasons - identity, security, single
> point of failure, obsolescence, etc - why this shouldn't be implemented
> - let alone social / ideological reasons. it would be good to have a
> cogent list of 'bullet points' to offer. as an individual, i can write
> to my MP or to the broadsheets registering dissent, distaste - but
> this kind of counterargument will sound a lot better, read a lot
> better in the letters page of the grauniad and the times, coming from 
> a pre-existing, disinterested group of technical professionals, 
> such as, london.pm
> 
> is this a crackfuelled suggestion, and is it something with which the
> majority of the 'group' would concur?

What worries me on this score is that this ("a disinterested group of
technical professionals") is exactly what I understand Stand.org.uk
was meant to be.

Are you suggesting that Stand no longer comes across as
"disinterested"? I'm slightly inclined to agree if so, but I'm not
sure how that's come to be. Stand's largest media exposure came with
the ID card proposal response campaign, and I think the Government
added a fairly good (from their point of view) "these are weirdo
crackpots" spin to the story.

If a different group were to attempt to take on the mantle, it would
require some bloody good PR to make sure that it didn't get dismissed
in the same way.