Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

EU votes to create gigantic biometrics database

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 203 posts

Re: EU votes to create gigantic biometrics database

#191

Post by NotPaidToPost »

blibble wrote: post #188
NotPaidToPost wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact is that the monetary union has brought closer political integration and will continue to do so because, again, that's the only way. I think you're trying to ascribe more meaning to whatever book you've dropped the title of that it might have... (I haven't read that book but the author seems serious enough not to ignore facts)

> The fact is that the monetary union has brought closer political integration and will continue to do so because, again, that's the only way. there's another alternative: the entire thing self-destructs which seems more likely at this point than full fiscal and political union

The Trumps and Farages of this world think that by repeating it again and again it will make it "seem more likely". But to me it seems more likely they will pass sooner than the Euro.

The reality is that France, Germany, the Netherlands, etc are not going back.

Re: EU votes to create gigantic biometrics database

#192

Post by christudor »

NotPaidToPost wrote: post #190
christudor wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I may be mistaken but it looks like you haven’t read the book but you’re confident in assuming I’ve somehow misunderstood it! Here’s the relevant quote in full: “British economist Nicholas Kaldor had warned as early as March 1971 that the fiscal governance system would deepen political divisions. In November 1997, Milton Friedman predicted that the euro’s flawed economics would “exacerbate political tensions by conve…

I'm stating facts. You're trying to find more and more random quotes in an attempt to prove your point... But you haven't found one yet. Last time: The monetary union has led to closer political union and that can only continue. Downvoting all of someone else's comments in a thread is immature and certainly rather poor when you're claiming to be running an educational website...

Fair enough, let's leave it there.

p.s. I don't actually have the ability to downvote comments, so that'll be someone else who's doing that.

Re: EU votes to create gigantic biometrics database

#193

Post by rooam-dev »

gnulinux wrote: post #146
rooam-dev wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, this could mean a joint effort to make it more secure, since stakes would be higher.

I don't think it's possible to make a 100% secure complex system. You have a lot of moving parts, from OSS vulnerabilities to proprietary S vulnerabilities to hardware issues to social engineering to DevOps mistakes to intellectual laziness etc. With 0.01% chance millions of Europeans data will be stolen.

I did not say 100% secure. Joining efforts and resources could be a better approach than leaving it to each country to secure their own database.

Re: EU votes to create gigantic biometrics database

#194

Post by winter_blue »

franch wrote: post #189
winter_blue wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> every time there was a popular referendum even the EU Constitution has been rejected by the population That it was "rejected by the population" is a dishonest characterization. Referendums in Luxembourg and Spain were successful. Elected representatives in 16 other EU countries voted in favor of the Constitution. Yes, it was rejected by voters France and the Netherlands, and that killed the treaty, because establis…

> So, no, it wasn't rejected by "the population" (a term that it was always be inaccurate[1]). It was rejected by a minority. And the treaty being one that requires unanimous approval, failed because of that. Uhm sorry no. Read the links. It was rejected by the majority of the voters both in France and the Netherlands. What happened afterwards in France was to change it slightly and make it pass by parliamentary vote…

I meant a minority of the European people/countries. Whether you count by population, or by the number of countries.

(a) By number of states: 18 approved it, 2 rejected it, and the rest canceled/dropped efforts as it was effectively a failure (at that point).

(b) By population: Let's add together the populations of the 18 countries that approved of it, and the 2 that rejected it. I'm confident the total population of the 18 europhiles exceeds that of the 2 naysayers.

We don't know how things would have fared in the rest of the EU (that dropped/canceled referendums or legislative votes on this), but of those 20 countries, a majority of both people and countries were for the EU Constitution.

Re: EU votes to create gigantic biometrics database

#196

Post by oaiey »

modzu wrote: post #185
oaiey wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would formalize it differently. Borders are established by a society of people who live in it. Historically, often based on racial, linguisitic or cultural differences. There is no right to any outsider to declare himself member of a society (just think of your book reading club). It is the right of the society to define the rationale for its membership. Is it unfair to many people to live in worse conditions: yes.…

well first of all i think you are equating society and territory, but even so, a society/territory is not akin to a book club. if there is only one club, that you are born into, does that analogy still make sense? if "outsiders" have no right to declare themselves members of a society -- by what principle does the society earn this right? it seems that this principle is merely the georgraphy beneath your feet when yo…

You are right about the territory. I had a paragraph about it but deleted it :). Territory is a tricky aspect. Over time, territory changes its value. The Inka territory/society in Middle America were once the peak of evolution. Now the territory/society is not that interesting anymore. Same story for the territories we nowadays know as Egypt, Iraq or Syria. After the Oil you can count Saudi Arabia to it. The UK was much more interesting 100 years ago.

Territory is indeed a factor. But one which is volatile as an aspect how well a society develops on it.

And regards being born in a society: There is nothing stronger than the bound of a family. Why we are surprised that the societies select this as a primary membership rule. And this is universal like that in every spot of the world.

Re: EU votes to create gigantic biometrics database

#197

Post by voxic11 »

Someone1234 wrote: post #177
xfitm3 wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never had to provide biometrics at the US border.

You haven't flown internationally since 2007?

Not the same person, but I traveled to China in 2009 and the only biometric I had to give was a photo for my passport.

Re: EU votes to create gigantic biometrics database

#198

Post by raxxorrax »

NotPaidToPost wrote: post #186
christudor wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not the view of Ashoka Mody in his recent book Eurotragedy.

The fact is that the monetary union has brought closer political integration and will continue to do so because, again, that's the only way. I think you're trying to ascribe more meaning to whatever book you've dropped the title of that it might have... (I haven't read that book but the author seems serious enough not to ignore facts)

There is always another way. And if that is the official strategy, there should be another way. In fact, any way would be better by definition.

Re: EU votes to create gigantic biometrics database

#199

Post by ahje »

tapland wrote: post #141
ahje wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the Nordic countries, ID isn't mandatory, and apart from a few border crossings between Denmark and Sweden, there are no border controls either. Apart from the aforementioned border controls, citizens of other Nordic countries aren't required to carry a passport or a national ID card, but should carry some kind of identification on them. In practice, that means you just carry your regular driver's license in your…

You are very much required to carry a national ID card (or passport) when travelling to other Nordic countries. Now, there aren't any checks except for the border into Sweden from Denmark, but if there is a check you are not allowed to travel using an ID or driver's license. Driver's licences, ID cards issued by banks or tax offices are not valid for travel within schengen even though you are generally able to move b…

Misconception? The Nordic Passport Union is still quite valid. Quoted from Wikipedia:

"Within the Nordic area, any Nordic identity documentation (e.g. a driving license) is valid as proof of identity for Nordic citizens because of the Nordic Passport Union, while a national identity card or a passport is can be required in other Schengen countries"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_Passport_Union

In other words, you need to be able to identify yourself, but not necessarily with a national ID or a passport as you would when entering other parts of the Schengen area.

The border controls between Denmark and Sweden are a temporary suspension of those rules but it only concerns people crossing the border at those points -- not people who who are already in the country or people who cross the borders at other locations, like say, the Finnish/Swedish border.

Re: EU votes to create gigantic biometrics database

#200

Post by zaarn »

CaptainZapp wrote: post #114
retiredcoder wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding about mental illness entry. I have ADHD and it is flagged in the system. How do I know? When I tried to exchange my driver license, it was flagged and the “local DMV” forwarded the application to the police department. I then had to present evidence to the police I was capable of driving, thankfully I’ve never been fined and my psychiatrist didn’t have a problem signing a document stating I am capable of dr…

They may connect potential medication (stimulants, my bad) with the ability to drive. Needless to say that this connection (if you even are prescribed such meds) is complete and utter bullshit. It also doesn't help to de-stigmatize mental illness in society. Thanks for sharing.

It isn't used entirely for bad purposes. I know that the most frequent use of medical info in the SIS is that police officers who arrested someone can check if they need a doctor to administer or prescribe medication or if they need to keep something in mind when handling the person. (ie is this person aggressive because of a mental illness or due to being an ass? do they require heart medication, etc.)
Post reply on HN