[13510] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
[OT] Re: Hitchens: The Cult of ID
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (J.A. Terranson)
Sat Jun 7 20:40:18 2003
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 18:23:10 -0500 (CDT)
From: "J.A. Terranson" <measl@mfn.org>
To: "R. A. Hettinga" <rah@shipwright.com>
Cc: Clippable <rahettinga@earthlink.net>, cryptography@metzdowd.com,
cypherpunks@ssz.com
In-Reply-To: <a060012bdbb07f51915e9@[66.149.49.6]>
Good Evening,
From roughly 1985 to ~1997, I was a resident of Missouri (USA). Now,
Missouri may well be a poster child for backwater living, but they had an
unusual thing to recommend them: they understood that a "Driver's
License" was somthing you got to prove you knew how to drive a car, rather
than something you got to drink beer and vote. Presumable due to this
revelation, Missouri did not actually *require* either a photo or a social
security number for the issuance of a driver's license.
Anyone who had objection to the social security number was given a
different encoded "license number", and anyone who objected to the photo had
a red box in the corner with the words "PHOTO NOT REQUIRED" emblazoned across
it - you needed only to fill out the form which described the basis of your
objection(s).
Even better was the State of New York, up until ~1983: no photo on
any license. Just a piece of paper (no plastic at all) that said you knew
enough to drive. Proving that the license belonged to *you*, and not someone
else, required actual *ID*!
It's time we get back to the reality standard on these...
--
Yours,
J.A. Terranson
sysadmin@mfn.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
