Hacker News Reader

Comment by mindcrime | Hacker News Reader

Yeah, right. Let me know how that works out for ya. Like anybody is going to trust something like this, when the US Federal Government has it's fingers in the pie. This thing is dead in the water from day 0.

This idea is about as dead as the Norwegian Blue. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npjOSLCR2hE

View on HN

Americans just don't trust the government; that's why so few people have driver's licenses. Oh wait.

I have a government drivers license so I can drive on government roads.

I don't need a government license to get online and check my email, thank you.

If you live in the USA you drivers license is issued by the state you live in. There is no USA national drivers license.

Don't confuse state's rights with Federal Government rights.

American federalism is under siege. There is, in fact, a plan for a national driver's license called REAL ID, and the states are resisting it.

If you live in the USA the states have governments too.

Not yet you don't!

Drivers licenses are mandatory, and you get heavily fined if caught driving without it. This on the other hand is supposed to be voluntary. I certainly won't be volunteering any time soon.

You make no sense. Driver's licenses are required, if you want to drive any car.

False. Drivers licenses are only required if you want to drive on public roads. If you have a lot of property with private roads (farms, quarries, etc), you're free to drive unlicensed. Hell, you don't even have to get a license plate for your car if you never put it on a public road (although you'll probably have to register it with the state for property tax reasons).

In other words, it will be possible to avoid this ID, but so ridiculously impractical for most people that almost everyone will be expected to have and use one.

Yeah, that sounds about right to me.

Oh yes, a very common case, people driving on their private roads.

1. Sarcasm.

2. Do you think the Federal Internet ID won't be required somewhere?

arpanet

DARPA contracted with universities to create it. Just because the military's interests were once aligned with advancing communication technology between academics doesn't mean we should accept that all or even some of the current government's "involvement" is simply for the betterment of mankind. These people ultimately rely on the threat and use of force to do their "job" no matter how remotely connected its authority is to the U.S. Constitution.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com