abhishivsaxena

Totally agree. And much of the violence being attributed to Burmese forces is just hearsay attributed to Islamists.

Western media/NGOs seems to buy it at face value and support these said Islamist, but hey they also supported ISIS affiliates in Syria against secular Asad regime so that's not surprising to me at all.

This apart from the fact that anyone from subcontinent will tell you that these are not Rohingyas, but Bengalis speaking Bangladeshis who have flooded rakhine and made ethnic rakhines a minority in a few decades.

Really? What did you have for lunch today?

All the herbivores in Animal Kingdom would disagree with that statement.

> 1) a biometric data base (and biometrics I decry in particular)

true

> 2) which is being used to unify all databases

false. And also FUD. PAN can be used for more tacking that Aadhaar.

> 3) including things which it is not supposed to,

false, strictly what's mandated by parliament in the Aadhaar bill. In a democracy parliament is suprement, not some privacy-wallahs.

> 4) with the architecture underlying Aadhar

not relevant to argument

> 5) while removing all options to opt out

true, so? It's mandated by parliament. It's like a mandatory tax ID.

6) For demonstrably false gains (the AP results, their false reduction in costs claims)

false

Bottom line, Aadhaar is just like any other ID or Tax ID, and no amount of disinformation will change that. It stores and 4 attribues about you name/dob/gender/address and two biometrics.

Biometrics actually make the system more secure, since it's driven by a biometric based consent driven architecture with stuff like instant notifications whenever you data is assessed. Only you can allow who accesses these 4 attributes by authenticating via biometrics or by OTP.

It's mandated by the parliament. If you don't like it, please try to get a party in power which would dismantle it next time. If that doesn't happen I'm afraid the only other option for you is to move.

> The fact is that a majority of Indians do not know what the constitution is, what their protections are, and do not have recourse to it.

> It is instead people like you - who sell their rights for cheap pennies, who are considered craven, and who they despise.

Another example of the quality of demeaning discourse peddled by Anti-Aadhaar lobby.

But doesn't matter. As long as the overwhelming majority of billion+ Indians keeps backing Aadhaar and keep on doing millions of transactions everyday, all this online FUD wouldn't count for anything.

> Is your bank responsible for your peacekeeping and policing ? It is not.

So you are fine with the bank having your name/dob/gender. But don't want the government to have it?

In case you don't know, govt already knows these attributes about you. Birth certificates, passports, PAN for high value transactions. FUD.

> Accusations of lack of rationality are valid when you have the locus standii proven by base knowledge of subject matter. Your various assertions here and in other parts of the thread do not suggest that

Oh, I think I do! Along with overwhelming majority of a billion+ Indians who are very happy using Aadhaar, doing millions of transactions each day, and want the program further expanded.

> So how is this not a matter of rights and trust. Please demonstrate.

That is for you to demonstrate, since it's your argument. Not me! Hence I said devoid of rational arguments.

KYC was a part of Aadhaar from day one.

I assume you are implying someone can determine your religion, caste and more by using your name.

If you signup for a bank account or a mobile company, they would have your name/dob in any case - Aadhaar or No-Aadhaar. Like in any other country on this planet.

This isn't textbook definition of causing FUD? And it's shocking that Mozilla is at forefront of it.

Also, using buzzwords like "trust", "rights" doesn't augment your arguments, if it's missing a coherent rational structure.

You can ask aadhaar to dispatch notifications to you every time an authentiction happens.

Non govt agencies need your consent to get your data, if you don't want that just don't authenticate.

The article suggests that government is selling your data to private companies, which is such a big misrepresentation I wonder how Mozilla let its name be used for it. Do they not care for their reputation anymore?

Private companies can access your data only if you give them you consent by authenticating, and all they get is name/dob/gender/address-if-avialable. Which they would have anyways since you are their customer - mobile provider, bank etc.

There should be an overarching privacy law in India covering disclosure, insurance, etc; but that's a separate debate.

> I mentioned elsewhere that centralized anti-corruption programs have a terrible track record for a reason. If you couldn't count on your institutions to prevent corruption, you cannot count on them to prevent abuse of power. Given that track record, a default position of scepticism is warranted.

This isn't an anti corruption program. Just an National Id like in any other country. And BM authentication to keep your data secure using consent driven architecture.

Astonishing how something even simple that would create such noise in India.

> Right back at you. I may have a choice when using a commercial service but why is the government forcing me to have an Aadhaar if I never intend to use it?

Mostly only if you want subsidies. If you are talking about the PAN linkage, you are already required to have PAN. Is that forcing you as well? That way you can even refuse to follow any regulation, arguing that goverment is forcing you. We don't live in an anarchy. If you don't like Aadhaar go vote for some party which will revoke it come next election. If can't do it, maybe think about changing countries.

> Yes but they cannot build a profile of me using things like income bracket (pan linking), travel information (rail and air travel linking), social and family ties (various other ways). If you think this isn't even plausible in India, either you have skin in the game or are being (/ intentionally trying to be) incredibly naive.

This kinds of profiles can be built using system like Palantair, Aadhaar or no Aaadhaar. Using just Name/DOB/Address can be decent enough identifier. And we already have PAN mandated for high value transactions. Opposing Aadhaar on these grounds, seems extremely silly to me.

Again, I am not connected with Aadhaar at all. Not want clicks like some people on this thread. Just a concerned citizen who wants to see technology help the poor/needy.

EDIT

> Yes, but once compromised they cannot be changed. Also, could you state clearly whether fingerprints would be used for authentication or identification?

Identity Authentication, because you identify yourself using the Aadhaar number, then prove it by authenticating.

Yes they can't be changed. But since there's an audit trails + you need an insider@service-provider to pass the stolen BM to server, those who try would be easily caught. With signatures/xerox there's no audit trails or instant notification. That's much more insecure if you look at it dispassionately.

Many people are not understanding Aadhaar is being used for stuff like bank accounts, food grain etc where this is acceptable.

Alternative like signatures, smart-cards, passwords etc wouldn't work in a country like India.

That could be more because your tone, making unsubstantiated claims etc.

Instead if you want to blame some national party for it, it's you choice.

FYI I don't have downvotes powers.

Btw, I got donwvotes too. But I'm blaming anyone for it.

Ok, I apologise. Shouldn't have used that word.