tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5043138489010794057.post4966311626517473156..comments2024-03-27T15:57:09.192+05:30Comments on Urbanomics: Bridging the PC-MHA divide on AadhaarUrbanomicshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16956198290294771298noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5043138489010794057.post-31408688522160594142012-01-24T22:39:35.685+05:302012-01-24T22:39:35.685+05:30Dear Viyoma,
"the compromised system..."...Dear Viyoma,<br /><br />"the compromised system..." refers to the pre-UID scenario.<br /><br />The fundamental case for a UID is the dire need for a system that authenticates with the highest degree of reliability. <br /><br />I don't think we have a disagreement on that.<br /><br />regards,KP.KPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06553866275918658507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5043138489010794057.post-3869862211969644082012-01-24T18:31:19.868+05:302012-01-24T18:31:19.868+05:30Dear KP, Mr Nandan Nikelini, in his latest intervi...Dear KP, Mr Nandan Nikelini, in his latest interview, clearly specifies the Purpose of UID. Its main objective is to give Identity to those, who have NO IDENTITY PROOF as of now.<br /><br />UID is not a panacea for all problems, and it cant be. Security issues and concerns will still have to be addressed at their respective levels.<br /><br />Aadhaar is one step towards fixing identity. Simple-Clear- Objective.<br /><br />Coming to your point on "The compromised system of checks"; this point should have been raised at the time of UID Planning. <br />The enrollment procedure was known, but somehow, critics choose to speak..only when implementation begins.Viyomahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09148836292606453449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5043138489010794057.post-23070528473828738972012-01-23T21:34:37.279+05:302012-01-23T21:34:37.279+05:30Dear Gulzar,
This is a clearly developed argument...Dear Gulzar,<br /><br />This is a clearly developed argument for the UID program. I hope some of those charged with having to 'defend' the program - can do so using this well delineated argument.<br /><br />The identity being derivative of a compromised system of checks - as anyone who has been through a passport verification process in the 70's / 80's / 90's, with a 'visit' from the local police station can attest - is in itself a mockery of a fundamental documentary proof of citizenship.<br /><br />Notwithstanding the dangers of data theft / impersonation / misuse of personal data / lax privacy standards etc.,- that need to be addressed - there is no way out of having to create a national databank of verifiable ID's.<br /><br />Touting the UID as a panacea for all our problems - like some of the leading lights have - is misleading, and may be playing into the various camps that have specific issue with such arguments - and this walks the project into the territory of having to defend itself continually against disparate lenses through which it is critiqued.<br /><br />That, we do not have a unified form of identification is sufficient reason to embark on this project - the instrumental benefits that accrue can always be open to political debate / checks and balances. ( And, I believe the CBA / externalities etc will have made the case for technical and financial outlay towards this project)<br /><br />Unless, offcourse, we were to make the case that an identification is in itself an intrusion into personal freedoms.<br /><br />regards,KP.KPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06553866275918658507noreply@blogger.com