THE CICAK.com

Identification card paranoia, is it unfounded?

By BAHIR YEUSUFF

The British government wants to reintroduce identification cards, said my friend who recently returned from England.

The people, he said, are vehemently against it. They believe it is a serious threat to civil liberties and privacy.

How can a simple piece of paper, possibly laminated, prove to invade a person’s privacy?

I would assume that the British IC is used to confirm the citizens’ identities - the same manner in which it is used in Malaysia.

Personally, I can’t see how having an IC will allow the government to invade my privacy, any more than my credit card.

Admittedly, the counter-argument is that with all the features the MyKad supposedly has - its ATM, credit card, health card, and passport capabilities - someone would be able to track your financial transactions and, perhaps, even your physical being!

I recognise that the MyKad could potentially be abused. However, I choose to write this commentary with trust.

With all that can be done with computers these days, trust and faith have almost disappeared. Those who “trust� the government are seen as naïve and weak. But if you have nothing to hide, why be afraid?

Speaking of being watched, it has been said that London is the most “watched� city, with cameras in both private and public locations. Highways are watched so closely that if your car breaks down in transit, assistance will be provided almost immediately.

What if the Malaysian government started “watching” its streets? Would drivers feel less safe, or more violated? I can’t say. Living in KL, I would gladly accept the call for cameras on our roads to deter reckless driving and the beating of traffic lights.

What’s so bad about that?

So personally, I feel that the arguments against ICs are totally uncalled for. Can anyone really say how the IC has made any of us Malaysians feel violated and unsafe?

What if we didn’t have it? Anyone could claim to be Malaysian, or even assume your identity.

We would have immigrants walking around claiming to be Malaysians, stealing our jobs, committing crimes and causing trouble. Will the IC deter crime? Of course not. But it will, hopefully, allow the powers that be to do their jobs better.

In the Hollywood blockbuster Minority Report, the billboards changed their advertisements to suit each passerby based on retinal scans. Would you consider that to be an invasion of privacy, or a spectacular invention for the marketing industry?

Why should we find this vision of the future scary? Wouldn’t you like to know when your favorite company releases a new product?

I don’t have a problem with it, as long as advertisers can assure me that retinal scans do no harm.

Hollywood dreams, I hear you scream? Not really. It has already begun.

Google’s Gmail already does it - having an e-mail conversation with your friend about movies results in advertising regarding everything from movie books to movie-making courses being displayed in the right hand frame. Is this an invasion of privacy? Why should it be? A computer is “readingâ€? your e-mail, and displaying information it “thinks” you would like. I’ve found it useful in the past, clicking on advertising purely because I was talking about something.

Of course it can be used for malicious purposes. But as with anything else, this sort of information will allow its user to do wrong, or good. So it comes down to that. This whole rant of an article comes down to trust.

Do you trust the people who have your IC details, videos of you driving, and information about your purchasing power?

If you have nothing to hide, why be afraid?

—
BAHIR YEUSUFF is a contributing writer for theCICAK.

Bahir is lazy. He enjoys challenging arguments and discussions, late night talks, jazz and reading.