i do not understand why people are complaining about this fingerprinting shit

[xfer]

I mean, if I visited another country, I would kind of expect to be documented in that way. What's the big deal?

I didn't understand why it was such a bad thing that Pete Rose betted that his own team would win until it was explained to me, though. Now I do, so maybe I'm just missing something and it needs to be explained to me?

 

[steak-knife]

do we care?

 

[lizard]

People have to understand that baseball was shaken to its core by the Black Socks scandal in like 1919 or whenever it was....gambling is the biggest fear they have because it can undermine the integrity of the game. Pete Rose accepted willingly his "lifetime" ban in return for some of the damning details of the investigation to be withheld from the press, and he's lied about it ever since, until he has an autobiography to pimp. He was a great player but as a human he's an absolute dirtbag, and stupid to boot.

 

[steak-knife]

do we care tho?

 

[xfer]

Well, I mean, besides that, I just didn't know enough about baseball to know that, for example, a manager who has money on a certain game could choose to play an all-star pitcher who needs rest for his arm instead of the relief pitcher he really ought to play. So gambling "to win" is still bad like gambling your team will lose, because you're still changing the game to conform to where your money lies.

I didn't want to make this a Pete Rose thread!

 

[lizard]

you can care or not, its immaterial to me. it is significant, though, because many people do care.

 

[steak-knife]

i reckon many more people dont care. like everyone in china and india for a start. thats about 2 billions people. chinks too, funnily enough.

 

[lizard]

well that may be quite so....
just as I care not which of their holy men is quaffing a tall glass of his own vitamin enriched urine right this moment.

 

[steak-knife]

you got it spot on dude.

 

[lizard]

you know, when I awoke this a.m. I had no idea my mental faculties would be taxed to the limit by a fellow named after dining implements!

 

[steak-knife]

this is why we like the internet so much, so many unexpected things can e-happen to you. the breath-taking beauty of it all makes me weep sometimes when i feel sad at night.

 

[mindspell]

The fingerprinting issue is simply one of privacy. What business is it to the government to know what are your doing with your time? The same applies to your coming and going from a certain country to another. It all boils down to the fear of big brother controlling everything in your life.

Note that I do not necessarily agree with that but this is what I understand from the beef people have with this issue...

 

[steak-knife]

i wish i had fingers.

 

[xfer]

Well, what I'm saying is, that "privacy" issue you mentioned, fear about Big Brother watching you coming and going in and out of other countries...is foolish. And I'm saying that can't really be the entirety of the argument...can it? I mean, if there's ONE place the government should stick its nose into, it's in the comings and goings of people in and out of their nations, isn't it?

I'm a member of the ACLU and all that, so I'm pretty wary of excessive governmental control and oppressions and stuff. This doesn't really seem to be a major issue except on the most superficial level, though. Unless I'm missing something huge.

 

[avi]

I just don't really see what fingerprinting will do except create a huge semi-useless database to get mismanaged. it's not like we have some terrorist thumbprint db to try and find matches from or anything.

 

[xfer]

welll i think it will be useful, but mostly post de facto. like, the next Mohamed Atta does his thing, and the government goes back and checks his comings and goings and figures out his travel patterns and stuff. which can be really useful for prosecution and investigation of not-yet-blown-themselves-up terrorist cells and the like.

so it will be clearly beneficial. i guess the question would be "is it beneficial ENOUGH to outweight the expense?" and i'm not sure if that's the case.

regardless. my opposition would be closer to avi's--focusing around how useful it is in terms of its cost--not any sort of "blah blah it's an affront to my dignity!" concerns. if i see people arguing about its cost, i'm going to pay close attention.

 

[steak-knife]

did you ever wonder why teenage mutant ninja turtles had only 6 fingers instead of 10?

 

[mindspell]

Well, what I'm saying is, that "privacy" issue you mentioned, fear about Big Brother watching you coming and going in and out of other countries...is foolish. And I'm saying that can't really be the entirety of the argument...can it? I mean, if there's ONE place the government should stick its nose into, it's in the comings and goings of people in and out of their nations, isn't it?

I'm a member of the ACLU and all that, so I'm pretty wary of excessive governmental control and oppressions and stuff. This doesn't really seem to be a major issue except on the most superficial level, though. Unless I'm missing something huge.

That's the whole argument. The problem is that how do you control the the info held by the immigration/custom/passport services about this fingerprinting is not going to be exchanged to other agencies and such of the government? It can't because there will have to be a pretty intense screening to prove that you are actually you, which will involve a bunch of info transiting from one agency/department/whatever to the other, including this, most sensible, info. How do you control access to this info? Who has rights and who hasn't? You see the global failure that the social security number is in term of identity theft, and such, and think for a minute that a more 'secure' solution like fingerprinting is used and the globality it could reach. It really isn't that easy of a question to sort through. Fingerprinting is the equivalent of having a bar code on your neck.

 

[steak-knife]

walt disney and his mates decided to provide mickey mouse and his mates with only 4 fingers - this way it would be easier to animate them like you know what i mean.

 

[xfer]

If that's the concern, peoples' energy would be and should be focused on strengthening laws about using the information improperly. I think if freedom-lovers really get behind this argument about fingerprints equaling bar codes on necks, it will be very detrimental to the cause in the long run. Supporting a silly argument will hurt the cause across the board as people equate real, important problems with the silly ones.