On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 8:26 AM, Vickram Crishna <[email protected]> wrote: > At the risk of repeating myself: > > > Not simply the proposed (despite the decision to spend goodish sums of > money, the allocation of an office and the - very slow - creation of a > secretariat to deal with the project, and all these are not surmises gained > from newspaper reports, but the result of RTI applications made in the past > few weeks) NUID project, but any expenditure of public money on the creation > of a public service instrument must be accompanied by full disclosure of the > systems used in its implementation. Up to and until this expense includes > the use of ICTs, I think FOSSCOMM should have a clear objective (within the > CMP, therefore) to demand the use of free software. > In practical terms, this may take the form of readymade documents to file > with concerned organs of government, and a public statement, preserved on > the website, for instance, expressing this position. > However, for the reasons stated above (and implicitly, in the quoted link), > I certainly object to treating the matter as fait accompli, so that > FOSSCOMM, by virtue of recommending the use of free software as an > alternative to proprietary systems, is seen as defending and being a party > to the imposition of NUID on our country's people. > --
Thanks for repeating this. NUID will be used by the powers/mega systems, and it is more advantageous for them rather than individual. Therefore I do not find that as a good use of ICT, infact it is a good abuse of ICT, whether it is free software or not. Using free software for NUID only makes it lesser evil, but evil is evil at the end of the day. When we dream of a free society we should dream of a society where each human being is identified for being a human (made of flesh and blood) and no other identities should matter. All human beings should be given the dignity they deserve. These NUID project is not intended for that, on the contrary it is an instrument for discrimination. Each one of us are endowed with a unique culturally transmitted ability to know if the other person is a human being or not. What more do we need? Why do we have to use ICT to determine whether a person is a person. Considering the ill-consequences of NUID, and handing over our information to unreliable and intransparent administrative systems, I personally oppose the very idea of NUID. It is an ill-conceived solution to a manufactured problem that does not exist. Nagarjuna _______________________________________________ network mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fosscom.in/listinfo.cgi/network-fosscom.in
