Comments on: Online Debate Topic 1

By: George

George — Sun, 24 Jan 2010 15:12:25 +0000

What are we tryin to prove??India the next Tech Hub of the world??.The world knows it and people of US who work for IT companies know it extra well about their Indian colleagues.Lets assume that the project is successful,and the 700 million people have an identity,will they be able to get what they deserve just by showing this card.At the end of he day its the bureaucrats who have failed time and again to put more strict laws in place and have been barriers for Govt funds reaching the people.A lot has been debated about the technical aspects of the project,biometrics,Database and so on ,do we really know what the aam admi needs and will all the issues be addressed with this UID.

On a lighter note ,the funds needed for the project are also being addressed as mentioned above by Medha.Instead of breaking our heads as to how to keep the cash flowing,let one form of it be the Tax amount or the black money collected from the political bigwigs.This will certainly solve 10% of cash of money issues.

By: Suresh Jagennathan

Suresh Jagennathan — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 21:27:14 +0000

We need to do this project , if only to prove to ourselves, that we can do such a massive project.Why should we constantly compare ourselves to UK or USA that if they cannot do this , then we cannot do this. I dont want to be emotional but I believe India should now aspire to do what we think is in our interests , the bigger the better. If we fail once in a while , so be it!

By: Vishnu

Vishnu — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 16:06:19 +0000

Social Security Number in US and National Insurance Number in UK do not have biometric data stored in them. The concept of biometric check is the heart of UID. If biometric check is eliminated the system will become less complex and the cost of the project will be much lesser. But then its tall clams will no longer hold. Again remember that the population of India is nearly 20 times as that of UK and the social conditions we have in our country is much more diverse and complex.

The existing technology for biometric checks even in small scale have encountered substantial technological and operational problems and this is definitely going get amplified when it is scaled up. In India we need to scale up this technology to handle 1.2 billion people.

By: Medha!

Medha! — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 09:31:31 +0000

I am not contesting that there are not going to be any hurdles, technological or otherwise. What I am contesting, however, is that the risk is worth taking, for it is a well-informed risk, not only because we have the best brains working for us, but also because, as Nandan Nilekani remarked in the Devil’s Advocate, the technology needed exists, it just has to be scaled up. Of course, it is an ambitious, such a project has never been undertaken. But the issue at hand is its necessity. Both UK and USA, the “developed” countries that have dropped similar projects, have dropped issuing the card. They, however, have a number that they identify the residents with. The social security number of the USA and the national insurance number of the UK (both of which have become de facto National Identification Numbers) are similar to the UID number that the UIDAI proposes.
As for the speed involved with the granting of the UID, are you opposing it because the verification might take lets say a day or two as opposed to the 15 days or more that the other proofs take? With this, when the authenticity of the UID is considered, I don’t see how you have a case.
You seemed to have misunderstood my point about the BPL. While 25% of the people are BPL, 20% belong to the middle and high income groups, 55% remain poor. Out of these 700 million people in India do not even have a legal identity, which means, 700 million people are outside the system. What the UID proposes to do is give them an identity, so they are eligible to the benefits offered by the government.

By: Vishnu

Vishnu — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 07:38:23 +0000

And about the 75% of the Indian population above poverty line (the absolute majority as you call it)…see Ms.Medha, just because a person come above BPL does not mean that he is well off. Only 20% of the Indian population comes under the classification of middle and high income group (world economic outlook database September 2006). So it is not fair to say that we cannot just stop by thinking JUST ABOUT BPL category. In fact their problems are the key issues which need to be addressed immediately.

By: Vishnu

Vishnu — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 07:25:14 +0000

Are you arguing that UK dropped this project because they didn’t have access to people of the status of Nandan Nilekani to head the project?.

Quoting R. Ramakumar of Tata Institute of Social Scinences Mumbai “The fact that the UIA is to be headed by a technocrat like Nilekani, and not a demographer, is evidence to this biased view of the government. The problems of enumeration in a society like India’s, marked by illegal immigration as well as internal migration, especially of people from poor labour households, are too enormous to be handled effectively by a technocrat. It is intriguing that the duties of the Census Registrar and the UIA Chairperson have been demarcated, and that the UIA Chairperson has been placed as a Cabinet Minister above the Census Registrar.”

Whoever may be the big brains working behind the project a slight failure in any of the technological components may immediately affect underlying confidence of people in the scheme as a whole.

I’ll summarize the technological hurdles in the implementation of this project which may help you to get clearer picture of why it is not as simple as it looks.

Volume: Creating and managing a database of 1.2 billion people spread over a huge area will involve immense work. Around five megabytes of data will be required to store the compressed fingerprint images of each individual, meaning the size of the entire database will be at least six petabytes (6,000 terabytes, or 6,000,000 gigabytes), making it among the world’s largest databases.

Speed: Each new entry has to be validated against existing entries to remove the possibility of duplication. Over the next few years, this would mean comparing each new application against, say, one billion entries in the database at a reasonable speed. Also, the UIDAI proposes online authentication through cellphones and using basic technology. While authentication is a simpler process, the proposed time of three to four seconds for the same makes it challenging.

Security: Dealing with sensitive information, it has to include security features that will ward off hackers. The robustness of the system under full operation, with possibly thousands of queries every second, will also have to be factored in.

Biometrics: A Biometrics Committee has been set up to look into the issue of the final set of biometrics used. Due to the criticism that biometric readers are not fool proof, Nilekani is also planning to add iris scan data in addition to biometric readers. While this will increase the size of the database, there will also be problems relating to the equipment required for the iris scan (no need to mention the associated costs)

By: Medha!

Medha! — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 05:07:58 +0000

Lets do a background check on the people heading UIDAI. Nandan Nilekani – former chairman, INFOSYS, one of the best IT companies in India that has received acclaim from people all over the world and also awarded prizes for their innovation in technology. Nandan Nilekani is also an IIT graduate who co-founded NASSCOM. The second, Bill Gates, who expressed his keenness to be a part of the project. Gates, presently the chairman and the Chief Software Architect of Microsoft, needs no introduction for he is considered to be an integral part of the personal computer revolution.
When you have such luminaries, who have emerged into the public light from the field of technology, you can be rest assured that they will take all the necessary precautions to secure safety and ensure the implementation of the best technology.

By: Vishnu

Vishnu — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 17:50:09 +0000

44 million Americans are victims of identity thefts that happen on the internet, every year?..wow. I was not aware of this. But if your statistics are true then it backs my concerns of the possiblity people trying to hacking into the UID system (especially when the potential benefits of doing so is much higher).

By: Medha!

Medha! — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 17:24:13 +0000

The Unique Identification number is going to be, as my opponent agrees, a revolutionary step in the governance of the country. At a stage, where so much of development is to be achieved and many forces are impending a step to introduce a proof of legal identity that is authentic and is not prone to being copied easily is not merely a wishful exercise, but a necessity. The implications of introducing the UID are far-reaching. All the problems and glitches that seem to be involved with the introduction and implementation of the UID, are not significant when the end, the accomplishment is considered. Further, most of the problems that have been forwarded by my opponent are speculations, most of them revolve around a report conducted by the LSE condemning the introduction of a similar project in England, not India. In India, the introduction of the UID is undertaken by well-informed pioneers who belong to the field of technology. Further, it is presently in its first leg of implementation – the pilot project. This gives the people implementing it sufficient leverage – to test the technology and iron out the glitches. It even has a revenue system to make it run on its own feet.
I would like to conclude by saying that when a new system is trying to be introduced, there are a lot of apprehensions. We cannot belittle an idea either because it did not work for another country, or because our country has other problem-areas, especially when the new system is going to help alleviate the situation.The UID right now is the need of the hour. Its purposes are two-fold – it helps people who are in dire need of help reap benefits and prevents the people who are misusing benefits from continuing it – all of these by establishing the legal identity of the individuals. Therefore, we must not only believe in its creation, but must support it wholeheartedly.

By: Medha!

Medha! — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 12:12:37 +0000

The entire brouhaha that we have been involved with for the past week is totally wasted, for you don’t even understand the concept of legal identity. You mainly seem to be harping about the people who belong to the BPL category. All that the UID does is that it classifies them as BPL, like most other forms of legal identity. The issue you are talking about is not the fault with the UID but with the Public Distribution Systems in itself. Secondly, we cannot stop by thinking just about the people who belong to the BPL category, for they form 25% of the Indian Population, (and these are the people who need a legal identity, more than anybody else). For the rest of the 75%, which is the absolute majority, the UID will not be superfluous or tiresome, but beneficiary and necessary.

I would just like to point out to you that you cannot hide behind vague terms like “social inefficiency and social problems” when rebutting the point that the best brains in the world are working for the UID and they obviously know the security risks involved in maintaining the database and will resort to all of the methods available to secure it. What do you mean by “technology cannot tackle social problems”?? I’m sorry, was it supposed to? My point had no connection whatsoever to these “social problems” that you are talking about.

Thirdly, now that you are done laughing at the contention, can i tell you that 44 million Americans are victims of identity thefts that happen on the internet, every year? I suggest you don’t think about yourself or people like you, that you are so fond of accusing me of, when you argue about issues that are much beyond your levels of comprehension. (no offence)