5 ms·

And again, a new measure that will affect everybody except criminals, who pay a drug addict to register hundreds of these cards.

ghshephard 10y ago
Well, only the criminals that put some effort. Somewhat effective at tracking down the lazy criminals. Also, in places like Singapore, you can only own 5 Data SIMs before they start asking tougher questions. I wasn't aware there were countries that you could purchase data SIMs in without having to hand over passport/government ID, I'd just assumed that was a ubiquitous practice.
- wiredfool 10y ago
  I've bought several sims in the UK and Ireland over the past year, and none of them have taken an ID.
  - lucaspiller 10y ago
    Same in most of Eastern Europe, just hand over cash and get a SIM card.
- arviewer 10y ago
  In the Netherlands you can buy sim cards without any ID. If you pay them cash, there is no link to you, except maybe a security camera in the shop. You don't need to activate them - they work right away.
  - nroets 10y ago
    In some countries, law enforcement can get a list of devices (IMEI numbers) the sim was used in. Then ask of a list of sims used in that device and a list calls and texts made to / from any of those sims. So, one slip up and the sim will have a link to you.
    - mamon 10y ago
      It is also possible to buy the whole package: SIM card + a disposable 50$ worth dumbphone. Which IMEI will be equaly untraceable.
      - toomanybeersies 10y ago
        I've seen dumbphones for sale for $10, including a SIM with $20 credit. Handy for emergencies and for dodgy people.
- toomanybeersies 10y ago
  In New Zealand, >90% of phones are pre-paid and anonymous (unless you opt to fill in your personal details online). It's strange to think that other countries have restrictions on buying SIM cards, I can literally go to the corner store and get one for $20, with $20 credit on it.
na85 10y ago
It's not intended to stop criminals. It's intended for surveillance and tracking of the population. Otherwise it would be a waste of time and money.
- fauigerzigerk 10y ago
  How is survaillance of the entire population not a waste of time and money if it's not ultimately intended to catch criminals?
  - CiPHPerCoder 10y ago
    Define "criminals" in the context of a panopticon.
    - fauigerzigerk 10y ago
      Why would the definition change in that context?
      - jobead 10y ago
        I think his point is that when you watch anyone long enough, they become criminals. So if you watch everyone, everyone becomes a criminal.
        fauigerzigerk 10y ago
        Possibly, but that doesn't change the definition of "criminals".
        wolfgke 10y ago
        It does: One is a criminal if the prosecution in a lawsuit can convince the judge that the accused is a criminal. Some evidence can only be collected in a panopticon which can make a difference in the trial. It would only make no difference if the result of the trial would be independent of the additional evidence that a surveillance state could in principle collect. But this would mean that the surveillance state is not necessary.
fab13n 10y ago
But then, the simple fact that you're using a SIM card bought from a known SIM-trafficking criminal makes you worthy of interest. The phone being instrumental in a first crime, it'll be easy to get a wire warrant and listen for the subsequent crimes you'll commit by using it. Most criminals aren't masterminds (and the few who are, are genrelly designed with other names, such as "politicians"); if you make it difficult to procure a phone, and a weapon, and to hide on the net, etc., many of them won't be able to assemble everything they need to commit serious crimes without getting caught. One of the reasons why gun homicides are so much less prevalent in Europe is that if a minority of hardcore, resourceful criminals can find guns through black markets, most of the random losers can't: too complicated, too expansive, some planning-ahead required... And the many losers are the ones causing the bulk of criminality, not the few hardcore criminals.
- phn 10y ago
  The comparison with guns doesn't really hold up. Guns are not a fundamental piece or even really necessary, when living in a modern society. A SIM card on the other hand, is pretty darn convenient for the general population.
  - fab13n 10y ago
    The comparison was only between illegal guns and illegal SIM cards. Very few people have untraceable SIM cards, nor consider that they need one. Whether they're right to belive they don't need one, that's an interesting but different question!
- pmarreck 10y ago
  > But then, the simple fact that you're using a SIM card bought from a known SIM-trafficking criminal makes you worthy of interest. This is the same circular non-logic that permits officers to arrest you merely for resisting arrest. The state decides to make wearing blue illegal; I continue to because I am a strong "blue believer"; thus, merely by insisting on wearing blue, I MUST hang with other law-non-abiders (aka "criminals") and thus become a "person of interest" to law enforcement for no other reason than sticking to principles. Possessing an anonymous SIM card is no sole indicator that you are up to no good. Assuming so is problematic due to a good privacy argument by Martin Fowler: http://martinfowler.com/articles/bothersome-privacy.html http://martinfowler.com/articles/bothersome-privacy.html

ghshephard 10y ago

Well, only the criminals that put some effort. Somewhat effective at tracking down the lazy criminals. Also, in places like Singapore, you can only own 5 Data SIMs before they start asking tougher questions. I wasn't aware there were countries that you could purchase data SIMs in without having to hand over passport/government ID, I'd just assumed that was a ubiquitous practice.

wiredfool 10y ago
I've bought several sims in the UK and Ireland over the past year, and none of them have taken an ID.
- lucaspiller 10y ago
  Same in most of Eastern Europe, just hand over cash and get a SIM card.
arviewer 10y ago
In the Netherlands you can buy sim cards without any ID. If you pay them cash, there is no link to you, except maybe a security camera in the shop. You don't need to activate them - they work right away.
- nroets 10y ago
  In some countries, law enforcement can get a list of devices (IMEI numbers) the sim was used in. Then ask of a list of sims used in that device and a list calls and texts made to / from any of those sims. So, one slip up and the sim will have a link to you.
  - mamon 10y ago
    It is also possible to buy the whole package: SIM card + a disposable 50$ worth dumbphone. Which IMEI will be equaly untraceable.
    - toomanybeersies 10y ago
      I've seen dumbphones for sale for $10, including a SIM with $20 credit. Handy for emergencies and for dodgy people.
toomanybeersies 10y ago
In New Zealand, >90% of phones are pre-paid and anonymous (unless you opt to fill in your personal details online). It's strange to think that other countries have restrictions on buying SIM cards, I can literally go to the corner store and get one for $20, with $20 credit on it.

na85 10y ago

It's not intended to stop criminals. It's intended for surveillance and tracking of the population. Otherwise it would be a waste of time and money.

fauigerzigerk 10y ago
How is survaillance of the entire population not a waste of time and money if it's not ultimately intended to catch criminals?
- CiPHPerCoder 10y ago
  Define "criminals" in the context of a panopticon.
  - fauigerzigerk 10y ago
    Why would the definition change in that context?
    - jobead 10y ago
      I think his point is that when you watch anyone long enough, they become criminals. So if you watch everyone, everyone becomes a criminal.
      - fauigerzigerk 10y ago
        Possibly, but that doesn't change the definition of "criminals".
        wolfgke 10y ago
        It does: One is a criminal if the prosecution in a lawsuit can convince the judge that the accused is a criminal. Some evidence can only be collected in a panopticon which can make a difference in the trial. It would only make no difference if the result of the trial would be independent of the additional evidence that a surveillance state could in principle collect. But this would mean that the surveillance state is not necessary.

fab13n 10y ago

But then, the simple fact that you're using a SIM card bought from a known SIM-trafficking criminal makes you worthy of interest. The phone being instrumental in a first crime, it'll be easy to get a wire warrant and listen for the subsequent crimes you'll commit by using it. Most criminals aren't masterminds (and the few who are, are genrelly designed with other names, such as "politicians"); if you make it difficult to procure a phone, and a weapon, and to hide on the net, etc., many of them won't be able to assemble everything they need to commit serious crimes without getting caught. One of the reasons why gun homicides are so much less prevalent in Europe is that if a minority of hardcore, resourceful criminals can find guns through black markets, most of the random losers can't: too complicated, too expansive, some planning-ahead required... And the many losers are the ones causing the bulk of criminality, not the few hardcore criminals.

phn 10y ago
The comparison with guns doesn't really hold up. Guns are not a fundamental piece or even really necessary, when living in a modern society. A SIM card on the other hand, is pretty darn convenient for the general population.
- fab13n 10y ago
  The comparison was only between illegal guns and illegal SIM cards. Very few people have untraceable SIM cards, nor consider that they need one. Whether they're right to belive they don't need one, that's an interesting but different question!
pmarreck 10y ago
> But then, the simple fact that you're using a SIM card bought from a known SIM-trafficking criminal makes you worthy of interest. This is the same circular non-logic that permits officers to arrest you merely for resisting arrest. The state decides to make wearing blue illegal; I continue to because I am a strong "blue believer"; thus, merely by insisting on wearing blue, I MUST hang with other law-non-abiders (aka "criminals") and thus become a "person of interest" to law enforcement for no other reason than sticking to principles. Possessing an anonymous SIM card is no sole indicator that you are up to no good. Assuming so is problematic due to a good privacy argument by Martin Fowler: http://martinfowler.com/articles/bothersome-privacy.html http://martinfowler.com/articles/bothersome-privacy.html