3 ms·

Yes, but the old lady in the village will have a problem with it when it is used to marginalize and discriminate against her. The riots in 1984 and in 2001 sho

by ganduG 9y ago

Yes, but the old lady in the village will have a problem with it when it is used to marginalize and discriminate against her. The riots in 1984 and in 2001 showed us how voter lists can, and will, be misused by people in power to their own benefit.

aub3bhat 9y ago
You mean the Cincinnati riots of 2001 I can clearly see why USA should not have voter lists /s The riots happened in 2002 and NOT 2001 (at least get the year right), and unless you are arguing abolishing voter lists, or have a specific argument that involves Aadhar. I don't see how this is in anyway relevant to this discussion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cincinnati_riots_of_2001 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cincinnati_riots_of_2001 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Gujarat_riots https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Gujarat_riots
- ganduG 9y ago
  Nice deflection! Are you disagreeing that voter lists were used in 2001 to discriminate against muslims? Do we have any laws preventing that from happening with aadhar data?
  - realonedev 9y ago
    Do you even understand how Aadhar works? You made a claim. Can you prove that using an Aadhar number one can get the religion of a person?
    - hackuser 9y ago
      If you can identify someone, it's easy to link it to data that identifies their religion.
      - realonedev 9y ago
        You are wrong. Easy!= Exact. I asked a simple question, do you know how to identify a religion by Aadhar number?
        urbanj 9y ago
        He is right. Prove that it is impossible, please.
    - ganduG 9y ago
      Given a persons name you can guess with fairly reasonable accuracy what their religion is.
    - urbanj 9y ago
      Are you asserting that it is impossible to do that? That there is no way anyone, no matter how rich, powerful or connected to the system can, from an Aadhar number, derive enough infomation about a person to derive their religion?
realonedev 9y ago
Disgusting comment. Please make sure you know what you are talking. Don't spread fake news like the Indian communists. Edit: If people want I compile produce point by point data to prove that Indian communists are masters at spreding fake news, for decades. I will even quote a website which is mostly anti current government (it spreads fake news most of the times) thewire.in/24713/aadhaar-identification-simplified-myths-busted/ ....The UIDAI has emphasised several times that information related to religion or caste is neither collected nor stored in the Aadhaar database. Applicants and holders are encouraged to look at their Aadhaar to confirm this.....
- blindwatchmaker 9y ago
  > Don't spread fake news like the communists. > mostly anti current government (it spreads fake news most of the times) Do you consider views from sources that disagree with your own as 'fake news' ? A lot of what you've posted here sounds a lot like the hyper partisan BJP trolls that seem to pop up wherever there's any criticism of the Modi government. You should try to do better on HN, because I would prefer not to see that particular virulent strain of the internet in relatively sane places.
  - realonedev 9y ago
    Your assumptions mean nothing,unless you produce quantifiable data and verifiable data source to proof any of your claims. Your statement combining the words, hyper, troll, government, modi, sanity, are not backed up by any data nor they hold true for anyone else expect the ones having a biased brain such, as yours. I can prove point by point how communists spread fake news. Your assumptions about equating disagreeing with fake news with stamping as fake news, does not matter, it actually makes you a troll who just wants to spread the propaganda; that a person stating a media house as a fake news source necessarily disagrees with it, if he/she has an opinion at all about the fake news. How in earth did you just assume that fake news = disagreement by the person who finds out the fake factor in the news. A news is fake, means, it has not got verifiable data to back up it's headline or summary. Simple and plain. Why is it so hard for some people to understand? I would rather communicate with those who don't label people and jump to conclusions. Good day, and Remember, Fake News = No verifiable data source + no quantifiable data. Fake News Defender's arguments = oppose all those who find out the fake factor/fact check by abusing them and name calling them trolls "look he disagrees hence he calls it fake news".

by ganduG 9y ago

aub3bhat 9y ago

You mean the Cincinnati riots of 2001 I can clearly see why USA should not have voter lists /s The riots happened in 2002 and NOT 2001 (at least get the year right), and unless you are arguing abolishing voter lists, or have a specific argument that involves Aadhar. I don't see how this is in anyway relevant to this discussion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cincinnati_riots_of_2001 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cincinnati_riots_of_2001 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Gujarat_riots https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Gujarat_riots

ganduG 9y ago
Nice deflection! Are you disagreeing that voter lists were used in 2001 to discriminate against muslims? Do we have any laws preventing that from happening with aadhar data?
- realonedev 9y ago
  Do you even understand how Aadhar works? You made a claim. Can you prove that using an Aadhar number one can get the religion of a person?
  - hackuser 9y ago
    If you can identify someone, it's easy to link it to data that identifies their religion.
    - realonedev 9y ago
      You are wrong. Easy!= Exact. I asked a simple question, do you know how to identify a religion by Aadhar number?
      - urbanj 9y ago
        He is right. Prove that it is impossible, please.
  - ganduG 9y ago
    Given a persons name you can guess with fairly reasonable accuracy what their religion is.
  - urbanj 9y ago
    Are you asserting that it is impossible to do that? That there is no way anyone, no matter how rich, powerful or connected to the system can, from an Aadhar number, derive enough infomation about a person to derive their religion?

realonedev 9y ago

Disgusting comment. Please make sure you know what you are talking. Don't spread fake news like the Indian communists. Edit: If people want I compile produce point by point data to prove that Indian communists are masters at spreding fake news, for decades. I will even quote a website which is mostly anti current government (it spreads fake news most of the times) thewire.in/24713/aadhaar-identification-simplified-myths-busted/ ....The UIDAI has emphasised several times that information related to religion or caste is neither collected nor stored in the Aadhaar database. Applicants and holders are encouraged to look at their Aadhaar to confirm this.....

blindwatchmaker 9y ago
> Don't spread fake news like the communists. > mostly anti current government (it spreads fake news most of the times) Do you consider views from sources that disagree with your own as 'fake news' ? A lot of what you've posted here sounds a lot like the hyper partisan BJP trolls that seem to pop up wherever there's any criticism of the Modi government. You should try to do better on HN, because I would prefer not to see that particular virulent strain of the internet in relatively sane places.
- realonedev 9y ago
  Your assumptions mean nothing,unless you produce quantifiable data and verifiable data source to proof any of your claims. Your statement combining the words, hyper, troll, government, modi, sanity, are not backed up by any data nor they hold true for anyone else expect the ones having a biased brain such, as yours. I can prove point by point how communists spread fake news. Your assumptions about equating disagreeing with fake news with stamping as fake news, does not matter, it actually makes you a troll who just wants to spread the propaganda; that a person stating a media house as a fake news source necessarily disagrees with it, if he/she has an opinion at all about the fake news. How in earth did you just assume that fake news = disagreement by the person who finds out the fake factor in the news. A news is fake, means, it has not got verifiable data to back up it's headline or summary. Simple and plain. Why is it so hard for some people to understand? I would rather communicate with those who don't label people and jump to conclusions. Good day, and Remember, Fake News = No verifiable data source + no quantifiable data. Fake News Defender's arguments = oppose all those who find out the fake factor/fact check by abusing them and name calling them trolls "look he disagrees hence he calls it fake news".