Originally Posted by
OldGoat
I doubt it. Although name calling is unimpressive, it does highlight voids in the speaker's knowledge.
I called your post idiotic, not you. I especially found the use of the term "cyberspace" to be idiotic. I'm not accusing
you of being an idiot -- if I were, I would've said it clearly. (And no, I'm not calling you that. I'm not a fan of ad hominem.)
Anyway, if you really want to go there and play the "Since you aren't responding, I therefore claim I know more than you" game, I can 100% guarantee I know more about NFC and all things mobile than you do -- certainly enough that I would never use the term "cyberspace" unless I were making fun of someone.
First, putting identity on a chip isn't new. RFID chips have been capable of this for ages now. Second, in the case of NFC, identity doesn't even go on a "chip" (or "tag," as it's properly called in the NFC world -- but I'm not here to teach you how NFC works). Identity and so on go on the NFC device itself. Third, going through one's apps and contact lists would be pretty useless in the NFC-device-as-identity case.
So in your example, it appears the TSA is in fact not claiming they have a right to look through your phone, since doing so wouldn't yield any information.
Regardless, the blogger claimed that when the TSA said it had a right to look for "identification media," they were claiming they could look through your phone. I said it's ridiculous to go there, and even more ridiculous to make it the headline of the post. My argument is simply that turning everything into a slippery slope really doesn't accomplish the goal. The TSA does enough worthy of indictment that fabricating policies and misrepresenting their words and statements can only backfire when it comes to getting people to listen.