Subject: [Drip] auto license plates

From: "Card, Stu" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2020 14:01:53 -0400

There have been numerous references to automobile license plates in our
discussions. Lest anyone think these are globally uniform or have always
been as they are now, see

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_registration_plate

https://magazine.northeast.aaa.com/daily/life/cars-trucks/license-plate-history/
esp. the 1977 entry.

---

From: Alexandre Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 10:33:06 +0200

Stuart,

Thanks for pointing to this.

> been as they are now, see

I agree, they are not globally uniform.  They are not globally unique 
either.  I could spot some similarities in format, and a potential 
duplicate between two countries in Europe.

And, within each country there are many exceptions.  For example, a 
classical exception is the license plate of diplomatic cars.

Finally, the formats change regularly (every few decades or so) for 
reasons that include: run out of space, new strategy of allocation per 
person or per car, new uniformisation along geopolitical strategy, new 
privacy requirements, and others.

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_registration_plate

Thanks for the pointer to Wikipedia.  I do not agree with it because it 
does not list the country where I live.

> https://magazine.northeast.aaa.com/daily/life/cars-trucks/license-plate-history/

I wonder what happened in year 1977 with respect to license plates and 
why do they talk about it?

I can not see that web page.  The page is simply blocked.  The reason 
invoked is "Block reason: Access from your Country was disabled by the 
administrator."

This is the full message displayed in the browser:
> Website Firewall
> Back to sucuri.net
> Access Denied - Sucuri Website Firewall
> 
> If you are the site owner (or you manage this site), please whitelist your IP or if you think this block is an error please open a support ticket and make sure to include the block details (displayed in the box below), so we can assist you in troubleshooting the issue.
> Block details:
> Your IP: 	[my publicly routable IP address of the enteprise IT NAT facing the Internet]
> URL: 	magazine.northeast.aaa.com/daily/life/cars-trucks/license-plate-history/
> Your Browser: 	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:79.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/79.0
> Block ID: 	GEO02
> Block reason: 	Access from your Country was disabled by the administrator.
> Time: 	2020-08-24 04:19:02
> Server ID: 	13006
> © 2019 Sucuri Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy 

Alex

---

From: "Stuart W. Card" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 12:16:01 -0400

Sorry about the blocked site, I can't imagine why it is blocked, but
here is the 1977 entry I found interesting & potentially semi-relevant:

> 1977 – License Plates Reach the Supreme Court
> 
> The land’s highest court gives their decision on the case of Wooley v. Maynard. Up until that point, the state of New Hampshire required all noncommercial vehicles to have license plates containing the state motto “Live Free or Die.” Resident George Maynard cut off the words “or Die,” believing they went against his religious beliefs. He was cited for violating the state law, fined, and after refusing to pay, jailed for 15 days.
> 
> Maynard sued and the case eventually made its way to the Supreme Court. In a 6-3 decision, the court ruled that New Hampshire could not require citizens to display the state motto, stating “New Hampshire’s statute in effect requires that appellees use their private property as a ‘mobile billboard’ for the State’s ideological message…The First Amendment protects the right of individuals to hold a point of view different from the majority, and to refuse to foster, in the way New Hampshire commands, an idea they find morally objectionable.”

On 8/24/2020 4:33 AM, Alexandre Petrescu wrote:
> ...
> administrator." ...

-- 
-----------------------------------------
Stuart W. Card, PhD, Principal Engineer
AX Enterprize, LLC  www.axenterprize.com
4947 Commercial Drive, Yorkville NY 13495

---

From: Alexandre Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 18:34:37 +0200

Le 24/08/2020 à 18:16, Stuart W. Card a écrit :
> Sorry about the blocked site, I can't imagine why it is blocked,

I could explain why I think it is so.  It has to do with privacy
concepts being different in US than Europe.  Europe started first by
telling incomers from everywhere else that they should accept EU privacy
policy.  Then some servers in California found that unacceptable and
started blocking outright, until they implement the local California
features.  This kind of behaviour is now growing.

I speculate it leads again to seggregation in the Internet.

One would not like to create a new identification mechanism that risks
leading to such seggregation (between drones, or whatever else).

> but here is the 1977 entry I found interesting & potentially 
> semi-relevant:

Thanks, I learn.

>> The land’s highest court gives their decision on the case of
>> Wooley v. Maynard. Up until that point, the state of New Hampshire
>>  required all noncommercial vehicles to have license plates 
>> containing the state motto “Live Free or Die.” Resident George 
>> Maynard cut off the words “or Die,” believing they went against
>> his religious beliefs. He was cited for violating the state law,
>> fined, and after refusing to pay, jailed for 15 days.
>> 
>> Maynard sued and the case eventually made its way to the Supreme 
>> Court. In a 6-3 decision, the court ruled that New Hampshire could 
>> not require citizens to display the state motto, stating “New 
>> Hampshire’s statute in effect requires that appellees use their 
>> private property as a ‘mobile billboard’ for the State’s 
>> ideological message…The First Amendment protects the right of 
>> individuals to hold a point of view different from the majority, 
>> and to refuse to foster, in the way New Hampshire commands, an
>> idea they find morally objectionable.”

I did not know it.

I can tell another side effect, that was unplanned for, in the country
where I live.

First, the license plates were mandated to tell the Region where the car
is registered.  E.g. 75 means it is from Paris.  But then privacy issues
were raised, so now one is allowed to put whatever number one wants to
on her license plate, at the place typically allocated to region.  Some
people put the code of the region where they are born, or that they like
the landscape of.

But nowadays, something strange happened.  In the news they said that
region X has more COVID cases than any other.  It amounted to 'name and
shame'.  If you had a license plate with the code of that region, people
would look at you like at a 'pestiphéré'.   So people started changing
their license plate to put there something else, just because of that
reason.  There are more stories like: if you have a beautiful car then
rather put a license plate with a region code from Corsica island,
because that is  known to be biting back if one tries to steal that car
(a little bit like 'Dont Mess with Corsica' instead of Texas :-).

The privacy question is very important.  I am not sure how that is dealt
with with drones.

But side effects of privacy are also important.

Finally, in this discussion a little bit off topic, I would like to add
about the story of a few days ago about the Air Force One approaching
too close to a drone, or vice versa.  In this thing one would like both
identifications to work properly.

Alex

esp. the 1977 entry.
>> 
>> I wonder what happened in year 1977 with respect to license plates 
>> and why do they talk about it?
>> 
>> I can not see that web page.  The page is simply blocked.  The 
>> reason invoked is "Block reason: Access from your Country was 
>> disabled by the administrator." ...
>

---

From: Robert Moskowitz <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 13:02:03 -0400

> leading to such seggregation (between drones, or whatever else).

Drones fall within a region's civil airspace regulatory agency so it 
will be balkanized without work in open standards and organizations like 
ICAO's involvement.

There is too much at risk for allowing to let the playground stay open.

>>> private property as a ‘mobile billboard’ for the State’s ideological 
>>> message…The First Amendment protects the right of individuals to 
>>> hold a point of view different from the majority, and to refuse to 
>>> foster, in the way New Hampshire commands, an

ASTM's UUID is suppose to provide a level of privacy.  But with no trust 
or ownship proof.  Too much 'privacy'.

HHITs CAN provide privacy and discovery through proper procedures. This 
is, in part, through RAA/HDA that has a mix of clientele so that 
information is not informative.

> identifications to work properly.

RID only will show 'good' players.  A news service that got too close.  
A DHS drone that belongs there.  I youth's drone that was blown out of 
RF range of the controller (but this one was clearly under ground 
control based on comments).

But eliminate the good players then use cs-rid to locate all else. And 
non-good players do not belong in over an airport.  Send in the hawks!

-- 
Standard Robert Moskowitz
Owner
HTT Consulting
C:248-219-2059
F:248-968-2824
E:[email-masked]

There's no limit to what can be accomplished if it doesn't matter who 
gets the credit