"Morgans" wrote:
"Jim Logajan" wrote

A "worthy" project? Hmmm. Any requirment that a citizen who has done
nothing wrong must be denied access to a public commons as vast as
the national airspace (which is a right by the way, not a
privilege[2]) unless that person broadcasts an ID that uniquely
identifies that person would seem to be grounds for a lawsuit if that
requirement appears in the final rules. Whether it can prevail in the
face of ever greater assumption of state patronization of its
citizens seem, alas, problematic. :-(

Identifies a person? Humm, I thought it identified an aircraft.

I guess you must not like N numbers, or license plates and
registrations for your car, either.

Not the same thing. License plates and vehicle registrations don't involve
tracking your car's movements. The equivalent (or analogous case) on a car
would be a government requirement that everyone using the interstate
highway system must have a government approved tracking device on their
autos or trucks that allows the government to track (and keep a record for
an indefinite time) all your movements on those roads.

I'm not sure what your position would be on any government mandate
requiring such a thing on any ground vehicles you own. If you are okay with
a law that requires you install a tracking device on your ground vehicles
then that ends the discussion. We see government in different lights.

But if you are not okay with the the government recording all your travels
(at your expense too btw), all I can do is to try to stress the similarity
in the ground and air cases and hope you see the danger that I see.