Almost on cue, the 'technology sceptic' was first to post. Robert Boyd from Windsor, Canada writes: "Was anyone naif[sic] enough to suppose that any of this new, super duper, high tech baloney was intended to solve a security problem?" For this reader, technology will always be the problem and not the answer. Approximately 4 years ago, similar readers could be found sitting in coffee shops bemoaning the demise of printed daily newspapers and the inevitable decline of civil society.

Next comes the highly predictible 'information is the enemy' reader. Jim Terrets from Vancouver, writes: "Well done Globe and Mail, thanks to you, terrorists around the world now know that these passports can be easily hacked so that they can sneak into our countries and wreck[sic] havoc." Such readers think that talking about a problem is always worse than the problem itself. These comments tend to be so objectionable that they are catalysts for entire commentary sections unto themselves.

The initial provocations are followed by a series of consensus from technology professionals who tend to be the people reading the technology section. Eventually, the issue is expanded as commentary on liberal society itself. Jim Goodwin from Canada writes: "This is folly. Every step we take that infringes on the privacy and freedom of the private citizen is a system that the bad guys won."

Add a couple digressions: Andrew E from Calgary, Canada writes: "I wonder how long it will be before Israel arms members of it's spy agency with 'our' new passports?" And finally conclusions are drawn: Bill Smith from Chicago, IL, United States writes: #24--I agree with you. If I get an RFID-enabled passport, the first thing I'll do is have the RFID destroyed" and Anti Elvis from Waterloo, Canada writes: FYI, put your passport in the microwave for a few seconds. Problem fixed."

And there's the debate in a nutshell.