This makes me worry a bit about the mental health of the sander, much as I've enjoyed and respected his posts over the years. And I'm not saying that my worrying is justified; I'm not a professional, and I don't know the man. Nevertheless ...
But mutilating your body (I know, tattoos, earrings, gages), especially a functional part of your body, strikes me as somewhat unreasonable, if not unstable, especially in an age and part of the world where the government would have no trouble otherwise figuring out who you are anyway (like, you said who you are when you presented your passport).
And as for that, wouldn't each person's efforts (assuming anyone else would do this) be unique and easily differentiated?
1. This is not mutilation. Skin is naturally shed and replaced. It is clear the author took care to protect his body.
2. Yes, they will probably be unique but it is not likely that someone's natural prints look like your sanded prints. Also, since prints regenerate, it would be more difficult to track you through your fingerprints if the authorities have the sanded ones on file.
But mutilating your body (I know, tattoos, earrings, gages), especially a functional part of your body, strikes me as somewhat unreasonable, if not unstable, especially in an age and part of the world where the government would have no trouble otherwise figuring out who you are anyway (like, you said who you are when you presented your passport).
And as for that, wouldn't each person's efforts (assuming anyone else would do this) be unique and easily differentiated?