• Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    Honest question: why are people against digital ID? What are the fundamental differences between that and a physical ID?

      • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        Oh, wow! As someone who was born and raised in a country that had IDs for just shy of 100 years - what’s the logic behind that?

        • Flax@feddit.ukOPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 days ago

          The point is that it’s mandatory. There is currently no mandatory ID in the UK

          • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            Yeah, I get that, but is just the case of “we’re against it because it’s mandatory”? Like, you’re not against the concept of an ID, just the fact that it’s mandatory?

            Why is that? What’s malicious about it?

            • Flax@feddit.ukOPM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 days ago

              Yes. The government has no business forcing us to use their mandatory ID for tracking us.

              • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 days ago

                “Tracking”? How do you use an ID for tracking?

                I mean, sure, digital ID would allow that in some way (although that’s already fully possible with other means), but a physical ID?

                • Flax@feddit.ukOPM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  When it’s used to check into museums and use trains and online services just like China

                  • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    4 days ago

                    There’s a massive gap between “mandatory ID” and “like China”, mate.

                    Most of central Europe has mandatory IDs. Nobody gives a fuck because nobody who checks them has the time to report anything anywhere, even if anybody required anything like that. It’s literally only used to check the age of a person 99% of the time.

                    And nobody checks them when you want to enter a museum.

    • Luvs2Spuj@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 days ago

      Do you believe that age verification online is to protect children? Likewise for mandatory backdoors to secured data and encryption bans?

      Digital id can be abused and controlled in ways a physical id cannot. There are some similarities to the idea of having a ‘cashless society’ but it also has unique problems.

      Because a digital id is likely to become much more convenient, it’s not a stretch that it becomes mandatory to verify for services that previously had no need to. You have another reply talking about museums and buses, which you think is ridiculous, but when it becomes so simple to do these things can creep in.

      We don’t know the implementation being planned, so it is hard to say for sure - but I don’t want it and believe it should be resisted as strongly as possible.

      • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        I agree.

        That being said… Internet has changed. What used to be a private, personal space for a bunch of nerds, became yet another aspect of “real life”.

        Banks live here, streaming services, whole companies exist solely online, most of the world’s finances is done online, etc., etc.

        Unless you pull a Bartmoss’ DataKrash, you cannot go back from that.

        And where the money is, crime is. I know I’ll be downvoted for saying this, but it’s just a fact of life: the Internet is being used to hurt a lot of people daily. And we have no means of preventing that.

        Digital ID might be a step in the right direction - it would certainly curb the impact that misinformation/rage campaigns using bot networks have.

        I remember when the US imposed Internet sanctions on russia, effectively cutting it off from its services (for all of two days before they found ways around it), and the entire r/Conservative became a ghost town. Something like four posts were published in the span of those two days, one of them asking if the whole subreddit is really just bots from russia.

        If every user was verified, this wouldn’t be a thing.

        And yes, I understand the dangers of letting a government control/see what I’m browsing online. And yes, I understand that the current UK administration is nowhere near capable of designing a system that’s even on the same plane of existence as the solution to the underlying issue.

        But I also understand that if we don’t do anything at all, we’ll end up in the same state as the US - broken and divided, with russia reaping the rewards.