Digital ID: yes or no?

[Pross]

I tried it, I can't recall where it sent me but it was safe and legal I believe (although maybe that's relative to my normal browsing).

I just took one for the team again and it goes to a search for "somewhere out there is a butterfly net with my name on it" which are apparently lyrics from "Somewhere Out There" by Linda Rondstadt and James Ingram from the film An American Tail. Pretty random!

 

[briantrumpet]

Consecutive posts in my Bluesky feed are on point.

 

[First Aspect]

It's question I often ask myself, given how much sensitive data most of us have saved in, say Google or Apple systems... passwords ("Save them all in one place, so you can have really secure random ones you can't memorise!!"), bank card details, etc. etc. I make token efforts such as not saving the security codes on bank cards, but places like Google and Apple must be prime targets (and, one hopes, Google and Apple know that and have extraordinary measures in places, to prevent data theft).

The key distinction is that a digital ID would be an enabler to generate or appropriate any other ID. or that's the risk I see. At least now one thing gets compromised at a time more or less.

I think it is a bit like a passport. If you have that you can blag quite a lot of things. But a passport is hidden safely somewhere in my home, not held on a .gov.uk server and vulnerable to someone in a government department not paying attention and opening a phishing email.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

I've never seen the reason why people are so against having an easy way to prove who they are.

I already have easy ways to prove who I am, none of which is compulsory to carry and produce on demand to police or other officials.

I am completely against compulsion. If people want to buy ID cards, they already can and it has no effect on me being able to about my business without interference from the state.

Nor am I convinced they would prevent any of the 'problems' cited by supporters.

 

[First Aspect]

John Swinney, for the The SNP, who proposed this for Scotland in 2021, objectsnow because it forces Scots to be British.

FFS you stupid peckerhead you literally ARE British.

 

[presta]

Regarding the digital aspect, this has not been a good period to sell that to the public. JLR, Coop, M&S, now a nursery chain, Afghan informants etc. have all suffered from data breaches. If you codify ones identity in one digital platform, the consequences of a cock up could be extremely significant.

https://www.baltictimes.com/hundreds_of_thousands_of_id_photos_illegally_downloaded_in_estonia/
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-41858583

 

[Shortfall]

If anyone really thinks the only reason this government wants to introduce ID cards is to control immigration then I have a bridge to sell you.

 

[briantrumpet]

If anyone really thinks the only reason this government wants to introduce ID cards is to control immigration then I have a bridge to sell you.

Consensus suggests it wouldn't be effective at that, at least if France is anything to go by.

If they wanted this to have a positive reception, they've gone about it completely the wrong way (quelle surprise). They should have been preparing the ground by telling us well in advance about how it would simplify government-related things, that it's not going to be forced on pensioners etc. Instead of which they've hitched it onto their Reform-lite crusade at the last minute, and got lots of people up in arms (though we can dismiss most of the wailing from Tories, Reform & the SNP and anyone else who has previously told us how ID cards are needed).

 

[briantrumpet]

View attachment 10185

To be fair, that's not far out from this NCAP poll, vaguely evenly split (which I don't think would have been the case a few years ago... it's always been generally negatively viewed as an infringement & not necessary).

 

[Shortfall]

Consensus suggests it wouldn't be effective at that, at least if France is anything to go by.

Exactly, so there are c!early other reasons behind it that they're trying to obfuscate. Anyone who's given the subject more than a moments thought will know what they are but I've no doubt there'll be a lower mid wit along anytime soon who'll try and put me in the same box as flat earthers and chemtrail believers for questioning the government's motives.

 

[briantrumpet]

Exactly, so there are c!early other reasons behind it that they're trying to obfuscate. Anyone who's given the subject more than a moments thought will know what they are but I've no doubt there'll be a lower mid wit along anytime soon who'll try and put me in the same box as flat earthers and chemtrail believers for questioning the government's motives.

I think it's probably been a case of weighing up the pros and cons (and risks) for ever in the UK - as I say, traditionally, it's been heavily anti, not least because of the possible misuse by governments of any colour. But the poll here and cited upthread suggest that significant numbers of people feel that the utility factor outweighs the cons & threats. Even on wokey Bluesky there are strong voices on both sides of the argument.

 

[BoldonLad]

I'm not convinced.

Okay it was a couple of years ago now, but I set up facial recognition on my iPhone (work device, not my choice) and it worked every time.

It also worked when I held the phone in front of my cat.

The fingerprint sensors seem more reliable.

Well, I have heard it said, that over time dog owners begin to resemble their dog in appearance, perhaps the same is true of cat owners?

 

[Pblakeney]

Well, I have heard it said, that over time dog owners begin to resemble their dog in appearance, perhaps the same is true of cat owners?

I don't think he is the owner but still... 😂

 

[briantrumpet]

 

[Psamathe]

My thinking is that you either go off grid completely or succumb.
Any middle ground is an illusion.

It's a continuous scale not a binary position.

Data has value. Data is unreliable and that unreliability could have impacts. Those issues get worse the more data is amalgamated. eg. Some time back I made a Subject Access Request on the Conservative Party who I have never had any dealings with - I got back 13 A4 printed pages most of which was twaddle eg they had my birthday correct but had me leaving school and education before age 16 (though reality was I did 2 higher University degrees). They didn't make-up that information but got it from Experian (they gave the sources) who do credit reference ...

Government has no need to centralise information they have about me (which is limited anyway).

Lack of privacy and control over your data has real world impacts both for individuals and companies/research, etc. eg I withdrew from several long term medical clinical trials because the body holding the data broke privacy assurances and gave a load of medical data to an insurance company, China has been given access to half a million GP records despite UK security services "fears", Human Diversity Foundation (HDF - which carries out pseudoscientific research purporting to prove fundamental differences between races) seems to have bypassed controls to UK Biobank data (medical and genetic records for 500,000 people), etc.

The more organisations hold data the bigger the risk. Fine if that doesn't worry any individual but it is not for those who aren't concerned to dictate that those who are should just give away any privacy.