On one hand, I agree with all the concerns listed in the article. Of course it’s all in the implementation. Digital ID doesn’t necessarily have to be terribly implemented and a privacy nightmare, but I doubt any current government would implement it any other way.
That said, it makes me pretty grumpy that people are happy enough to have corporations like google, amazon, facebook, et al know everything about them, but somehow a government ID is a bridge too far.
I think it’s explained by the fact that governments assert a monopoly on violence, including imprisonment. The apparent risk is higher. You also can’t opt out, whereas you (theoretically, if not in practice) can with private services.
And more importantly, it’s highly visible, versus buried in a disclosure or hidden on a server. If the information those companies gather were in front of people’s faces, they’d be more up in arms about it.
Also the UK gov has has the cyber security track record of an open door with a neon sign saying ‘free sensitive material this way’ This is basically a giant government backed scheme for mass identity theft.
I don’t agree with the digital ID since it has implications to snowball further down road into a tool for a implemented authoritarian surveillance state.
But the fact everyone basically carries a smartphone with personal data that is linked to private corporations is kinda ironic.
Like the government can’t have a digital footprint of you but Google, Apple, Samsung etc can.
I’m sure these private companies are the bastions of privacy. They surely won’t sell your data or bend over to government subpoenas at the first real threat to their bottom line.
No discussion regarding this digital ID has rwally mentioned this and I find it incredibly concerning.
There should be base line regulation stopping this both at the private and governmental levels. But if the last 5ish years have shown in the world, most people are realistically comfrontable and complacent in all this. At least until the gestapo are at your door., but then it’s a week bit too late isn’t it.
That said, it makes me pretty grumpy that people are happy enough to have corporations like google, amazon, facebook, et al know everything about them, but somehow a government ID is a bridge too far.
Those companies don’t yet have an army of goons who will round up dissidents.
And frankly I’m not that worried about what Labour might do with a digital ID scheme, but the next government will be one to watch out for.
Those are fair points. However, does a digital ID really provide any additional information with which a government might oppress citizens and dissidents? Or do they already have all the same information?
On one hand, I agree with all the concerns listed in the article. Of course it’s all in the implementation. Digital ID doesn’t necessarily have to be terribly implemented and a privacy nightmare, but I doubt any current government would implement it any other way.
That said, it makes me pretty grumpy that people are happy enough to have corporations like google, amazon, facebook, et al know everything about them, but somehow a government ID is a bridge too far.
I think it’s explained by the fact that governments assert a monopoly on violence, including imprisonment. The apparent risk is higher. You also can’t opt out, whereas you (theoretically, if not in practice) can with private services.
And more importantly, it’s highly visible, versus buried in a disclosure or hidden on a server. If the information those companies gather were in front of people’s faces, they’d be more up in arms about it.
Also the UK gov has has the cyber security track record of an open door with a neon sign saying ‘free sensitive material this way’ This is basically a giant government backed scheme for mass identity theft.
It’s ok they’ll store every person as a column in an Excel 2003 spreadsheet so they’ll only have data for the first few thousand people
I don’t agree with the digital ID since it has implications to snowball further down road into a tool for a implemented authoritarian surveillance state.
But the fact everyone basically carries a smartphone with personal data that is linked to private corporations is kinda ironic.
Like the government can’t have a digital footprint of you but Google, Apple, Samsung etc can.
I’m sure these private companies are the bastions of privacy. They surely won’t sell your data or bend over to government subpoenas at the first real threat to their bottom line.
No discussion regarding this digital ID has rwally mentioned this and I find it incredibly concerning.
There should be base line regulation stopping this both at the private and governmental levels. But if the last 5ish years have shown in the world, most people are realistically comfrontable and complacent in all this. At least until the gestapo are at your door., but then it’s a week bit too late isn’t it.
I have a passport, driving licence in addition to other info necessary for applying for a job eg NI number.
Why do I need an ID? I bet there’d be some charge for it too. No. On principle no. He can get fucked.
Those companies don’t yet have an army of goons who will round up dissidents.
And frankly I’m not that worried about what Labour might do with a digital ID scheme, but the next government will be one to watch out for.
Those are fair points. However, does a digital ID really provide any additional information with which a government might oppress citizens and dissidents? Or do they already have all the same information?