5 ms·

I thought the whole point of americans not having anything like an identity card, is that they don’t want to be tracked by the government, freedoms, liberties a

I thought the whole point of americans not having anything like an identity card, is that they don’t want to be tracked by the government, freedoms, liberties and all that. Getting an e-ID will be very much against that.

atlasunshrugged 6y ago
Sure, but when you have a Facebook page, a drivers license, a passport, and a bunch of records that mean the government can identify you pretty easily anyways why not just get over it and get the benefits of having an e-ID
- pgcj_poster 6y ago
  I'm opposed to all of those as well.
thephyber 6y ago
In practice, we already suffer all of the surveillance, usability, and identity theft downsides with none of the additional upsides of being able to digitally sign contracts. There are always tons of Americans who claim they don't want to give the government more "power", but misunderstand that it already has this power. An e-ID would just make the experience of dealing with the government less of a hassle. This does skip over the fact that the US government is terrible at procurement, so the RFP would likely have bad requirements and the contract would likely be one large waterfall iteration and inevitably be way late and over budget.
- sneak 6y ago
  There is not much that a national-ID-based cryptographic contract signature provides over a standard "electronic signature" today, other than the ability to discriminate against undocumented immigrants.
  - thephyber 6y ago
    > provides over a standard "electronic signature" today What is that standard, praytell? Can you use Docusign to buy a house (maybe), pay your taxes (no) and open a banking account (no). There are thousands of IAM silos, not one "standard". I'm not interested in holding back progress on government efficiency or preventing identity theft in an increasingly online world because the two big political parties have irreconcilable differences about a wedge issue.

atlasunshrugged 6y ago

Sure, but when you have a Facebook page, a drivers license, a passport, and a bunch of records that mean the government can identify you pretty easily anyways why not just get over it and get the benefits of having an e-ID

pgcj_poster 6y ago
I'm opposed to all of those as well.

thephyber 6y ago

In practice, we already suffer all of the surveillance, usability, and identity theft downsides with none of the additional upsides of being able to digitally sign contracts. There are always tons of Americans who claim they don't want to give the government more "power", but misunderstand that it already has this power. An e-ID would just make the experience of dealing with the government less of a hassle. This does skip over the fact that the US government is terrible at procurement, so the RFP would likely have bad requirements and the contract would likely be one large waterfall iteration and inevitably be way late and over budget.

sneak 6y ago
There is not much that a national-ID-based cryptographic contract signature provides over a standard "electronic signature" today, other than the ability to discriminate against undocumented immigrants.
- thephyber 6y ago
  > provides over a standard "electronic signature" today What is that standard, praytell? Can you use Docusign to buy a house (maybe), pay your taxes (no) and open a banking account (no). There are thousands of IAM silos, not one "standard". I'm not interested in holding back progress on government efficiency or preventing identity theft in an increasingly online world because the two big political parties have irreconcilable differences about a wedge issue.