3 ms·
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 s
by 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 agoThere 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.