> Ironically, there's a >50% chance that the solution will entail 1) privately hosted platforms like AWS and 2) privately hosted support services and 3) private

> Ironically, there's a >50% chance that the solution will entail 1) privately hosted platforms like AWS and 2) privately hosted support services and 3) privately written core modules (McKinsey business strategy, Accenture implemented etc.) and 4) at least some privately contracted IT people to manage the solution. That would be in the US, with it's shit managment and governance culture of no expertise being required. The Wwiss are explicitly rejecting such willy-nilly privatization; did you read the article? > There's no reason to believe the gov. will make a more robust, scalable and secure solution that other entities. Again this is US ideology about US government. In another places they have something closer to actual democracy, a robust civil service, and an awareness that some things are too important to risk the profit motive sliding to rent-seeking. > A better approach might even be... I actually agree with you here. The next step after centrally planning how electronic identity should work is to realize many things don't need to require an "official one true personhood" surrogate key, and can make due with something weaker and more friendly to anonymity. The same functioning society that can figure out devolved cantons and federated cooperatives would be excellently prepared to figure that out.