5 ms·

You think that’s bad, wait until you hear about our federal identification system… I think people from other countries don’t understand that Americans don’t wa

by prpl 4y ago

You think that’s bad, wait until you hear about our federal identification system… I think people from other countries don’t understand that Americans don’t want (federal) government knowing anything about them besides taxes. There’s a whole bunch of reasons why, but for the most part it boils down to various forms of liberty - and tales of the mark of the beast. … but it’s usually fine when your state or a corporation is doing it.

naturalauction 4y ago
The uk (at least at the moment) has no federal ID card a bit like the US. Much like in the US it’s a point of contention when voter ID requirements are being mooted. That being said they managed to roll out a vaccine passport pretty easily.
sofixa 4y ago
> I think people from other countries don’t understand that Americans don’t want (federal) government knowing anything about them besides taxes I'm not American, I know that, have heard various reasons for it, and i consider it to be profoundly stupid. It might have made sense in the 19th century, but today? Your federal government already knows all there is to know about you. They can tap in healthcare, financial, state government information, all that online stuff. The cat is out of the bag, why not use it for something practical? A common unified ID which gives access to e-government services is the norm across the EU, and it's pretty cool and practical.
- okr 4y ago
  I do not find it stupid at all. I would prefer to live a life without a government, that issues proof of identity for me. And rather have a working economy, where the problem of ID independent of government is solved. I know, it is convenient to have a single persona, that i can use everywhere and they are interoperable. But i AM. That is proof enough. It does not need a government for the proof of that, imho.
  - sofixa 4y ago
    > And rather have a working economy, where the problem of ID independent of government is solved That sounds profoundly stupid. You mean like the credit rating agencies that provide credit worthiness identity, but where you have no control of how and with whom they store your data? So how would that work, how would the companies providing that service make money and how could they prove your identity? They'd still need to use government info like birth certificate/drivers license to verify who you are, but they'd have a profit motive. Of course that sounds better than the government, which doesn't need to sell who you are, providing an identity service. Why have a useless middleman trying to make money off you?
    - okr 4y ago
      Just take the government and a centralized ID out of the equation and it becomes an interesting problem. And why do i need a big guy, who hands out an ID with a silly watermark, prooving, that it is me? We have families, we have offspring, we have friends, we have relations, that we build over time, this should be proof enough?
      - curiousgal 4y ago
        This gives "Sovereign Citizen" vibes not gonna lie.
      - sofixa 4y ago
        > We have families, we have offspring, we have friends, we have relations, that we build over time, this should be proof enough? So fuck any homeless, people living alone, orphans, etc. ? Not to mention the utter unreliability of relying on random people (who claim they know you) for information like place/date of birth, etc.
  - paulryanrogers 4y ago
    Yet there is the social security number and card. It's a defacto federal ID for citizens. And a similar tax ID for everyone else.
- junofan 4y ago
  I don’t interact with any e-government services. They can tap into “all that online stuff” with a warrant.
trasz 4y ago
>Americans don’t want (federal) government knowing anything about them At the same time they don’t have any issues with commercial companies knowing everything about them, without any kind of control or oversight.
- junofan 4y ago
  I get class action privacy litigation notices all the time.
  - trasz 4y ago
    And yet nothing changes.
- jxramos 4y ago
  I think the big difference there is in what capacities for violence exist within these two entities. One has a monopoly on legal violence and is armed (government) the other has no such powers (corporations). You want to limit how much power you give to an entity that has a legal monopoly on violence. Behind this desire to limit power is the recognition of the sad recurring reality of what is known as democide. Also on the table here is the distinction between tyranny, trending tyranny, and potential tyranny. If you’re not a member of a society in the state of potential tyranny then it may be too late to reverse the trend. So the question arises what safeguards and obstacles can be set in place that keep people in a state of peace and potential tyranny and how do you upset things from devolving into trending tyranny. These are pretty deep questions that I’m starting to scratch the surface in learning about.
jxramos 4y ago
Yah, it boils down to the 10th Amendment at the end of the day and the US's approach to federalism. https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-10/#:~:text=The%20powers%20not%20delegated%20to,respectively%2C%20or%20to%20the%20people https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-10/....

by prpl 4y ago

naturalauction 4y ago

The uk (at least at the moment) has no federal ID card a bit like the US. Much like in the US it’s a point of contention when voter ID requirements are being mooted. That being said they managed to roll out a vaccine passport pretty easily.

sofixa 4y ago

> I think people from other countries don’t understand that Americans don’t want (federal) government knowing anything about them besides taxes I'm not American, I know that, have heard various reasons for it, and i consider it to be profoundly stupid. It might have made sense in the 19th century, but today? Your federal government already knows all there is to know about you. They can tap in healthcare, financial, state government information, all that online stuff. The cat is out of the bag, why not use it for something practical? A common unified ID which gives access to e-government services is the norm across the EU, and it's pretty cool and practical.

okr 4y ago
I do not find it stupid at all. I would prefer to live a life without a government, that issues proof of identity for me. And rather have a working economy, where the problem of ID independent of government is solved. I know, it is convenient to have a single persona, that i can use everywhere and they are interoperable. But i AM. That is proof enough. It does not need a government for the proof of that, imho.
- sofixa 4y ago
  > And rather have a working economy, where the problem of ID independent of government is solved That sounds profoundly stupid. You mean like the credit rating agencies that provide credit worthiness identity, but where you have no control of how and with whom they store your data? So how would that work, how would the companies providing that service make money and how could they prove your identity? They'd still need to use government info like birth certificate/drivers license to verify who you are, but they'd have a profit motive. Of course that sounds better than the government, which doesn't need to sell who you are, providing an identity service. Why have a useless middleman trying to make money off you?
  - okr 4y ago
    Just take the government and a centralized ID out of the equation and it becomes an interesting problem. And why do i need a big guy, who hands out an ID with a silly watermark, prooving, that it is me? We have families, we have offspring, we have friends, we have relations, that we build over time, this should be proof enough?
    - curiousgal 4y ago
      This gives "Sovereign Citizen" vibes not gonna lie.
    - sofixa 4y ago
      > We have families, we have offspring, we have friends, we have relations, that we build over time, this should be proof enough? So fuck any homeless, people living alone, orphans, etc. ? Not to mention the utter unreliability of relying on random people (who claim they know you) for information like place/date of birth, etc.
- paulryanrogers 4y ago
  Yet there is the social security number and card. It's a defacto federal ID for citizens. And a similar tax ID for everyone else.
junofan 4y ago
I don’t interact with any e-government services. They can tap into “all that online stuff” with a warrant.

trasz 4y ago

>Americans don’t want (federal) government knowing anything about them At the same time they don’t have any issues with commercial companies knowing everything about them, without any kind of control or oversight.

junofan 4y ago
I get class action privacy litigation notices all the time.
- trasz 4y ago
  And yet nothing changes.
jxramos 4y ago
I think the big difference there is in what capacities for violence exist within these two entities. One has a monopoly on legal violence and is armed (government) the other has no such powers (corporations). You want to limit how much power you give to an entity that has a legal monopoly on violence. Behind this desire to limit power is the recognition of the sad recurring reality of what is known as democide. Also on the table here is the distinction between tyranny, trending tyranny, and potential tyranny. If you’re not a member of a society in the state of potential tyranny then it may be too late to reverse the trend. So the question arises what safeguards and obstacles can be set in place that keep people in a state of peace and potential tyranny and how do you upset things from devolving into trending tyranny. These are pretty deep questions that I’m starting to scratch the surface in learning about.

jxramos 4y ago

Yah, it boils down to the 10th Amendment at the end of the day and the US's approach to federalism. https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-10/#:~:text=The%20powers%20not%20delegated%20to,respectively%2C%20or%20to%20the%20people https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-10/....