4 ms·

A centralized federal ID system, I'm sure there's no historical precedent for how this could go wrong.

comte7092 4y ago
The problem with historical totalitarian states was that they were totalitarian, not that they had identification. ID is a basic component of pretty much any functioning bureaucracy. Further, we already have near universal ID at the state level, what about the federal government makes it so much more magically tyrannical than the states?
- flangola7 4y ago
  Germany had identification record systems before they became totalitarian, when Jews were treated as citizens and decorated veterans of WW1 under the law. A person does not know when their government will become totalitarian and cannot rely on legal solutions to data problems.
  - comte7092 4y ago
    What you’re saying is that water is wet. Name a government in existence that functions without a central identification infrastructure of some sort. Having ID isn’t what leads to totalitarianism, it is a ubiquitous fact of having a bureaucracy that delivers services to its citizens. In most instance, having government id is not a harbinger of risk of totalitarianism. There are more important things to focus on.
    - flangola7 4y ago
      >Name a government in existence that functions without a central identification infrastructure of some sort. Within living memory, the United States of America.
      - mixdup 4y ago
        Social Security Numbers Drivers Licenses And before "but drivers licenses are not national" they effectively are via cooperation between the various states and between the states and the federal government
      - comte7092 4y ago
        You were alive when social security was rolled out?
sofixa 4y ago
Well don't leave us hanging, what's the precedent? The Nazis using government records to find the Jews in occupied territories? Not really applicable because the IRS and Social Security already know all Americans, including "race". A central ID system could only bring benefits in UX.
- stonogo 4y ago
  We already have a central ID system: the passport. They even come in wallet-friendly card form now. The difference is it's not a forced central ID system, which is the primary difference between a useful tool and the foundation of a police state. "Your papers, please" was a meme before there was even the concept of memes.
  - sofixa 4y ago
    > We already have a central ID system: the passport. They even come in wallet-friendly card form now. Passports being optional and expensive, they don't fit the same utility as a universal ID system, but you're right, they could. > The difference is it's not a forced central ID system, which is the primary difference between a useful tool and the foundation of a police state Laughable bullshit. Specific technical things, especially ones with actual utility, such as ID cards, or speeding cameras, are not "the foundation of a police state". A police state is a systemic thing, and can be achieved with low tech (Stasi) or high tech solutions (drones doing facial recognition and pattern tracking) regardless of utilities available to the general population. What you actually want is laws and systems preventing police abuses, spying without just cause, tracking en masse, etc.. Refusing utilities that have actual real life applications that are genuinely useful because they could be abused isn't preventing anything. Do you forget the Patriot Act and everything that came out of it? The US president ordering the execution of an American citizen without due trial? Guantanamo? Police abuses on a massive scale? And I'm sorry, it's ID cards that are the foundation of a police state? Your efforts are misguided and wasted. And again, the US federal government already has multiple ways of knowing everything about anyone - like with IRS records and not to mention credit reporting agencies and telecoms selling this kind of data to whoever, including government agencies. That ship has long ago sailed, why not actually make it into something useful?

The problem with historical totalitarian states was that they were totalitarian, not that they had identification. ID is a basic component of pretty much any functioning bureaucracy. Further, we already have near universal ID at the state level, what about the federal government makes it so much more magically tyrannical than the states?

flangola7 4y ago
Germany had identification record systems before they became totalitarian, when Jews were treated as citizens and decorated veterans of WW1 under the law. A person does not know when their government will become totalitarian and cannot rely on legal solutions to data problems.
- comte7092 4y ago
  What you’re saying is that water is wet. Name a government in existence that functions without a central identification infrastructure of some sort. Having ID isn’t what leads to totalitarianism, it is a ubiquitous fact of having a bureaucracy that delivers services to its citizens. In most instance, having government id is not a harbinger of risk of totalitarianism. There are more important things to focus on.
  - flangola7 4y ago
    >Name a government in existence that functions without a central identification infrastructure of some sort. Within living memory, the United States of America.
    - mixdup 4y ago
      Social Security Numbers Drivers Licenses And before "but drivers licenses are not national" they effectively are via cooperation between the various states and between the states and the federal government
    - comte7092 4y ago
      You were alive when social security was rolled out?

sofixa 4y ago

Well don't leave us hanging, what's the precedent? The Nazis using government records to find the Jews in occupied territories? Not really applicable because the IRS and Social Security already know all Americans, including "race". A central ID system could only bring benefits in UX.

stonogo 4y ago
We already have a central ID system: the passport. They even come in wallet-friendly card form now. The difference is it's not a forced central ID system, which is the primary difference between a useful tool and the foundation of a police state. "Your papers, please" was a meme before there was even the concept of memes.
- sofixa 4y ago
  > We already have a central ID system: the passport. They even come in wallet-friendly card form now. Passports being optional and expensive, they don't fit the same utility as a universal ID system, but you're right, they could. > The difference is it's not a forced central ID system, which is the primary difference between a useful tool and the foundation of a police state Laughable bullshit. Specific technical things, especially ones with actual utility, such as ID cards, or speeding cameras, are not "the foundation of a police state". A police state is a systemic thing, and can be achieved with low tech (Stasi) or high tech solutions (drones doing facial recognition and pattern tracking) regardless of utilities available to the general population. What you actually want is laws and systems preventing police abuses, spying without just cause, tracking en masse, etc.. Refusing utilities that have actual real life applications that are genuinely useful because they could be abused isn't preventing anything. Do you forget the Patriot Act and everything that came out of it? The US president ordering the execution of an American citizen without due trial? Guantanamo? Police abuses on a massive scale? And I'm sorry, it's ID cards that are the foundation of a police state? Your efforts are misguided and wasted. And again, the US federal government already has multiple ways of knowing everything about anyone - like with IRS records and not to mention credit reporting agencies and telecoms selling this kind of data to whoever, including government agencies. That ship has long ago sailed, why not actually make it into something useful?