12 ms·

Terrible headline. As the author himself pointed out, this has been discussed by politicians for decades. There just hasn't been a privacy acceptable method. Es

Terrible headline. As the author himself pointed out, this has been discussed by politicians for decades. There just hasn't been a privacy acceptable method. Especially when you can vote without ID. It's just that more recently it's becoming more common to call for real ID checks to access the internet. Didn't the UK introduce a porn block so you have to ask your internet provider to access it..?

jjeaff 3y ago
What does voting without an id have to do with any of this?
- deprecative 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - valleyer 3y ago
    I've voted many times in the US without having to show ID. Here's California: "In most cases, a California voter is not required to show identification to a polling place worker before casting a ballot." https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voting-resources/voting-california/what-bring https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voting-resources/voting-cal...
    - jjeaff 3y ago
      This is true, but not the whole story. You do have to have some form of ID when you register to vote. But not necessarily a photo ID. A utility bill or something similar to verify that you live where you say you live. Then they match SSN and some other stuff like that. It's a system that can be somewhat easily cheated on a small scale, but would be very difficult to do on a large scale without getting caught. I would encourage anyone who thinks voter fraud is a big problem in the US to learn about how voting verification works in your state and try to come up with hypothetical ways that someone might cheat to gain a few hundred illicit votes. I think you will find it completely untenable and highly risky. Which is why we have had so few voter fraud problems over the years.
  - jen20 3y ago
    The UK recently tried implementing voter restrictions, having heard the dog whistles from the US right. What they discovered was that those most likely to not have ID were old and Conservative, per Jacob Rees Mogg! [1]: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/20/sunak-defends-voter-id-after-rees-mogg-says-law-backfired https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/20/sunak-defen...
- suddenclarity 3y ago
  The article is about ID verification to access the internet and by extension, if it's reasonable to require ID verification to visit TikTok when a lot more important aspects in life doesn't require ID. If you're hellbent on not requiring ID for some things, then you need to have the discussion on why you should require it for less important areas.
  - jjeaff 3y ago
    Well, there is a big difference between using TikTok and voting. You have a constitutional right to vote. And for good, real world reasons, many supreme court cases have been fought over all the obstacles that have been put in place for voters. Any verification method required to vote has to be looked at carefully and gone through with a fine-toothed comb lest we allow the evils of our past to resurface in exactly the same ways.
    - Etrnl_President 3y ago
      [dead]
rcxdude 3y ago
The UK government attempted to introduce one but the attempt was abandoned (because it was basically unworkable). I'm sure they'll try again when they need to pander to that segment of their base (the current stupidity is another iteration of the 'banning encryption' idiocy which seems to be evergreen).

jjeaff 3y ago

What does voting without an id have to do with any of this?

deprecative 3y ago
[flagged]
- valleyer 3y ago
  I've voted many times in the US without having to show ID. Here's California: "In most cases, a California voter is not required to show identification to a polling place worker before casting a ballot." https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voting-resources/voting-california/what-bring https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voting-resources/voting-cal...
  - jjeaff 3y ago
    This is true, but not the whole story. You do have to have some form of ID when you register to vote. But not necessarily a photo ID. A utility bill or something similar to verify that you live where you say you live. Then they match SSN and some other stuff like that. It's a system that can be somewhat easily cheated on a small scale, but would be very difficult to do on a large scale without getting caught. I would encourage anyone who thinks voter fraud is a big problem in the US to learn about how voting verification works in your state and try to come up with hypothetical ways that someone might cheat to gain a few hundred illicit votes. I think you will find it completely untenable and highly risky. Which is why we have had so few voter fraud problems over the years.
- jen20 3y ago
  The UK recently tried implementing voter restrictions, having heard the dog whistles from the US right. What they discovered was that those most likely to not have ID were old and Conservative, per Jacob Rees Mogg! [1]: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/20/sunak-defends-voter-id-after-rees-mogg-says-law-backfired https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/20/sunak-defen...
suddenclarity 3y ago
The article is about ID verification to access the internet and by extension, if it's reasonable to require ID verification to visit TikTok when a lot more important aspects in life doesn't require ID. If you're hellbent on not requiring ID for some things, then you need to have the discussion on why you should require it for less important areas.
- jjeaff 3y ago
  Well, there is a big difference between using TikTok and voting. You have a constitutional right to vote. And for good, real world reasons, many supreme court cases have been fought over all the obstacles that have been put in place for voters. Any verification method required to vote has to be looked at carefully and gone through with a fine-toothed comb lest we allow the evils of our past to resurface in exactly the same ways.
  - Etrnl_President 3y ago
    [dead]

rcxdude 3y ago

The UK government attempted to introduce one but the attempt was abandoned (because it was basically unworkable). I'm sure they'll try again when they need to pander to that segment of their base (the current stupidity is another iteration of the 'banning encryption' idiocy which seems to be evergreen).