3 ms·

The reasoning is probably related to the kneejerk reaction to a national ID system, which is in turn related to(but not solely a result of) a kneejerk reaction

The reasoning is probably related to the kneejerk reaction to a national ID system, which is in turn related to(but not solely a result of) a kneejerk reaction to any sort of national firearms registry.

salawat 2y ago
It's not knee-jerk when your nation's culture was formatively cemented by literally opposing everything about how Great Britain understood the relationship between citizen and state. If you cannot understand why those things are dismissed without question, you have zero business being anywhere around them. Some systems just should not exist. Their mere existence, plus the temptation to abuse them, is basically irresistable to exploit once they do exist. Both of the systems you mention fall into that category.
- knowaveragejoe 2y ago
  Be that as it may, the US seems to have worked around the need in a suboptimal way. I don't see how that can be improved without either 1) a national ID system seen in other countries or 2) beaming into average people's brains an understanding of unique cryptographic identities that they are in charge of maintaining and using.
pushcx 2y ago
The US now has recently (as big projects go) finished rolling out a national ID system: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_ID_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_ID_Act
- knowaveragejoe 2y ago
  This isn't really the same thing, though, is it?
  - pushcx 2y ago
    Yes, it was designed to give plausible deniability. So it's not explicitly a "national ID system", it's just a system of uniform standards for identification cards across all the national territories with ubiquitous data sharing overseen by a federal agency... but it's "independently" implemented by the states, which could freely choose not to implement it at the cost of locking their citizens out of every federally-run program like, say, flying on a plane.

3 ms·

The reasoning is probably related to the kneejerk reaction to a national ID system, which is in turn related to(but not solely a result of) a kneejerk reaction

by knowaveragejoe 2y ago

salawat 2y ago
It's not knee-jerk when your nation's culture was formatively cemented by literally opposing everything about how Great Britain understood the relationship between citizen and state. If you cannot understand why those things are dismissed without question, you have zero business being anywhere around them. Some systems just should not exist. Their mere existence, plus the temptation to abuse them, is basically irresistable to exploit once they do exist. Both of the systems you mention fall into that category.
- knowaveragejoe 2y ago
  Be that as it may, the US seems to have worked around the need in a suboptimal way. I don't see how that can be improved without either 1) a national ID system seen in other countries or 2) beaming into average people's brains an understanding of unique cryptographic identities that they are in charge of maintaining and using.
pushcx 2y ago
The US now has recently (as big projects go) finished rolling out a national ID system: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_ID_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_ID_Act
- knowaveragejoe 2y ago
  This isn't really the same thing, though, is it?
  - pushcx 2y ago
    Yes, it was designed to give plausible deniability. So it's not explicitly a "national ID system", it's just a system of uniform standards for identification cards across all the national territories with ubiquitous data sharing overseen by a federal agency... but it's "independently" implemented by the states, which could freely choose not to implement it at the cost of locking their citizens out of every federally-run program like, say, flying on a plane.