4 ms·

Am I the only one who is a little wary of this? Google having your drivers license and starting to partner up with the government?

0xbadcafebee 2y ago
What exactly are you wary of? Both of them already know where you live, and the government already buys private databases with all your information in it.
- akira2501 2y ago
  "Due to an account problem your mobile ID cannot be used at this time." snark removed.
  - gruez 2y ago
    So have a physical backup? I don't see how this is different than using google pay. Sure it could get declined, but that's why I have physical cards as backup.
    - akira2501 2y ago
      Google pay and your cards are equivalent and offer equivalent privacy to you. The digital IDs entire reason for existing is removed by reverting to the physical backup, plus you have to keep it with you, and risk losing it which also damages your privacy differently. If you'll allow me to suggest the next goalpost, it would be some locations changing their policy to no longer accept physical IDs. That's probably a long way away, but it is a likely outcome, given our recent history. If the States actually cared about these outcomes, they'd ally together, and create an ID "smartcard" standard, with special terminals, that can be used to present your ID and only release certain information with a PIN. The card would otherwise just have your name and ID number on it. Everything else would need to be digitally "released."
      - teaearlgraycold 2y ago
        The benefit of mDL isn’t that you don’t need your physical card. It allows for limited information dispersal. And it is a backup for your physical card.
- inferiorhuman 2y ago
  I, for one, do not want to give the cops access to or a reason to take possession of my phone.
  - viraptor 2y ago
    You're not forced to use it. It's an issue to think / make a decision about, but it's not an issue with this service.
    - inferiorhuman 2y ago
      Cop sees phone, cop demands you unlock it and hand it over is exactly the scenario I want to avoid. Or cop pretends bluetooth isn't working and demands you fork over the phone so they can make it work. Or you accidentally unlock the phone and cop demands you hand the unlocked phone over. I see plenty of downsides but basically no upside (until someone gets their hands on the state's signing keys).
- puppycodes 2y ago
  > "What exactly are you wary of?" Take a look at cases that involve violations of the 4th amendment by cops and the insane hurdle that is qualified immunity and you will find out.
- southernplaces7 2y ago
  So of course then it's okay if the tangled web of corporate/government co-surveillance weaves tighter and people become partially beholden to a tech giant known for being even more opaque and user-hostile than the government itself.
  - kjkjadksj 2y ago
    How are you beholden when you still have the id card?
    - southernplaces7 2y ago
      There is a very real possibility of such a partnership eventually becoming obligatory as part of some "modernization and digitization" fad of the kind that many governments love. Certain major countries already have similar and to a slightly more abstract degree, how many government services in how many jurisdictions basically require you to have a smartphone for access to certain services? Those phones and their OS systems come from only a small pool of corporations. It's naive to not think the above or worse is possible
teaearlgraycold 2y ago
I know the lead on this project. He’s pretty convinced this is a net positive. For example, you’ll be able to verify your age at a bar without the bouncer seeing your address.
- Fogest 2y ago
  Where I live many places even use scanners to scan the barcodes on the back of ID. They claim this is to do things like banning people from the establishment and to try and prevent issues with fakes. However I really don't believe this excuse and think it has more to do with tracking who is visiting their establishments. Even though I'd rather not have Google storing my ID, I'd trust it A LOT more than a sketchy club/bar having such information.
  - akira2501 2y ago
    In California I can just file a request on your license plate number for your public information. You will only be notified that I requested it. They will protect your residence address and phone number. Your ID has both a residence address and mailing address associated with it. If these are the same you don't actually get protected there. This may have changed somewhat since I'm not in a position which requires me to do this anymore but this was the standard for years. Which is why I always _highly_ recommend Californian's to get a private mail box or post office box and use that as your mailing address. Then your residence information is private and only law enforcement can see it.
    - mixmastamyk 2y ago
      Was this repealed or watered-down? "Driver's Privacy Protection Act of 1994" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver%27s_Privacy_Protection_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver%27s_Privacy_Protection_...
      - akira2501 2y ago
        No. You can still request and obtain the information. It's now a crime to use it unlawfully or to lie in order to obtain it, and California additionally added the feature that the requested party will be notified of the request, it doesn't really afford you any "immediate" protections. So, split that mailing address off, if you can.
m463 2y ago
Yes, they are also part of the DMV website, the FTB website, the IRS website, ... there should be a law against this.
hulitu 2y ago
Google partnered with the government a long time ago. The other companies also. That's where the money comes from.
oliwarner 2y ago
What is there to be weary of? It's a photo and a QR link for CA cops to be able to look up your database record. Google isn't getting any significant data here, AFAICS.
onetokeoverthe 2y ago
[dead]
skylurk 2y ago
I think Google should be wary, if this is ever popular, it's going to attract a lot of regulation.
93po 2y ago
Google has been giving the government unlimited access to the entirety of their servers and data for 20+ years

0xbadcafebee 2y ago

What exactly are you wary of? Both of them already know where you live, and the government already buys private databases with all your information in it.

akira2501 2y ago
"Due to an account problem your mobile ID cannot be used at this time." snark removed.
- gruez 2y ago
  So have a physical backup? I don't see how this is different than using google pay. Sure it could get declined, but that's why I have physical cards as backup.
  - akira2501 2y ago
    Google pay and your cards are equivalent and offer equivalent privacy to you. The digital IDs entire reason for existing is removed by reverting to the physical backup, plus you have to keep it with you, and risk losing it which also damages your privacy differently. If you'll allow me to suggest the next goalpost, it would be some locations changing their policy to no longer accept physical IDs. That's probably a long way away, but it is a likely outcome, given our recent history. If the States actually cared about these outcomes, they'd ally together, and create an ID "smartcard" standard, with special terminals, that can be used to present your ID and only release certain information with a PIN. The card would otherwise just have your name and ID number on it. Everything else would need to be digitally "released."
    - teaearlgraycold 2y ago
      The benefit of mDL isn’t that you don’t need your physical card. It allows for limited information dispersal. And it is a backup for your physical card.
inferiorhuman 2y ago
I, for one, do not want to give the cops access to or a reason to take possession of my phone.
- viraptor 2y ago
  You're not forced to use it. It's an issue to think / make a decision about, but it's not an issue with this service.
  - inferiorhuman 2y ago
    Cop sees phone, cop demands you unlock it and hand it over is exactly the scenario I want to avoid. Or cop pretends bluetooth isn't working and demands you fork over the phone so they can make it work. Or you accidentally unlock the phone and cop demands you hand the unlocked phone over. I see plenty of downsides but basically no upside (until someone gets their hands on the state's signing keys).
puppycodes 2y ago
> "What exactly are you wary of?" Take a look at cases that involve violations of the 4th amendment by cops and the insane hurdle that is qualified immunity and you will find out.
southernplaces7 2y ago
So of course then it's okay if the tangled web of corporate/government co-surveillance weaves tighter and people become partially beholden to a tech giant known for being even more opaque and user-hostile than the government itself.
- kjkjadksj 2y ago
  How are you beholden when you still have the id card?
  - southernplaces7 2y ago
    There is a very real possibility of such a partnership eventually becoming obligatory as part of some "modernization and digitization" fad of the kind that many governments love. Certain major countries already have similar and to a slightly more abstract degree, how many government services in how many jurisdictions basically require you to have a smartphone for access to certain services? Those phones and their OS systems come from only a small pool of corporations. It's naive to not think the above or worse is possible

teaearlgraycold 2y ago

I know the lead on this project. He’s pretty convinced this is a net positive. For example, you’ll be able to verify your age at a bar without the bouncer seeing your address.

Fogest 2y ago
Where I live many places even use scanners to scan the barcodes on the back of ID. They claim this is to do things like banning people from the establishment and to try and prevent issues with fakes. However I really don't believe this excuse and think it has more to do with tracking who is visiting their establishments. Even though I'd rather not have Google storing my ID, I'd trust it A LOT more than a sketchy club/bar having such information.
- akira2501 2y ago
  In California I can just file a request on your license plate number for your public information. You will only be notified that I requested it. They will protect your residence address and phone number. Your ID has both a residence address and mailing address associated with it. If these are the same you don't actually get protected there. This may have changed somewhat since I'm not in a position which requires me to do this anymore but this was the standard for years. Which is why I always _highly_ recommend Californian's to get a private mail box or post office box and use that as your mailing address. Then your residence information is private and only law enforcement can see it.
  - mixmastamyk 2y ago
    Was this repealed or watered-down? "Driver's Privacy Protection Act of 1994" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver%27s_Privacy_Protection_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver%27s_Privacy_Protection_...
    - akira2501 2y ago
      No. You can still request and obtain the information. It's now a crime to use it unlawfully or to lie in order to obtain it, and California additionally added the feature that the requested party will be notified of the request, it doesn't really afford you any "immediate" protections. So, split that mailing address off, if you can.

m463 2y ago

Yes, they are also part of the DMV website, the FTB website, the IRS website, ... there should be a law against this.

hulitu 2y ago

Google partnered with the government a long time ago. The other companies also. That's where the money comes from.

oliwarner 2y ago

What is there to be weary of? It's a photo and a QR link for CA cops to be able to look up your database record. Google isn't getting any significant data here, AFAICS.

onetokeoverthe 2y ago

[dead]

skylurk 2y ago

I think Google should be wary, if this is ever popular, it's going to attract a lot of regulation.

93po 2y ago

Google has been giving the government unlimited access to the entirety of their servers and data for 20+ years