2 ms·

Well... Digital identities are a natural step since we need to digitalize the society and so we need to have digital IDs like we need physical ones. The point

by kkfx 2y ago

Well... Digital identities are a natural step since we need to digitalize the society and so we need to have digital IDs like we need physical ones. The point though it's another, or when imposing them and how. In a country where 99% of homes could be connected and most have already internet access, where a large slice of population use computers every day, so elderly typically have relatives who can help, and those who really need help are few enough there is no problem helping them directly it's a thing. Imposing them (even worse than de jure, but de facto) in a country where a large slice of population have not even a home with an address and ordinary services it's definitively another. India's digital strategy, the 100 smart city program etc are just fascist move to cut off a large slice of population for whom the ruler count to have no option to accommodate in a new society. And it's not much different than various imposition we witness in the west, a small step at a time, more softly.

BadHumans 2y ago
No, we don't NEED to digitalize society. We could due with less digital things for the betterment of society.
- kkfx 2y ago
  To achieve such result you need to digitalize for real. Here in the EU the current state of things is crappy because most do not want digitization and that's so happen driven by few interested parties. So instead of having a smart card per document we have a complicated three-level system handed to the private sector, we have not much coherent digital invoices, an economist have even suggested to create "a virtual State to simplify things", we have certified mails in some countries so badly designed you can't keep then for sure for 10+ year and so on. If people instead of pretend to stop the history train embrace it and impose a certain conduit we could have much better things with much less complicates crappy bureaucratic choices for the sake of few against the other. Try to keep parts of a paper-based world in a bit-based society we already are, it just trying to be Luddites ending as the original ones... A small example: we end up in de facto mandatory smartphones for all simply because only very few have battled to have smart-cards and some are interested in imposing macro-bugs to the whole population. The whole population have tried to ignore the evolution, keeping the paper and they end up with a (cr)app instead of a good smart card.
reaperducer 2y ago
we need to digitalize the society Why?
- kkfx 2y ago
  Economy, quickness, simplicity, effectiveness, comfort. Let's say you have a smart-card as a digital ID, you need a new one because the one you have is expiring. With classic model you go to a certain office in a certain timeframe to do that. In a digital world you order the new one from you desktop, being identified enough, you can than take a photo directly from your cam, then via mail you get the new one, you confirm you have it in hand with the card itself and you get a new pin. Done. The same if you lost an ID. There is no need to force smartphones crapplications and alike to be digital. Then you have your health infos in the health system of your country, any doctor with your ID and their own could access all your relevant records. At a supermarket you can prove your identity simply passing the card on a reader, the sole data share is "you can buy alcohol or not". To open an account with a bank, you just authenticate yourself to a public system that gives the banks the relevant data they legally need and nothing more, you know they could ask for something else but all requests are optional. You purchase a home? You can sign the contract from remote with your ID. You can retrieve the relevant docs at any time from the relevant public administration as a PADES signed pdf/a and so on. All these things simplify life and reduce time and cost spent in doing anything. Of course yes, the same passage could be used to act against you in a dictatorship and so on, but the bar is simple: knowing the tech means imposing furor populi a good one, so for instance smart cards and not smartphone craplications, for instance IDs, not "digital wallets" and so on. Try to keep the old system means leaving few interested party pushing their own favorite solution against all others interests. As have always happened...
  - rangestransform 2y ago
    I think we should introduce as much friction as possible for the government to track us across businesses
    - kkfx 2y ago

by kkfx 2y ago

BadHumans 2y ago

No, we don't NEED to digitalize society. We could due with less digital things for the betterment of society.

kkfx 2y ago
To achieve such result you need to digitalize for real. Here in the EU the current state of things is crappy because most do not want digitization and that's so happen driven by few interested parties. So instead of having a smart card per document we have a complicated three-level system handed to the private sector, we have not much coherent digital invoices, an economist have even suggested to create "a virtual State to simplify things", we have certified mails in some countries so badly designed you can't keep then for sure for 10+ year and so on. If people instead of pretend to stop the history train embrace it and impose a certain conduit we could have much better things with much less complicates crappy bureaucratic choices for the sake of few against the other. Try to keep parts of a paper-based world in a bit-based society we already are, it just trying to be Luddites ending as the original ones... A small example: we end up in de facto mandatory smartphones for all simply because only very few have battled to have smart-cards and some are interested in imposing macro-bugs to the whole population. The whole population have tried to ignore the evolution, keeping the paper and they end up with a (cr)app instead of a good smart card.

reaperducer 2y ago

we need to digitalize the society Why?

kkfx 2y ago
Economy, quickness, simplicity, effectiveness, comfort. Let's say you have a smart-card as a digital ID, you need a new one because the one you have is expiring. With classic model you go to a certain office in a certain timeframe to do that. In a digital world you order the new one from you desktop, being identified enough, you can than take a photo directly from your cam, then via mail you get the new one, you confirm you have it in hand with the card itself and you get a new pin. Done. The same if you lost an ID. There is no need to force smartphones crapplications and alike to be digital. Then you have your health infos in the health system of your country, any doctor with your ID and their own could access all your relevant records. At a supermarket you can prove your identity simply passing the card on a reader, the sole data share is "you can buy alcohol or not". To open an account with a bank, you just authenticate yourself to a public system that gives the banks the relevant data they legally need and nothing more, you know they could ask for something else but all requests are optional. You purchase a home? You can sign the contract from remote with your ID. You can retrieve the relevant docs at any time from the relevant public administration as a PADES signed pdf/a and so on. All these things simplify life and reduce time and cost spent in doing anything. Of course yes, the same passage could be used to act against you in a dictatorship and so on, but the bar is simple: knowing the tech means imposing furor populi a good one, so for instance smart cards and not smartphone craplications, for instance IDs, not "digital wallets" and so on. Try to keep the old system means leaving few interested party pushing their own favorite solution against all others interests. As have always happened...
- rangestransform 2y ago
  I think we should introduce as much friction as possible for the government to track us across businesses
  - kkfx 2y ago