4 ms·
I have integrated digital identity solutions like eIDAS compliant government products or Mastercards offering and can tell you that there is absolutely nothing
by Traubenfuchs 2y ago
I have integrated digital identity solutions like eIDAS compliant government products or Mastercards offering and can tell you that there is absolutely nothing nefarious about them. All service providers really want is to reduce fraudulent sign-ups/logins and in the deepfaked future there is just no way around digital-identities.
At worst, with a bad implementation, to steal someone's digital identity you need to steal their smartphone and be able to fully unlock it -I don't even know if any solution really is that bad! At best, you need to provide your live face. I just checked, for Austria, on iOS the governments app requires Face ID for example. For the privacy minded: No biometrics online, just offline, local Face ID! Stealing my phone and knowing my lock key is not enough! Some other governments might offer online authentication-via-face+liveness solutions though, which are also safe, but more of a privacy concern.
One more thing: All those solutions offer a way for a service-provider to just ask for a service-provider-specific persistent identity + age verification only. No name, birthday, selfie or cross-service identifier necessary!
tl;dr - the reptilians are not stealing your identity and biometric information, this is not the mark of the beast and this makes services more trustable, safer and cheaper to use.
- idle_zealot 2y agoYou're missing the point. This isn't reptilians siphoning your DNA and iris scans, it's an attack on digital freedoms. Your phone can verify your identity privately and offline, sure. But only if the party you're attesting to trusts your phone isn't lying about your age. In other words, the only way the scheme works is if users don't control their devices. Want to go online? You have to use a locked down industry-approved terminal device (Google's Android, Apple computer, Windows 12 with a TPM or whatever). It completes the erosion of end-user control of the means of computation. Three companies will dictate all software you're allowed to run on modern hardware, attempts to run your own stuff will fall afoul of anti-DRM circumvention laws and be a felony. All software development, even basic automation and scripting, will be relegated to hobbyist programmable microcontrollers and cloud VMs. This is the future we're gunning for full-speed-ahead, with basically no push-back. What should've been an empowering technology brought to the masses, allowing free-form problem solving, communication, and collaborative solution building has been near-totally dominated by barely-functional opaque push-button solutions and constricting walled gardens. I chalk it up to a total failure of education to teach people how powerful computing can be to solve everyday problems, combined with a concerted effort by tech companies to teach helplessness in pursuit of profits.
- Ukv 2y ago> All those solutions offer a way for a service-provider to just ask for a service-provider-specific persistent identity Even if working solely as advertised, and somehow implemented flawlessly without compromising a user's right to modify their device, I think the stated goal itself is contentious. Alt/throwaway accounts are a useful (and for some, necessary) tool for maintaining privacy. I do not want identity-bound "rationing" of certain types of online content, nor do I see elimination of "unlawful account sharing" as a positive.