4 ms·

> It is strange that showing ID to vote is controversial in the US and that providing basic ID to citizens for free to allow them to vote is a problem that seem

> It is strange that showing ID to vote is controversial in the US and that providing basic ID to citizens for free to allow them to vote is a problem that seems difficult to solve (or want to solve). One of the blockers to a national ID system in the US, that would result in voter ID no longer posing any substantive obstacle to voting, has been anti-government paranoia; but another, if you're not aware, has been fundamentalist Christianity and its eschatology -- fundamentalist Christians may associate the idea of a national ID with the "mark of the beast". The amusing thing here of course is that while Trump's attempt to unilaterally impose ID rules is illegal, if it were successful, it would likely be an own goal. Formerly, the sort of person who is likely to not have any sort of ID -- someone disconnected from any systems that would require it -- was more likely to vote Democratic than Republican, but in recent years, this has reversed. While I can't cheer for breaking election laws (or for a court ruling that this is in fact legal, because it shouldn't be considered so), it would at least be amusing if this backfired.

specialist 1y ago
> associate the idea of a national ID with the "mark of the beast" This was absolutely true during the 2000s. The huge irony is that having a national ID (central authenticator issuing globally unique identifiers) is the only way to protect PII, at the field level, at rest. Per the Translucent Database strategy. Which I won't repeat here. Unless the peanut gallery develops a genuine interest. In other words, not having Real ID (or equiv) enables our panoptic surveillance capitalistic dystopia.
- cosmic_cheese 1y ago
  > This was absolutely true during the 2000s. There was plenty of it in the lead-up to 2000, too. I had a family member who in the late 90s got swept up in some of the religious internet mania surrounding the mark that was tying it to the Y2K bug and all sorts of other things. It remains some of the most bonkers stuff I’ve ever seen, even in the modern era of heightened internet craziness.

specialist 1y ago

> associate the idea of a national ID with the "mark of the beast" This was absolutely true during the 2000s. The huge irony is that having a national ID (central authenticator issuing globally unique identifiers) is the only way to protect PII, at the field level, at rest. Per the Translucent Database strategy. Which I won't repeat here. Unless the peanut gallery develops a genuine interest. In other words, not having Real ID (or equiv) enables our panoptic surveillance capitalistic dystopia.

cosmic_cheese 1y ago
> This was absolutely true during the 2000s. There was plenty of it in the lead-up to 2000, too. I had a family member who in the late 90s got swept up in some of the religious internet mania surrounding the mark that was tying it to the Y2K bug and all sorts of other things. It remains some of the most bonkers stuff I’ve ever seen, even in the modern era of heightened internet craziness.