6 ms·

Could you explain what it is you find so distasteful about ID cards? I mean if you have a passport then you already have an 'ID card', but I certainly don't wa

Could you explain what it is you find so distasteful about ID cards? I mean if you have a passport then you already have an 'ID card', but I certainly don't want to take that out with me to prove my age.

jjgreen 1y ago
Could you please give me your real name "celticninja", your phone number, your address, your NI number -- oh, and you'll need to install this app on your phone which I promise will never be used to monitor your location, purchases, friends. Then I'll explain.
- gadders 1y ago
  Also, please authenticate with your digital ID before posting on social media.
  - tempodox 1y ago
    Not even a joke, but only a question of time.
  - tedk-42 1y ago
    And we never heard from then again. Case in point of how someone likes something in theory but in practice it's distasteful.
  - celticninja 1y ago
    That is not a requirement though. And if it came in I would be against it. So what is your point?
    - pjc50 1y ago
      Yet. This slope looks very slippery in the year of the Online Safety Act.
      - ruszki 1y ago
        With your logic, everything can be used, or change to be used in a bad way, so nothing should be changed. There is never a guarantee. Seriously, is there anything which cannot be changed to be shit, in the best case to be a worthless money pit? Edit: btw this proposal already has something which can be criticised: ID on mobile phones… so probably they’d lock everybody into a duopoly.
        DangitBobby 1y ago
        You're arguing that the installation of a literal surveillance apparatus should be tolerated because technology can almost always be used for evil.
        ruszki 1y ago
        No, I’m arguing that it can be used for good, and it shouldn’t be dismissed when it cannot be used for evil things by law, especially not because of future possible evil usage, because that’s true for everything. Btw, why do use the internet? It’s quite contradictory to argue about this here. And that is the case since almost its inception.
        DangitBobby 1y ago
        Everything can be used for bad or good, some things the balance is so bad they aren't worth considering.
        ruszki 1y ago
        There is no difference between changing a law more, than less. It can be done the same way, with a single vote. So the balance doesn't matter at all, especially that voters clearly don't make distinctions based on that.
        array_key_first 1y ago
        Yes, let's build the nuke and then put it in the center of London with a big red button. But don't worry, nobody will push the button. Or, proposal B: don't build the nuke.
    - gadders 1y ago
      Like they wouldn't bring it in to combat "mis-information" i.e. viewpoints they don't like.
    - EasyMark 1y ago
      What do you have to hide? Why are you against adding just a little more to the law to protect the children?
- amaccuish 1y ago
  Reductio ad absurdum.
  - opless 1y ago
    Not really. British governments have always been increasingly authoritarian. The stated reason is to stop illegals working. Unfortunately we have an ID for working, called a national insurance number. We literally can't get legally paid without it. So a National ID card ... Is irrelevant. You still need this number for benefits, etc. I've got an NI number, a driving license and a passport. Not to mention a NHS number. I don't need another form of identification to link together everything about me so my government can leak everywhere.
    - pjc50 1y ago
      NI is not ID for working. It's a tax identifier. The ID for working system is https://www.gov.uk/prove-right-to-work https://www.gov.uk/prove-right-to-work , with its digital ID "share code" https://www.gov.uk/view-right-to-work https://www.gov.uk/view-right-to-work (what does the digital ID scheme add to this again?)
      - opless 1y ago
        Yes, and to be paid via PAYE you need a NI number. The prove right to work is a slightly newer thing thats additional
        mnahkies 1y ago
        The nuance is that you can have a NI number, then have your visa lapse for whatever reason - you still have the NI number. Hence the requirement to prove your right to work through another means. Previously you could use proof of British nationality or a physical biometric residence card - but they've been replaced by the digital share code system (which tbh hasn't been too bad)
        1y ago
- tpxl 1y ago
  > Could you please give me your real name "celticninja", your phone number, your address, your NI number The police can and will request this information from you, digital ID or not. If you have actual beef with digital ID, present it.
  - mytailorisrich 1y ago
    No, police cannot. The government is pushing Digital IDs on rubbish claims (obviously won't do anything about illegal immigration). Everyone can see that. So what does this mean about their actual aims?
  - pjc50 1y ago
    They can certainly ask, but at the moment can they jail you simply for not answering?
    - GeoAtreides 1y ago
      yes. yes they can. They'll invoke one of the more ambiguous sections, it's usually the anti-terrorism one, but sometimes is the anti-drugs one (i can't remember the numbers), and they'll detain then arrest you and haul you to the police station. You can complain later, and maybe get some pounds out of it, but make no mistake: if the uk police wants you identified, they will identify you.
  - ratelimitsteve 1y ago
    there's a difference between "the police can request this information from an individual" and "this information will be automatically gathered from everyone at all times and stored by the state". for one, there are circumstances in which the police are allowed to request that information and you can say "no", and there are also practical limits to the number of police that can be out requesting. The central equivalence you're trying to draw here is simply false.
    - EasyMark 1y ago
      Especially when they drop NFC into it and put up observation posts around the city
- lxgr 1y ago
  What does any of that have to do with an ID card? Many countries have had ID cards for decades, yet don't have any digital ID system whatsoever.
  - array_key_first 1y ago
    Nothing but I thought we were talking about digital id.
    - lxgr 1y ago
      At least three comment levels up from mine are about ID cards, not digital ID.
pjc50 1y ago
It all depends on exactly when they're mandatory and what tracking is associated with them. My own personal thinking has evolved on the subject since I campaigned against ID cards under Blair ("no2id"). It is a question of trust and purpose. Things like the Estonian digital identity scheme do not seem to be bad in practice. The problem comes from identity checkpoints, which serve as an opportunity for inconvenience, surveillance, and negligence by the authorities. Remember the "computer is never wrong" Fujitsu scandal? The Windrush fiasco (itself a story of identity and records)? And anything born of an immigration crackdown is coming out of the gate with a declared intention to be paranoid and authoritarian.
- jodrellblank 1y ago
  > "Remember the "computer is never wrong" Fujitsu scandal?" For anyone outside the UK who doesn't know this reference, the UK Post Office (originally the state postal system, privatised by this time) paid Fujitsu to build a computer system. It had bugs which made it look like money was going missing. The bugs were reported, and ignored. The Post Office prosecuted employees for theft and fraud over sixteen years, ruining hundreds of lives and reputations, sending hundreds of people to prison, and causing some suicides. It eventually came out as an investigative journalism story that the system was at fault, the people were innocent, and the Post Office knew about the bugs right from the start and had been hiding them from the police/courts. "In 2024, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak described the scandal as one of the greatest miscarriages of justice in British history" that's almost 10 years after it ended and 25 years after it started, rather too late to undo all the harm. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Post_Office_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Post_Office_scandal
- ascorbic 1y ago
  I've had a very similar journey. I also campaigned against them, rejoiced when the hard drives were shredded after the election. I am now less worried. The devil is in the detail, and the issue last time was in the database rather than the cards. That said, I think since then we have bigger concerns, and if an ID app alleviates some concerns about immigration then I'm fine with it. One big thing that has happened since then is GDS – the various GOV.UK apps tend to be actually good. I recently used the new GOV.UK One Login app to renew my driving licence and it was impressively good.
GJim 1y ago
> to prove my age If you want to prove your age, there are a host of *voluntary* forms of identity you can carry if you wish to do so. Please tell me how a new *compulsory* scheme (with privacy invading overreach) is going to help you.
- KaiserPro 1y ago
  I mean most pubs only allows passports and driving licenses. the latter has a compulsion to keep it updated.
  - v3xro 1y ago
    And even then you're never asked for it if you look over 25. Which is fair - if in doubt, verify, but usually you don't need to give over your *identity* to a place that serves alcohol.
whywhywhywhy 1y ago
>I mean if you have a passport then you already have an 'ID card', So why do we need this digital ID then?
- jama211 1y ago
  Technically, they could indeed upgrade passports with an online verification feature and make them mandatory and it would work.
v3xro 1y ago
I am sure by now it has been explained by others. But basically - an ID document is like a bearer token that does not need to call a central authority every time it is verified. I am sure there are cases where it is, but a digital token that is linked to location every time it is verified is a quite different thing. Currently in the UK the law states that ultimately only a court can force you to identify yourself - by which time hopefully the purpose for which identification is being done is quite a serious and valid one. Making it cheaper to track people is not exactly a goal worth pursuing in my (not so humble) opinion. To add to this - there is very rarely in my mind a need for someone to actually identify themselves - there are plenty of examples where it's useful for *audit* purposes to have a record, or to have a role-based credential to be able to do a thing, but *identity*?
EasyMark 1y ago
Should be used for basic things like driving a car or signing up for a government service. Should be used to determine if you can make money to survive on or walk down the street without being stopped to very that you as a brown person are legit. "What are you doing in this part of town? Your sort isn't usually around this area"
ninalanyon 1y ago
What I find distasteful about them is the lies and prevarications that surround them.

jjgreen 1y ago

Could you please give me your real name "celticninja", your phone number, your address, your NI number -- oh, and you'll need to install this app on your phone which I promise will never be used to monitor your location, purchases, friends. Then I'll explain.

gadders 1y ago
Also, please authenticate with your digital ID before posting on social media.
- tempodox 1y ago
  Not even a joke, but only a question of time.
- tedk-42 1y ago
  And we never heard from then again. Case in point of how someone likes something in theory but in practice it's distasteful.
- celticninja 1y ago
  That is not a requirement though. And if it came in I would be against it. So what is your point?
  - pjc50 1y ago
    Yet. This slope looks very slippery in the year of the Online Safety Act.
    - ruszki 1y ago
      With your logic, everything can be used, or change to be used in a bad way, so nothing should be changed. There is never a guarantee. Seriously, is there anything which cannot be changed to be shit, in the best case to be a worthless money pit? Edit: btw this proposal already has something which can be criticised: ID on mobile phones… so probably they’d lock everybody into a duopoly.
      - DangitBobby 1y ago
        You're arguing that the installation of a literal surveillance apparatus should be tolerated because technology can almost always be used for evil.
        ruszki 1y ago
        No, I’m arguing that it can be used for good, and it shouldn’t be dismissed when it cannot be used for evil things by law, especially not because of future possible evil usage, because that’s true for everything. Btw, why do use the internet? It’s quite contradictory to argue about this here. And that is the case since almost its inception.
        DangitBobby 1y ago
        Everything can be used for bad or good, some things the balance is so bad they aren't worth considering.
        ruszki 1y ago
        There is no difference between changing a law more, than less. It can be done the same way, with a single vote. So the balance doesn't matter at all, especially that voters clearly don't make distinctions based on that.
      - array_key_first 1y ago
        Yes, let's build the nuke and then put it in the center of London with a big red button. But don't worry, nobody will push the button. Or, proposal B: don't build the nuke.
  - gadders 1y ago
    Like they wouldn't bring it in to combat "mis-information" i.e. viewpoints they don't like.
  - EasyMark 1y ago
    What do you have to hide? Why are you against adding just a little more to the law to protect the children?
amaccuish 1y ago
Reductio ad absurdum.
- opless 1y ago
  Not really. British governments have always been increasingly authoritarian. The stated reason is to stop illegals working. Unfortunately we have an ID for working, called a national insurance number. We literally can't get legally paid without it. So a National ID card ... Is irrelevant. You still need this number for benefits, etc. I've got an NI number, a driving license and a passport. Not to mention a NHS number. I don't need another form of identification to link together everything about me so my government can leak everywhere.
  - pjc50 1y ago
    NI is not ID for working. It's a tax identifier. The ID for working system is https://www.gov.uk/prove-right-to-work https://www.gov.uk/prove-right-to-work , with its digital ID "share code" https://www.gov.uk/view-right-to-work https://www.gov.uk/view-right-to-work (what does the digital ID scheme add to this again?)
    - opless 1y ago
      Yes, and to be paid via PAYE you need a NI number. The prove right to work is a slightly newer thing thats additional
      - mnahkies 1y ago
        The nuance is that you can have a NI number, then have your visa lapse for whatever reason - you still have the NI number. Hence the requirement to prove your right to work through another means. Previously you could use proof of British nationality or a physical biometric residence card - but they've been replaced by the digital share code system (which tbh hasn't been too bad)
        1y ago
tpxl 1y ago
> Could you please give me your real name "celticninja", your phone number, your address, your NI number The police can and will request this information from you, digital ID or not. If you have actual beef with digital ID, present it.
- mytailorisrich 1y ago
  No, police cannot. The government is pushing Digital IDs on rubbish claims (obviously won't do anything about illegal immigration). Everyone can see that. So what does this mean about their actual aims?
- pjc50 1y ago
  They can certainly ask, but at the moment can they jail you simply for not answering?
  - GeoAtreides 1y ago
    yes. yes they can. They'll invoke one of the more ambiguous sections, it's usually the anti-terrorism one, but sometimes is the anti-drugs one (i can't remember the numbers), and they'll detain then arrest you and haul you to the police station. You can complain later, and maybe get some pounds out of it, but make no mistake: if the uk police wants you identified, they will identify you.
- ratelimitsteve 1y ago
  there's a difference between "the police can request this information from an individual" and "this information will be automatically gathered from everyone at all times and stored by the state". for one, there are circumstances in which the police are allowed to request that information and you can say "no", and there are also practical limits to the number of police that can be out requesting. The central equivalence you're trying to draw here is simply false.
  - EasyMark 1y ago
    Especially when they drop NFC into it and put up observation posts around the city
lxgr 1y ago
What does any of that have to do with an ID card? Many countries have had ID cards for decades, yet don't have any digital ID system whatsoever.
- array_key_first 1y ago
  Nothing but I thought we were talking about digital id.
  - lxgr 1y ago
    At least three comment levels up from mine are about ID cards, not digital ID.

pjc50 1y ago

It all depends on exactly when they're mandatory and what tracking is associated with them. My own personal thinking has evolved on the subject since I campaigned against ID cards under Blair ("no2id"). It is a question of trust and purpose. Things like the Estonian digital identity scheme do not seem to be bad in practice. The problem comes from identity checkpoints, which serve as an opportunity for inconvenience, surveillance, and negligence by the authorities. Remember the "computer is never wrong" Fujitsu scandal? The Windrush fiasco (itself a story of identity and records)? And anything born of an immigration crackdown is coming out of the gate with a declared intention to be paranoid and authoritarian.

jodrellblank 1y ago
> "Remember the "computer is never wrong" Fujitsu scandal?" For anyone outside the UK who doesn't know this reference, the UK Post Office (originally the state postal system, privatised by this time) paid Fujitsu to build a computer system. It had bugs which made it look like money was going missing. The bugs were reported, and ignored. The Post Office prosecuted employees for theft and fraud over sixteen years, ruining hundreds of lives and reputations, sending hundreds of people to prison, and causing some suicides. It eventually came out as an investigative journalism story that the system was at fault, the people were innocent, and the Post Office knew about the bugs right from the start and had been hiding them from the police/courts. "In 2024, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak described the scandal as one of the greatest miscarriages of justice in British history" that's almost 10 years after it ended and 25 years after it started, rather too late to undo all the harm. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Post_Office_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Post_Office_scandal
ascorbic 1y ago
I've had a very similar journey. I also campaigned against them, rejoiced when the hard drives were shredded after the election. I am now less worried. The devil is in the detail, and the issue last time was in the database rather than the cards. That said, I think since then we have bigger concerns, and if an ID app alleviates some concerns about immigration then I'm fine with it. One big thing that has happened since then is GDS – the various GOV.UK apps tend to be actually good. I recently used the new GOV.UK One Login app to renew my driving licence and it was impressively good.

GJim 1y ago

> to prove my age If you want to prove your age, there are a host of *voluntary* forms of identity you can carry if you wish to do so. Please tell me how a new *compulsory* scheme (with privacy invading overreach) is going to help you.

KaiserPro 1y ago
I mean most pubs only allows passports and driving licenses. the latter has a compulsion to keep it updated.
- v3xro 1y ago
  And even then you're never asked for it if you look over 25. Which is fair - if in doubt, verify, but usually you don't need to give over your *identity* to a place that serves alcohol.

whywhywhywhy 1y ago

>I mean if you have a passport then you already have an 'ID card', So why do we need this digital ID then?

jama211 1y ago
Technically, they could indeed upgrade passports with an online verification feature and make them mandatory and it would work.

v3xro 1y ago

I am sure by now it has been explained by others. But basically - an ID document is like a bearer token that does not need to call a central authority every time it is verified. I am sure there are cases where it is, but a digital token that is linked to location every time it is verified is a quite different thing. Currently in the UK the law states that ultimately only a court can force you to identify yourself - by which time hopefully the purpose for which identification is being done is quite a serious and valid one. Making it cheaper to track people is not exactly a goal worth pursuing in my (not so humble) opinion. To add to this - there is very rarely in my mind a need for someone to actually identify themselves - there are plenty of examples where it's useful for *audit* purposes to have a record, or to have a role-based credential to be able to do a thing, but *identity*?

EasyMark 1y ago

Should be used for basic things like driving a car or signing up for a government service. Should be used to determine if you can make money to survive on or walk down the street without being stopped to very that you as a brown person are legit. "What are you doing in this part of town? Your sort isn't usually around this area"

ninalanyon 1y ago

What I find distasteful about them is the lies and prevarications that surround them.