6 ms·

> I don't get the resistance to a digital/national id in other countries. To us it is quite bizarre. It depends on the country and its relationship with the pe

> I don't get the resistance to a digital/national id in other countries. To us it is quite bizarre. It depends on the country and its relationship with the people. If the people trust that their government represents the people's interests, there is little push-back. In countries where citizens have reason to believe their government is hijacked by interests that do not have their best interests at heart, then every move is viewed with suspicion. In this case people are tying Digital ID to CBDCs and social credit systems, which is a reasonable thing to do, given this is exactly how China uses them to enforce 15-minute cities with checkpoints between them. All citizens conversations are tracked, their movements are restricted as well [1], and their ability to purchase goods & services are tightly regulated based on their behavior via the social credit system. This is the world that people who are pushing back against this are trying to avoid. [1] https://x.com/songpinganq/status/1972382547427590401 https://x.com/songpinganq/status/1972382547427590401

majormajor 1y ago
Seems like a red-herring. Does a government need a digital ID to do that? Many do that with the "free market" of publicly-tradable information + pre-existing government IDs already used for certain things. I don't know for sure how much the UK government is purchasing all that, but there's a lot of cameras and tech tracking in the country already, like those of us across the pond also are watched with. It won't reverse surveillance states but fraud is also a huge problem that deserves addressing.
- exe34 1y ago
  if they want private information, they should buy it on the open market like every other company!
- iamnothere 1y ago
  Yes, governments do need a centralized common identity if they intend to build something like a social credit system. Those without adequate experience dealing with the US system, for instance, may assume that the government already has your info and thus such a system is redundant. However, this is simply not the case. US government systems are a hodgepodge of different systems built by different vendors, over different computing eras, many of which lack a primary key relationship with something like your social security number (the current “default” identifier). Many are plagued with duplicate records, data problems, and other issues that prevent easy correlation of records without human verification. Talk to some people in the IRS or Social Security and you’ll quickly get a sense of how many problems this can create! Maybe it’s improved since I last talked to people about it, but I doubt it. A central ID enforced on all systems by statute would significantly reduce the barrier to creating “airtight” oppressive systems. While the inefficiencies in the US system have a cost, certainly preventing the implementation of more efficient social benefit programs, they also provide a barrier against more efficient social repression. Given the political animosity present in the country right now, it’s probably good that we don’t have the ability to create a turnkey totalitarian system. Things are bad enough as is! More generally, in nations where the population feels suspicion towards their politicians and bureaucrats, the people may prefer to leave inefficiencies baked into the system in order to hamper potential oppression. Those social tensions and trust deficits should be resolved before proceeding with any ambitious central ID schemes.
  - reaperducer 1y ago
    US government systems are a hodgepodge of different systems built by different vendors, over different computing eras, many of which lack a primary key relationship with something like your social security number (the current “default” identifier). This is a feature, not a bug. Even though we're only at the very beginning of the various U.S. systems being merged, we're already seeing it being abused. (One example: States using license plate reader data to prosecute women for getting abortions in other jurisdictions.)
    - xp84 1y ago
      Honestly with things like abortion, where there are sincerely held beliefs with good points on both sides of it, I think it would be less work for literally everyone to truly leave it to the states and everybody just moves to the nearest or most convenient state that aligns with their values. I’m so sick of this one issue being a perennial divisive force. Both sides have a point. Go live wherever you agree with the policies. And if the blue states want to operate abortion clinics for runaway teens from red states that’s fine, then they can also build dorms for them and pay for them to stay there. Red states can do the opposite and build state-sponsored birthing centers and pay for childcare for the runaway teens from blue states whose parents want to force them to terminate.
  - Avamander 1y ago
    > Yes, governments do need a centralized common identity if they intend to build something like a social credit system. Which the US already has to a very large extent with the Social Security system.
    - iamnothere 1y ago
      Please read comments in full before replying to them: > US government systems are a hodgepodge of different systems built by different vendors, over different computing eras, many of which lack a primary key relationship with something like your social security number (the current “default” identifier). Many are plagued with duplicate records, data problems, and other issues that prevent easy correlation of records without human verification.
tombot 1y ago
UK already has a social credit system with our credit score, we even need to pay to see it.
- pipes 1y ago
  That's a financial score based on previous financial transactions and contracts. It's a bit of a stretch to call it social.
  - asdff 1y ago
    Well, in the U.S. at least it literally determines where you are allowed to live. I don't know how you couldn't call it a social credit system.
    - animal_spirits 1y ago
      It’s not a social credit system because it doesn’t weight your social involvement in the society (political party, school credentials, race) but rather payment history, amount of debt, types of credit
      - asdff 1y ago
        Simply things that correlate to social involvement I suppose. Quacks like a duck and all.
        pkaodev 1y ago
        What are you on about? It's financial providers deciding whether you are or aren't risky for them to work with, based on your financial decisions. Not repaying loans and using credit cards to get cash -> you're probably bad with money -> lenders are unlikely to get their money back from you.
        TimorousBestie 1y ago
        > based on your financial decisions A lot of individuals saw their credit scores decline during the Great Recession, even if they weren’t involved in subprime lending. This myth that credit scores are entirely due to your own financial decisions is up there with myths people believe about names or time zones.
enlightens 1y ago
that Twitter account famously posts nonsense https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/events/jordan-petersons-chinese-sperm-factory-milking-tweet https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/events/jordan-petersons-chine...
- gslepak 1y ago
  Think you'd be hard pressed to find a single Twitter account that hasn't at some point posted some nonsense.
  - ffsm8 1y ago
    So all Twitter users are terminally online?
stephen_g 1y ago
Wow, crazy seeing the "15 minute city" conspiracy theory on HN! For those who haven't seen it, the idea of 15 minute cities is that a lot of people think it would be great to structure development of cities with the ideal of a person being able to access most of the services they want to (workplaces, schools, supermarkets, doctors) within 15 minutes (whether walking, cycling, using public transit etc.) of where they live. It's basically a target for how easily you should be able to access services without needing to travel far, and a push-back of massive suburbs zoned solely as single-family housing that force you to drive a long way to get to anything. The more conspiratorial among us have baselessly decided the idea of "hey it would be great to build schools and things near where people live" must actually be a globalist plot to restrict people's movement to within 15 minutes of their home. It's wild!
- 71bw 1y ago
  No conspiracy is needed to observe the current world, the state of political affairs and to notice where all of it is headed.
- agedclock 1y ago
  If you are going to mock conspiracy theorists can you at least articulate the conspiracy theory correctly. People are worried that it would be made difficult for you to travel outside 15 minute city via a combination of mandated digital payment system for all transactions that are tied to you identity and removal of personal vehicles (e.g. cars). e.g. Person A is allowed by authorities to buy a train ticket, while Person B is not due to <arbitrary criteria>. I've been told this has been done in China to stop people travelling to protests, but I don't actually know if that is true. Do I think this is the intention behind 15 minute cities? No. I do however think that what they are describing is possible since I've had problems making transactions electronically for legal purchases because my transaction was flagged by the bank for being fraudulent. Also in the UK the bank can refuse to give you your money.
  - xp84 1y ago
    I have also had a problem before with a transaction being inaccurately flagged as fraudulent. This could either be because an anti-fraud algorithm isn’t perfect 100% of the time, or it could be the result of a vast government conspiracy to limit my travel. I have my doubts that China, which has many of the densest cities in the world, would get much mileage (pun intended) out of restricting travel to try to quell protests. They have tons of cities that each have millions of residents. If the CPC manages to piss off a significant fraction of the populace to the point where they’re interested in marching down the street demanding regime change, there will be enough of them in those cities that no amount of travel restrictions is going to matter. Arguably much more important would be that I don’t think most people in China own any significant weapons, and we’ve seen decades ago how shy that government isn’t about just running people over with tanks until protests dissipate.

majormajor 1y ago

Seems like a red-herring. Does a government need a digital ID to do that? Many do that with the "free market" of publicly-tradable information + pre-existing government IDs already used for certain things. I don't know for sure how much the UK government is purchasing all that, but there's a lot of cameras and tech tracking in the country already, like those of us across the pond also are watched with. It won't reverse surveillance states but fraud is also a huge problem that deserves addressing.

exe34 1y ago
if they want private information, they should buy it on the open market like every other company!
iamnothere 1y ago
Yes, governments do need a centralized common identity if they intend to build something like a social credit system. Those without adequate experience dealing with the US system, for instance, may assume that the government already has your info and thus such a system is redundant. However, this is simply not the case. US government systems are a hodgepodge of different systems built by different vendors, over different computing eras, many of which lack a primary key relationship with something like your social security number (the current “default” identifier). Many are plagued with duplicate records, data problems, and other issues that prevent easy correlation of records without human verification. Talk to some people in the IRS or Social Security and you’ll quickly get a sense of how many problems this can create! Maybe it’s improved since I last talked to people about it, but I doubt it. A central ID enforced on all systems by statute would significantly reduce the barrier to creating “airtight” oppressive systems. While the inefficiencies in the US system have a cost, certainly preventing the implementation of more efficient social benefit programs, they also provide a barrier against more efficient social repression. Given the political animosity present in the country right now, it’s probably good that we don’t have the ability to create a turnkey totalitarian system. Things are bad enough as is! More generally, in nations where the population feels suspicion towards their politicians and bureaucrats, the people may prefer to leave inefficiencies baked into the system in order to hamper potential oppression. Those social tensions and trust deficits should be resolved before proceeding with any ambitious central ID schemes.
- reaperducer 1y ago
  US government systems are a hodgepodge of different systems built by different vendors, over different computing eras, many of which lack a primary key relationship with something like your social security number (the current “default” identifier). This is a feature, not a bug. Even though we're only at the very beginning of the various U.S. systems being merged, we're already seeing it being abused. (One example: States using license plate reader data to prosecute women for getting abortions in other jurisdictions.)
  - xp84 1y ago
    Honestly with things like abortion, where there are sincerely held beliefs with good points on both sides of it, I think it would be less work for literally everyone to truly leave it to the states and everybody just moves to the nearest or most convenient state that aligns with their values. I’m so sick of this one issue being a perennial divisive force. Both sides have a point. Go live wherever you agree with the policies. And if the blue states want to operate abortion clinics for runaway teens from red states that’s fine, then they can also build dorms for them and pay for them to stay there. Red states can do the opposite and build state-sponsored birthing centers and pay for childcare for the runaway teens from blue states whose parents want to force them to terminate.
- Avamander 1y ago
  > Yes, governments do need a centralized common identity if they intend to build something like a social credit system. Which the US already has to a very large extent with the Social Security system.
  - iamnothere 1y ago
    Please read comments in full before replying to them: > US government systems are a hodgepodge of different systems built by different vendors, over different computing eras, many of which lack a primary key relationship with something like your social security number (the current “default” identifier). Many are plagued with duplicate records, data problems, and other issues that prevent easy correlation of records without human verification.

tombot 1y ago

UK already has a social credit system with our credit score, we even need to pay to see it.

pipes 1y ago
That's a financial score based on previous financial transactions and contracts. It's a bit of a stretch to call it social.
- asdff 1y ago
  Well, in the U.S. at least it literally determines where you are allowed to live. I don't know how you couldn't call it a social credit system.
  - animal_spirits 1y ago
    It’s not a social credit system because it doesn’t weight your social involvement in the society (political party, school credentials, race) but rather payment history, amount of debt, types of credit
    - asdff 1y ago
      Simply things that correlate to social involvement I suppose. Quacks like a duck and all.
      - pkaodev 1y ago
        What are you on about? It's financial providers deciding whether you are or aren't risky for them to work with, based on your financial decisions. Not repaying loans and using credit cards to get cash -> you're probably bad with money -> lenders are unlikely to get their money back from you.
        TimorousBestie 1y ago
        > based on your financial decisions A lot of individuals saw their credit scores decline during the Great Recession, even if they weren’t involved in subprime lending. This myth that credit scores are entirely due to your own financial decisions is up there with myths people believe about names or time zones.

enlightens 1y ago

that Twitter account famously posts nonsense https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/events/jordan-petersons-chinese-sperm-factory-milking-tweet https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/events/jordan-petersons-chine...

gslepak 1y ago
Think you'd be hard pressed to find a single Twitter account that hasn't at some point posted some nonsense.
- ffsm8 1y ago
  So all Twitter users are terminally online?

stephen_g 1y ago

Wow, crazy seeing the "15 minute city" conspiracy theory on HN! For those who haven't seen it, the idea of 15 minute cities is that a lot of people think it would be great to structure development of cities with the ideal of a person being able to access most of the services they want to (workplaces, schools, supermarkets, doctors) within 15 minutes (whether walking, cycling, using public transit etc.) of where they live. It's basically a target for how easily you should be able to access services without needing to travel far, and a push-back of massive suburbs zoned solely as single-family housing that force you to drive a long way to get to anything. The more conspiratorial among us have baselessly decided the idea of "hey it would be great to build schools and things near where people live" must actually be a globalist plot to restrict people's movement to within 15 minutes of their home. It's wild!

71bw 1y ago
No conspiracy is needed to observe the current world, the state of political affairs and to notice where all of it is headed.
agedclock 1y ago
If you are going to mock conspiracy theorists can you at least articulate the conspiracy theory correctly. People are worried that it would be made difficult for you to travel outside 15 minute city via a combination of mandated digital payment system for all transactions that are tied to you identity and removal of personal vehicles (e.g. cars). e.g. Person A is allowed by authorities to buy a train ticket, while Person B is not due to <arbitrary criteria>. I've been told this has been done in China to stop people travelling to protests, but I don't actually know if that is true. Do I think this is the intention behind 15 minute cities? No. I do however think that what they are describing is possible since I've had problems making transactions electronically for legal purchases because my transaction was flagged by the bank for being fraudulent. Also in the UK the bank can refuse to give you your money.
- xp84 1y ago
  I have also had a problem before with a transaction being inaccurately flagged as fraudulent. This could either be because an anti-fraud algorithm isn’t perfect 100% of the time, or it could be the result of a vast government conspiracy to limit my travel. I have my doubts that China, which has many of the densest cities in the world, would get much mileage (pun intended) out of restricting travel to try to quell protests. They have tons of cities that each have millions of residents. If the CPC manages to piss off a significant fraction of the populace to the point where they’re interested in marching down the street demanding regime change, there will be enough of them in those cities that no amount of travel restrictions is going to matter. Arguably much more important would be that I don’t think most people in China own any significant weapons, and we’ve seen decades ago how shy that government isn’t about just running people over with tanks until protests dissipate.