5 ms·

Exactly. Personal data should be treated like radioactive material. Strictly regulated to such an extent that no one wants anything to do with it unless they

Exactly. Personal data should be treated like radioactive material. Strictly regulated to such an extent that no one wants anything to do with it unless they absolutely have to use it in the course of their business. After that, their primary concern should be how to dispose of it quickly and safely.

londons_explore 2mo ago
Estonia has it's ID cards which can sign things.... That suddenly means a data leak doesn't matter - nobody can make new signatures. Verifying someone's ID would be as simple as asking them to sign your company name and today's date.
- mschuster91 2mo ago
  The problem is... being opposed to a national ID card scheme is bipartisan in the US [1]. The Republicans go as far as to yap about "mark of the beast", the Democrats and the ACLU fear them being used as part of a surveillance state. [1] https://www.nyclu.org/commentary/letter-beware-mark-beast-wall-street-journal https://www.nyclu.org/commentary/letter-beware-mark-beast-wa...
  - alistairSH 2mo ago
    Which is insane. The federal government already knows who we are, via SSN, tax returns, and whatever else. The state already knows via tax returns, driver's license, and whatever else. If we, collectively, don't want a true national ID, then federal regulations on state-issued IDs should be available (something roughly akin to ReadID, but with the ability to use the ID as a proof of age or other attribute as needed). We'll get there eventually, but not before we try everything else first.
    - cucumber3732842 2mo ago
      >Which is insane. The federal government already knows who we are, via SSN, tax returns, and whatever else. The state already knows via tax returns, driver's license, and whatever else. "They can already send a drone to watch you and track your cell location and, and, and, why does it matter if they also slap up a million AI powered cameras?" The comprehensiveness of the system matters.
      - alistairSH 2mo ago
        Not sure how you jump from "ID with chip" to "AI-based drone and camera network". We can do one without the other.
        skinfaxi 2mo ago
        They are already doing the camera thing with flock.
        cucumber3732842 2mo ago
        The point was to compare the proposed ID change with the state of surveillance before (bad but still not all that comprehensive) and after Flock et al (more comprehensive).
        mulmen 2mo ago
        Your failure of imagination doesn’t make national ID a good idea. This is Chesterton’s Fence. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._K._Chesterton#Chesterton's_Fence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._K._Chesterton#Chesterton's_...
    - mulmen 2mo ago
      > […] ability to use the ID as a proof of age or other attribute as needed What attributes should require proof? Where do you draw the line? Age? Gender? Race? Religion? Political party? Citizenship? > We'll get there eventually, but not before we try everything else first. We got here by trying everything else first. The “good old days” are now. Thousands of years of progress and blood delivered our liberal societies. Don’t give it up so easily.
      - alistairSH 2mo ago
        Whatever society needs... this is why we have elections and stuff. Really, the broader point is I'm tired of giving away massive chunks of my PII (SSN, DL copies, etc) instead of just having something from the government that will say "Yep. He is who he claims." If we, collectively, decide we need age-gated websites, then let's enable that properly. I shouldn't have to give NYT a scan of my DL and my SSN to gain access.
        mulmen 2mo ago
        > If we, collectively, decide we need age-gated websites We haven’t decided this. > having something from the government that will say "Yep. He is who he claims." You’re literally trading liberty for convenience. I understand your position. I just fundamentally disagree that the tradeoff you are so eager to make is worthwhile.
        alistairSH 2mo ago
        What liberty am I trading? The government already knows who I am.
        mulmen 2mo ago
        They don’t know what you do.
  - nobodyandproud 2mo ago
    I grew up in that tradition, so I can shed some light: The fear of a national ID isn’t just about tracking and privacy, but that an individual cannot participate in society or survive if the government decides to revoke the id. Meaning, I can’t buy food; rent or buy a home; or hold any sort of job and earn and save. What we have today isn’t better, but until recently I was hard pressed to see how such fears were even warranted.
    - embedding-shape 2mo ago
      > but that an individual cannot participate in society or survive if the government decides to revoke the id What would happen today if your government revokes a SSN which is your de facto "personal identification number" today? Can you still rent/buy a home? Can you have a job?
      - iamnothere 2mo ago
        Some US citizens don’t even have SSNs, believe it or not. The Amish get by just fine.
        embedding-shape 2mo ago
        Is it generally considered that The Amish "participates in society"? I thought the whole point for them was that they're "outside of modern society", to some degree at least.
        iamnothere 2mo ago
        They participate in their own society, which allows them to survive in their own way. In other countries, national IDs have often been followed by mandatory registration requirements for renting or owning property, employment, etc. At present there are ways to get around using ID for many things, and it should stay that way.
      - nobodyandproud 2mo ago
        Before my time, but I believe SSN was and probably still is controversial in my circle. I definitely recall rumblings about it even 30 years ago. But while cash is printed (physical currency): Not having an SSN becomes a major impediment but not impossible to make transactions and survive. Our migrant workers—who are basically carrying white collar workers like me—are proof of this.
  - lotsofpulp 2mo ago
    A national ID card scheme has existed for many decades. It’s called a passport. There is no reason a digital equivalent can’t be made using the passport system, and it can be left optional, just like passports are optional.
    - logifail 2mo ago
      > just like passports are optional "Border controls aren’t supposed to exist between EU member states – that’s the promise of the 1985 Schengen treaty. Yet today, travelers routinely face checks when crossing borders within the [European] union" https://euobserver.com/198454/law-professor-sues-germany-for-illegal-border-controls/ https://euobserver.com/198454/law-professor-sues-germany-for...
      - lotsofpulp 2mo ago
        What relevance does that have to the US federal government offering a digital ID verification system on top of existing passport infrastructure? EU did border checks without digital IDs being a thing, so why couldn’t US states do a border check without digital IDs? Digital IDs are not a causal factor for these concerns, seeing as how those government abuses already happen without digital IDs.
  - bayindirh 2mo ago
    > the Democrats and the ACLU fear them being used as part of a surveillance state. AFAICS from the other side of the pond, United States Government can track people well enough even without a national ID card. They have successfully worked around that problem. So, it's a moot point now. No?
    - swed420 2mo ago
      Correct. The challenge is convincing enough people of that.
  - vidarh 2mo ago
    You don't need a national ID card scheme to do this, though. The EU/EEA is rolling out a digital identity mechanism with interoperable wallets that can hold any range of identity documents and other credentials. You don't need to pick a single wallet provider - several EU countries are approving multiple, including private providers. You don't need to standardise on a single ID. This is already the case for many already in-use ID solutions in Europe. E.g. in Norway, there are at least 3 signing providers, and only one provider is government issued - the by far most popular (BankID) is private. You identify yourself to the provider when requesting issuance, not to the government (unless you sign up with a government provider).
GJim 2mo ago
> Exactly. Personal data should be treated like radioactive material The GDPR in a nutshell...... Unnecessary personal data is a liability.
- Tangurena2 2mo ago
  The GDPR comes from a different direction - you own the data about yourself, no matter where it is stored. In the US, courts have ruled that the compiler of data owns all that data - you have no control about data about yourself (except in a few legal categories like credit reporting). Some of these old court rulings covered telephone books and business directories. > Unnecessary personal data is a liability. Absolutely.

londons_explore 2mo ago

Estonia has it's ID cards which can sign things.... That suddenly means a data leak doesn't matter - nobody can make new signatures. Verifying someone's ID would be as simple as asking them to sign your company name and today's date.

mschuster91 2mo ago
The problem is... being opposed to a national ID card scheme is bipartisan in the US [1]. The Republicans go as far as to yap about "mark of the beast", the Democrats and the ACLU fear them being used as part of a surveillance state. [1] https://www.nyclu.org/commentary/letter-beware-mark-beast-wall-street-journal https://www.nyclu.org/commentary/letter-beware-mark-beast-wa...
- alistairSH 2mo ago
  Which is insane. The federal government already knows who we are, via SSN, tax returns, and whatever else. The state already knows via tax returns, driver's license, and whatever else. If we, collectively, don't want a true national ID, then federal regulations on state-issued IDs should be available (something roughly akin to ReadID, but with the ability to use the ID as a proof of age or other attribute as needed). We'll get there eventually, but not before we try everything else first.
  - cucumber3732842 2mo ago
    >Which is insane. The federal government already knows who we are, via SSN, tax returns, and whatever else. The state already knows via tax returns, driver's license, and whatever else. "They can already send a drone to watch you and track your cell location and, and, and, why does it matter if they also slap up a million AI powered cameras?" The comprehensiveness of the system matters.
    - alistairSH 2mo ago
      Not sure how you jump from "ID with chip" to "AI-based drone and camera network". We can do one without the other.
      - skinfaxi 2mo ago
        They are already doing the camera thing with flock.
      - cucumber3732842 2mo ago
        The point was to compare the proposed ID change with the state of surveillance before (bad but still not all that comprehensive) and after Flock et al (more comprehensive).
      - mulmen 2mo ago
        Your failure of imagination doesn’t make national ID a good idea. This is Chesterton’s Fence. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._K._Chesterton#Chesterton's_Fence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._K._Chesterton#Chesterton's_...
  - mulmen 2mo ago
    > […] ability to use the ID as a proof of age or other attribute as needed What attributes should require proof? Where do you draw the line? Age? Gender? Race? Religion? Political party? Citizenship? > We'll get there eventually, but not before we try everything else first. We got here by trying everything else first. The “good old days” are now. Thousands of years of progress and blood delivered our liberal societies. Don’t give it up so easily.
    - alistairSH 2mo ago
      Whatever society needs... this is why we have elections and stuff. Really, the broader point is I'm tired of giving away massive chunks of my PII (SSN, DL copies, etc) instead of just having something from the government that will say "Yep. He is who he claims." If we, collectively, decide we need age-gated websites, then let's enable that properly. I shouldn't have to give NYT a scan of my DL and my SSN to gain access.
      - mulmen 2mo ago
        > If we, collectively, decide we need age-gated websites We haven’t decided this. > having something from the government that will say "Yep. He is who he claims." You’re literally trading liberty for convenience. I understand your position. I just fundamentally disagree that the tradeoff you are so eager to make is worthwhile.
        alistairSH 2mo ago
        What liberty am I trading? The government already knows who I am.
        mulmen 2mo ago
        They don’t know what you do.
- nobodyandproud 2mo ago
  I grew up in that tradition, so I can shed some light: The fear of a national ID isn’t just about tracking and privacy, but that an individual cannot participate in society or survive if the government decides to revoke the id. Meaning, I can’t buy food; rent or buy a home; or hold any sort of job and earn and save. What we have today isn’t better, but until recently I was hard pressed to see how such fears were even warranted.
  - embedding-shape 2mo ago
    > but that an individual cannot participate in society or survive if the government decides to revoke the id What would happen today if your government revokes a SSN which is your de facto "personal identification number" today? Can you still rent/buy a home? Can you have a job?
    - iamnothere 2mo ago
      Some US citizens don’t even have SSNs, believe it or not. The Amish get by just fine.
      - embedding-shape 2mo ago
        Is it generally considered that The Amish "participates in society"? I thought the whole point for them was that they're "outside of modern society", to some degree at least.
        iamnothere 2mo ago
        They participate in their own society, which allows them to survive in their own way. In other countries, national IDs have often been followed by mandatory registration requirements for renting or owning property, employment, etc. At present there are ways to get around using ID for many things, and it should stay that way.
    - nobodyandproud 2mo ago
      Before my time, but I believe SSN was and probably still is controversial in my circle. I definitely recall rumblings about it even 30 years ago. But while cash is printed (physical currency): Not having an SSN becomes a major impediment but not impossible to make transactions and survive. Our migrant workers—who are basically carrying white collar workers like me—are proof of this.
- lotsofpulp 2mo ago
  A national ID card scheme has existed for many decades. It’s called a passport. There is no reason a digital equivalent can’t be made using the passport system, and it can be left optional, just like passports are optional.
  - logifail 2mo ago
    > just like passports are optional "Border controls aren’t supposed to exist between EU member states – that’s the promise of the 1985 Schengen treaty. Yet today, travelers routinely face checks when crossing borders within the [European] union" https://euobserver.com/198454/law-professor-sues-germany-for-illegal-border-controls/ https://euobserver.com/198454/law-professor-sues-germany-for...
    - lotsofpulp 2mo ago
      What relevance does that have to the US federal government offering a digital ID verification system on top of existing passport infrastructure? EU did border checks without digital IDs being a thing, so why couldn’t US states do a border check without digital IDs? Digital IDs are not a causal factor for these concerns, seeing as how those government abuses already happen without digital IDs.
- bayindirh 2mo ago
  > the Democrats and the ACLU fear them being used as part of a surveillance state. AFAICS from the other side of the pond, United States Government can track people well enough even without a national ID card. They have successfully worked around that problem. So, it's a moot point now. No?
  - swed420 2mo ago
    Correct. The challenge is convincing enough people of that.
- vidarh 2mo ago
  You don't need a national ID card scheme to do this, though. The EU/EEA is rolling out a digital identity mechanism with interoperable wallets that can hold any range of identity documents and other credentials. You don't need to pick a single wallet provider - several EU countries are approving multiple, including private providers. You don't need to standardise on a single ID. This is already the case for many already in-use ID solutions in Europe. E.g. in Norway, there are at least 3 signing providers, and only one provider is government issued - the by far most popular (BankID) is private. You identify yourself to the provider when requesting issuance, not to the government (unless you sign up with a government provider).

GJim 2mo ago

> Exactly. Personal data should be treated like radioactive material The GDPR in a nutshell...... Unnecessary personal data is a liability.

Tangurena2 2mo ago
The GDPR comes from a different direction - you own the data about yourself, no matter where it is stored. In the US, courts have ruled that the compiler of data owns all that data - you have no control about data about yourself (except in a few legal categories like credit reporting). Some of these old court rulings covered telephone books and business directories. > Unnecessary personal data is a liability. Absolutely.