Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 809 posts

Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers

#301

Post by voidUpdate »

netdevphoenix wrote: post #291
voidUpdate wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government has been able to do checks on me using my passport number etc, like when I was getting my provisional driving license, so somewhere there is a digital version of it on a government server or something. Can't they just make that information available? What impromptu checks would you need this ID for? The use cases I've seen for it are to make sure you are legal to work, and when renting a house, both of…

That is not what I mean. Doing checks using your passport number is not good enough . It only proves that you someone used your passport number for a job. It doesn't prove it's you. It doesn't prove that you didn't swap with someone else (worker proxy). A digital id is a token fully controlled that opens compliance possibilities that are not possible or financially feasible by using just a passport number because the…

The driving license application page pulled up my photo from giving it my passport number. That photo of me proves that I am the owner of that passport. I recently gave my work my passport information to prove that I was legal to work there. If we need a new system to prove that I am legal to work there, then how was it good enough to use my passport for that?

Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers

#302

Post by gushie »

I won't hold my breath. It'll take 5 times longer than planned, cost 10 times more, won't do everything it originally set out to do, then won't work on the tech that everyone will have when finished, and a future government will decide they don't like it and will start over.

Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers

#303

Post by iamnothere »

somelamer567 wrote: post #283

HARD eye-roll at the libertarian scaremongering about this basic, sensible idea to tame the identity mess. * I have half a dozen different ID numbers for various things like NI, NHS, drivers license, tax etc * I also have a dozen different GOV.UK logins for various services. * When need to provide strong proof of identity to AWS to reset a root password, I have to go to a notary and pay £200 for a signature and stamp…

I don’t own and refuse to purchase an iPhone or Android device. Where would that leave me? Fortunately I am not a UK citizen!

This effectively blocks development of mobile Linux as an alternative in the UK. It is already enough of a challenge to get people to try Linux phones without support for their favorite apps, and now it’s a requirement to own a US big tech pocket spy device? Absolutely absurd and Orwellian, and from the birthplace of Orwell no less.

Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers

#304

Post by astonex »

matt-p wrote: post #266

So I currently have; A National Insurance Card (needed to get a job), drivers license and passport, one of latter is also needed (in practice) to get a job. Why would a brit card help us reduce the number of people working illegally? The only notable 'employers' of illegal workers in the UK are American tech firms Uber and deliveroo (doordash) because they allow driver substitution without verifying that the substitu…

A Brit can pass a RTW check without a drivers license or a passport - a paper birth certificate is also acceptable (and paper can be lost, damaged, forged), as neither a drivers license or a passport a mandatory. Getting those can be expensive for some people while this ID is free.

A NI number is not ID, it's a reporting number.

Lastly, a national ID is a tried and tested scheme in many, many countries and brings a lot of positives. The only "negatives" are slippery slope make-believe scenarios not based in reality.

https://www.gov.uk/prove-right-to-work

Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers

#305

Post by motbus3 »

Can anyone really point me out the real problem about the immigrants? How big is it compared to, for example the lack of funding of the NHS or the hyper funding of other initiatives such as war in Ukraine.

Or are those things somehow related? I would be crazily scared to know that immigrant care workers will leave NHS as most hospitals relies on them. The government already made clear they won't pay people more nor will give more benefits for NHS workers and I am quite sure not Brits will take those spots when Tesco express pays more for less hours of work with more benefits.

Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers

#306

Post by michaelt »

netdevphoenix wrote: post #275
matt-p wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good for them, but I don't see why we need this, or indeed why that's a good thing?

Easy and cheap regular checks on the spot presential or/and online, as frequently as you want vs rare scheduled difficult and expensive checks. Possibilities get realised such as regular remote checks (ie selfie to prove you are the id owner holder, address proof, etc, flagging odd id holder behaviour or employer, etc). Currently, you cannot do this, no visibility into who works where and where that person even resem…

To the extent this is technically possible, if the gig economy companies wanted to do this, they could do it already.

When the driver signs up, check their passport or driving license in the normal manner, and take a matching portrait you keep on file. Any time you want to, compare a selfie to the portrait on file.

Reason they don't do this is it's profitable to hire people who can't legally work in the UK, if they can get away with it - and the government lets them get away with it.

Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers

#307

Post by kypro »

voidUpdate wrote: post #258

What's the benefit of this over a passport? A passport is a physical thing, so you don't need to have a phone to be able to use it, proves who you are with the same details as this digital ID, and will probably require a similar amount of paperwork to get hold of

One of the problems the UK has is that our two primary government IDs – driver licenses and passports – are not universally issued. Instead, these IDs have requirements and must be applied for at a cost, so not everyone has one.

This means when you want to implement things like the Online Safety Act you basically have to implement alternatives to ID verification like age estimators which isn't ideal (for the government anyway).

With a digital ID anonymous age estimators will no longer be required, so when someone is trying to watch porn or view footage of a political protest they'll have to identify who they are instead of using a fake AI face.

They don't have any real benefit over passports expect for the fact that a passport is a selectively issued document which not everyone living and working in the UK has access to or has applied for, but with digital IDs everyone will have one so there will no excuse to not identify yourself any time the government wants you to.

Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers

#308

Post by netdevphoenix »

billyjobob wrote: post #279
netdevphoenix wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Missing the point. A passport is the universal identity document. It's way too valuable to carry around and expediting a new passport is costly and slow. Checks need to be done in person and the passport holder needs to be told in advance about the check (so impromptu checks don't work and expired passports get through, also catching fake passports and the like is hard). A digital ID as its name says is digital, chec…

The fact that the UK doesn’t allow “impromptu checks”, otherwise known as “Papers please!” is not a bug, it’s a feature that distinguishes our democracy from other states and we are pretty proud of it.

There is nothing undemocratic about checking whether you are compliant with employment regulations on a regular manner anymore than it is to check whether your gas installation is compliant with gas regulations or your voting registration is compliant with voting policy. It is completely orthogonal. You might not be in favour of a policy but that does not mean that the policy is undemocratic.

Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers

#309

Post by matt-p »

motbus3 wrote: post #294
notavalleyman wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the person you're replying to, just explained to you, how the government already have the relevant data. So it's clearly not about data, because the government already issue his NINO and passport Edit - I mean, just play it back in your head. The PM is probably watching small boat arrivals and reform polling numbers like a hawk. And here's his idea to fix both problems, and you're saying, actually no, the PM is j…

I guess the guy above is right. It is about the data and the right to use your face and track you everywhere. This can be easily paired with that UK bonkers camera ai thing. They might not need to know who is illegal, but if the camera does not know you, you might need to explain yourself and show an id. At the same time, I wonder how will they deal with people wearing burkas, masks, balaclavas etc

Government already have my photo for passport and driver's license, I struggle to believe that there's people here working who don't have at least a provisional license or passport of any kind.

Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers

#310

Post by octo888 »

noelwelsh wrote: post #264

I don't think Kier Starmer understands that when people voted for Labour, they were, in fact, voting for Labour, not Reform / the Tories. This proposal at least has some merit (though it is not without issues) but trying to sell it as preventing illegal work is ludicrous, attempting to appeal to the right-wing votes who will never vote Labour, and giving control of the conversation to the Weasel in Chief, Nigel Farag…

The voters misunderstood too. How much evidence and examples from the period of 1997-2010 did people need? All a quick google away

A harsh lesson in believing the enemy of your enemy is your friend.

Though mostly in the UK it's usually just apathetic "well time for the other party to have go" (due to 14 years of the last lot) more than anything more educated

Post reply on HN