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

UK Petition: Do not introduce Digital ID cards

petition.parliament.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 373 posts

Re: UK Petition: Do not introduce Digital ID cards

#251

Post by n4r9 »

oncallthrow wrote: post #79
teamonkey wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is a criminal offense in the UK to use insulting words in public, or to send any message online that anyone could find insulting or offensive (whether any one does or not is irreverent). This is categorically untrue.

The latter part at least is true. Sending "grossly offensive" messages is illegal under the Malicious Communications Act 1988 and the Communications Act 2003, specifically Section 127: > a person is guilty of an offence if he— > (a)sends by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character; or > (b)causes any such m…

The full wording of the text is:

> A person is guilty of an offence if, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, he—

> [F1(a)sends by means of a public electronic communications network, a message that he knows to be false,]

> [F1(b)causes such a message to be sent; or]

> (c)persistently makes use of a public electronic communications network.

Re: UK Petition: Do not introduce Digital ID cards

#252

Post by username332211 »

SXX wrote: post #248
yaro330 wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As if this wasn't possible before digital ID was introduced. The only difference was that you got a conscription notice after you tried to leave and realised that you can't.

Blocking all the banks and everything? Nope it wasn't possible. You need to build a lot of tech first to implement digital Gulag.

I really doubt that. America's Congress seems to have very little difficulty in debanking people all across Europe, and obviously, they have no access to any European identity system. Canada infamously froze the bank accounts of anyone donating to anti-government protest movements and it's one of the nations without a comprehensive identification system.

KYC has already killed any financial privacy people may have had.

Re: UK Petition: Do not introduce Digital ID cards

#253

Post by wkat4242 »

phantomathkg wrote: post #207
wkat4242 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because the alternative is that we provide our passport to every online service that 'needs' to verify our identity. I really really really don't want to 'verify my identity' everywhere. Why the F is that normalised these days?? If I buy something online my payment and delivery address is all they should need. And all they've had to have for the last 30 years > I'd much rather the government, who already know every…

As an adult, you probably need to authenticate yourself in the following situation. opening a bank account, getting a credit card, getting a mortgage or a loan, buying a flight ticket, signing up for internet service, signing for mobile services, buying a concert ticket and the list goes on. What's common here is the service provider need to know you are actually the person say it is you and not someone else. Back in…

For a flight ticket I just ID myself at the airport so that's not an issue. For concert tickets I don't need to do this now. For internet service I absolutely don't need that, all they need to know is that I pay.

And mortgage, bank etc I just do on premise of course. These things are rare and important enough to warrant to just go there.

Re: UK Petition: Do not introduce Digital ID cards

#254

Post by wkat4242 »

agnishom wrote: post #219
crazygringo wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I buy something online my payment and delivery address is all they should need. That's what verifying your identity is for . The payment. This cuts down on fraud. My credit cards often require me to enter a code they text me for a purchase to go through, when it's somewhere online I've never shopped before. That's confirming my identity. And my credit card needed my identity originally to look up my credit histo…

The "credit card" model for buying stuff seems to be flawed. When you give some company your credit card number and CVV to buy something, they could always turn around and give the number to someone else. The fix is very simple, but requires more interaction: (1) You ask merchant for stuff (2) Merchant sends you a "money claim" (3) you sign your money claim (4) the merchant takes the signed claim to the bank (5) the…

Absolutely, credit cards are insanely insecure, everything that is needed is written on it. I don't know why we are stuck with this archaic American system. They patched it with a form of 2FA (Mastercard 3D Secure / Visa whatever) but it's still really patchy and in many cases is not even triggered at all even for big purchases.

But here in Europe we have much better payment methods like iDeal in Netherlands and Bizum in Spain (now going pan-EU with Wero)

Re: UK Petition: Do not introduce Digital ID cards

#255

Post by wkat4242 »

ACCount37 wrote: post #140
wkat4242 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because the alternative is that we provide our passport to every online service that 'needs' to verify our identity. I really really really don't want to 'verify my identity' everywhere. Why the F is that normalised these days?? If I buy something online my payment and delivery address is all they should need. And all they've had to have for the last 30 years > I'd much rather the government, who already know every…

Given the ongoing "age verification" fiasco, I'd be quite wary of giving UK government any more digital powers. They don't seem to be any good at using what they have.

Yeah age verification is another such idiocy. The EU is starting this BS as well. Great way for conservative politicians to make a name for themselves with their backers, but other than that it's not effective at all, considering the torrents are full of this stuff with no gating whatsoever.

Besides, parenting is the parents' job.

Re: UK Petition: Do not introduce Digital ID cards

#256

Post by orwin »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #119
reorder9695 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK government has justified this with reducing the amount of illegal workers. To work legally currently you need an NI number, this is not an improvement on that system other than requiring everyone to have a phone (probably with safetynet checks to ensure it can't be running a custom rom). I personally do not trust the government one little bit and am sure they'll find some way to abuse this, as they have just a…

>given their recent penchant for arresting protesters? A protest group attacked a military base causing £millions of damage. They got censured, as a terrorist organisation. "Protestors" decided they wanted to support that specific organisation, taking focus away from their message and chasing after something the government simply can't countenance: allowing protestors to ruin our defensive capabilities, at immense ex…

Terrorism is targeting civilians or civilian infrastrucure to further a political goal.

Terrorism have a bad rep, but it was used successfully in South africa to remove apartheid, with the French resistance and a lot of anti-colonization movement. Targeting fuel depots and the Crimea bridge can also be considered terrorism (and is, by the russian).

I personnally think we ought to distinguish terrorism which mostly target civilians from terrorism on which civilan death are side-effect, but the US state department calling terrorists people who only killed military targets during the Irak/Afghanistan war diluted the meaning of the word further. I'm trying to push back on that, because when the meaning of terrorism is diluted enough, it stop to be a good word to describe a phenomenon we ought to stop, and start to be a word used by politician to target what they don't like.

Re: UK Petition: Do not introduce Digital ID cards

#257

Post by graemep »

uyzstvqs wrote: post #57

We need to clearly define some stuff around Digital ID, since people seem to be using the term for distinctly different things. There's (1) eGovernment platforms, where you can handle government-related business online using a login. There's (2) Digital ID cards, where you can use your phone in place of a physical ID or drivers license in real life. And then there's (3) full EU-proposed-style Digital ID, where govern…

The suspicion is that the government will introduce it as (2) but it will be extended to replace physical ID, especially as the government has discussed making driving licences digital. On top of that once introduced it is likely that you will need to provide ID for more things, possibly including (3).

Re: UK Petition: Do not introduce Digital ID cards

#258

Post by [deleted] »

reorder9695 wrote: post #89
skeletal88 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our system in Estonia works well. I don't get the resistance to a digital/national id in other countries. To us it is quite bizarre. Some have explained it with a lack of trust between citizens and the country. But without such digital id it is impossible to have such digital government services as we have here. The government services need to verify and autheticate the citizen, so they only access their own data and…

The UK government has justified this with reducing the amount of illegal workers. To work legally currently you need an NI number, this is not an improvement on that system other than requiring everyone to have a phone (probably with safetynet checks to ensure it can't be running a custom rom). I personally do not trust the government one little bit and am sure they'll find some way to abuse this, as they have just a…

[deleted]

Re: UK Petition: Do not introduce Digital ID cards

#259

Post by raesene9 »

mulmen wrote: post #241
raesene9 wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Possibly, although they don't seem very slowed down at the moment... My feeling is though that digital ID can have benefits which shouldn't be discounted when considering it. Specifically some people have problems with current age verification due to lack of things like passports and driver's licenses which are often used as stand-ins for digital ID. Also it can make a lot of very nonsensical processes better. Things…

Is there something about digital IDs that make them easier to issue than passports? I understand what you are saying that they could have benefits but is that an inherent problem with passports or just bureaucracy?

UK passports cost almost £100, so a lot of people aren't going to get one unless they need to go abroad. I'd expect a required UK digital ID to be free at point of issue (otherwise there's not much point in it).

Re: UK Petition: Do not introduce Digital ID cards

#260

Post by cowboy_henk »

tomatocracy wrote: post #236
reorder9695 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK government has justified this with reducing the amount of illegal workers. To work legally currently you need an NI number, this is not an improvement on that system other than requiring everyone to have a phone (probably with safetynet checks to ensure it can't be running a custom rom). I personally do not trust the government one little bit and am sure they'll find some way to abuse this, as they have just a…

> To work legally currently you need an NI number More than this, employers are already required to verify right to work when they employ someone, either by physically seeing a passport or by means of an existing government system which allows them to verify visa status with an online "share code". They can be fined if they don't. There's zero reason to believe employers which currently ignore this requirement (and l…

Currently enforcement is expensive, because in order to prove that somebody is/isn't allowed to work, you need to first identify them. Without any way of identifying workers, how could the government make the case that a company is employing people illegally? Generally crime incidence is higher when chances of getting caught are low, so as long as the government cannot practically enforce these kinds of laws, employers are more likely to continue breaking them.
Post reply on HN