Kinda ambivalent about it. The eu settled system used for those that stayed post brexit is basically already this except website
Works ok
Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers
581–590 of 809 posts
Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers
#582Do not worry, people. You can vote yourself out of this. Like, totally. Just vote harder.
Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers
#583Earlier quoted context omitted.
I assume you're not from the UK? If we wanted we could stop illegal immigration extremely fast – as you say we are an island so it's relatively easy to stop people arriving. We don't need drones. At the moment after the French have given life-jackets to the illegal migrants and their boats have set off into the British channel, the people smugglers will call the British coast guard and ask them to go pick up the migr…
The French have no incentive to do the British immigration authorities' job for them. In fact, Britain very recently loudly quit an multilateral alliance that involved — among other things – common migration policy. Why shouldn't France give life jackets and boats to people who want to leave France?
I agree. I think the French are doing the right thing here. I only mentioned it because it's one of the many things governments do which encourage and normalise more coming.
British politician could try to strike a deal with the French to stop them helping individual who try to enter the UK illegally, but obviously it would only make sense for them to do that if the British were also trying to stop people entering the country illegally. Like you say, we can't expect the French to defend UK borders.
In regards to leaving the EU this wouldn't change the situation meaningfully, it would just allow for more cooperation in how illegal migrants are distributed across Europe. Like the UK, EU countries are also legally not allowed to deport Afghans. It's not as if the EU doesn't face similar problems.
Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers
#584Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they have a medical incident and go to a hospital emergency room, are they treated?
Do you know how much money the immigrants pay as taxes, health surcharge and National Insurance contributions in exchange for the right to live and work in the UK? Don't forget that the taxes, health surcharge and NI contributions of the immigrations are literally funding the NHS! I think it is fair to expect the contributors to get treatment when they are contributing so much to it.
In my experience, immigrants have low paying jobs and regularly use cash to avoid paying taxes. Most have no sense whatsoever of cohesion with the country they live in and instead make groups of similar culture that don't really try to fit in.
Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers
#585[flagged]
> Isn't a larger issue the number of immigrants who are NOT contributing to the economy, The bigger issue is people not contributing to the economy. Let’s not peg laziness as an immigration problem because British people are equally lazy. > The other complaint I often see is immigrants' failure to assimilate to British norms, language, and culture. If we forced people to conform to British norms then we wouldn’t enjo…
Major difference between visiting a place and emigrating there. How many cultures actually learn another language just to go on their annual vacation? You seem to be arguing simultaneously that the Brits are worse than average when it comes to adapting to local norms as tourists, while also suggesting that the people moving to Britain permanently shouldn't have to?
There's nothing wrong with a culture adapting over time without losing their identity, like your example of Brits deciding to add the kebab. But a small country can't preserve their identity when they are overloaded by so many immigrants coming in at once who FORCE their ways on their new home. Think of it as Push vs Pull, there's a difference.
Every country having a unique culture makes the world more interesting. Imagine how boring it would be if you saved up for a trip to Japan/Kenya/Chile/etc, only to find that almost everyone there was a white English-speaking American living the exact same lifestyle you have at home? Leftists would in that case be empathetic toward the remaining indigenous minority who feel their historic way of life was killed off against their will. Why should it be any different if you swap the country and nationalities in this example to what is happening in the UK?
I am an immigrant myself, and a fairly liberal one at that. But I made the effort to come to my new home legally and assimilate to the best of my ability. I'm not sure why I should hold others to a lower standard.
Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers
#586Earlier quoted context omitted.
Countries have a right of controlling immigration in their territory. Letting illegal immigrants stay and work essentially negates that right.
a) if it's illegal then the country isn't letting them do it. b) if your solution to it is that everyone else must have a mandatory state surveillance card powered by Palantir, Infosys, or Fujitsu Horizon so that you know who to target your hate at, you need to be forced back to the drawing board. We fought World War II against the "papers please" people who were using those documents to clear out undesirables. "stre…
> if it's illegal then the country isn't letting them do it.
Parent's suggestion was to make all illegal immigrants able to work legally, no question asked. This is equivalent to legalize all illegal immigrants, which is not a solution, it's a capitulation.
> if your solution to it is that everyone else must have a mandatory state surveillance card powered by
Well, no. The government is introducing a surveillance card because they always wanted to do that. They are able to use migrants as an excuse because every other means of controlling asylum seekers during their examination period has been made impossible.
To be absolutely clear, the problem is not legal migrants entering the country or asylum seekers seeking asylum. The problem is asylum seekers using the asylum process as a loophole to enter the country and disappear from the government's radar. The government is unable to close the loophole and now it is using the mere existence of the loophole to justify mass surveillance of everyone but those who should be watched.
Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers
#587Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm against the ID, but the more good faith reason for a database entry is it should eliminate fake IDs.
Doesn't a physically held digital ID also do that? Assuming the encryption is strong, verifying that the data on the ID has the proper cryptographic signature should provide assurance that the ID is real, shouldn't it? I guess, depending on how it's implemented, maybe an ID could be cloned and still appear valid, but that seems like a possibility for the UK's approach as well (the clone would just point to the same d…
Yes, I think you're probably right. But it still solves other problems such as "the app is a lookalike". If the app is basically an ID delivery mechanism that allows an operator to call up your photo, it becomes a relatively foolproof way to identify you accurately.
Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers
#588A secure, optional digital ID could be useful. But not in today’s UK. Why? Because the state has already shown it can’t be trusted with our data. - Snoopers’ Charter (Investigatory Powers Act 2016): ISPs must keep a year’s worth of records of which websites you visit. More than 40 agencies—from MI5 to the Welsh Ambulance Service—can request it. MI5 has already broken the rules and kept data it shouldn’t have. - Encry…
Was reading through your post, finding it difficult to find fault with anything you were saying, but something wasn't sitting right. And then ... > I'm certain it's worked well in other countries It has! In the Netherlands for example, it's just an incredibly convenient system, and if there's anything dodgy going on I'm not aware of it. So what makes the UK so different to the Netherlands? Genuine question, because I…
So the Netherlands may not be the best example to use as a positive example here.
Notoriously, the national identity system was used during World War II as a system for discovering and eliminating the Jewish community[1]. The lessons learned from that are a frequent topic of discussion in civil liberties groups, and the Dutch experience is often cited, both global conversations and within the Netherlands -- e.g. On Liberation Day 2015, Bits of Freedom held its annual Godwin Lecture on the risks of prioritising ID efficiency over civil liberties[2].
It may be that special protections were coded into the current system to prevent this from happening again, I don't know the details.
Certainly, the reputation for how obligatory papers have been (mis)used in mainland Europe since Napoleonic times have fed into the anglo world's suspicion around introducing similar regulations[3]. There are several recurring memes around how compulsory documents are a sign of an authoritarian environment.
[1] - https://jck.nl/en/agenda/identity-cards-and-forgeries
[2] - https://www.bitsoffreedom.nl/2015/04/30/during-world-war-ii-...
Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers
#589Earlier quoted context omitted.
Considering that up until a couple decades ago women would be ostracized from society for disclosing that they were raped, that isn't surprising.
Thats a bold statement - certainly possibly as a factor but to 4x it that seems unlikely. It sounds like you are callously dismissing valid concerns.
Why use absolute numbers rather than per capita?
What is the link between rape and immigration?
Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers
#590Earlier quoted context omitted.
All it takes is one breach or vulnerability and then yes, they DO have access to all your data. Imagine someone steals your driver's license. No biggie. Now imagine they steal your identity which is linked to everything you ever do.
> All it takes is one breach or vulnerability and then yes, they DO have access to all your data. No they don't. If they breach the health system, they don't have access to tax returns. Just because people are identified by a single ID number doesn't mean all their data is being stored on the same server. And for purely organizational reasons, that's incredibly unlikely to happen. And I don't know what you mean by "s…
When a credential is stolen, its validity across multiple unrelated services is often checked by credential stuffing. That's just one type of simple attack.
Has cybercrime been rendered obsolete with a government credential? Why is this master account immune to theft? On the contrary, it appears to be a credential that once stolen, could be more impactful than having your primary email account and phone compromised.
It's reasonable to be concerned even just from an infosec perspective.