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

Digital ID – The New Chains of Capitalist Surveillance

theslowburningfuse.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 215 posts

Re: Digital ID – The New Chains of Capitalist Surveillance

#91

Post by Brian_K_White »

skrebbel wrote: post #15
stavros wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not against digital ID, but I am very much against perfect law enforcement. Society evolves, and things that used to be unthinkable (eg gay marriage) slowly become acceptable. To become acceptable, however, they need to be allowed to be done, even if illegally. If you arrested every homosexual the moment they kissed someone, then homosexuality would never have become legal. Perfect enforcement leads to an ossifie…

This is the part of the argument I don’t get. A digital ID system like the one in NL is basically just a login system. It’s oauth for public services, not too different from “sign in with Google”. How does that lead to perfect law enforcement? Like, how does it prevent homosexuals from kissing? I don't mean this dismissively. I assume there is a series of steps that make sense that I’m not seeing.

But no one should use sign in with google.

Are you saying that it's 100% garanteed optional in all situations? It has no power to be used to control or even coerce you or discriminate against you or build a profile and track you which can be used at a later date by a different party when a new political wind decides it finds you inconvenient? I find all of that hard to believe while still performing the convenience function let alone any legitimate law enforcement function.

Re: Digital ID – The New Chains of Capitalist Surveillance

#92

Post by buildfocus »

agnishom wrote: post #67
skrebbel wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the part of the argument I don’t get. A digital ID system like the one in NL is basically just a login system. It’s oauth for public services, not too different from “sign in with Google”. How does that lead to perfect law enforcement? Like, how does it prevent homosexuals from kissing? I don't mean this dismissively. I assume there is a series of steps that make sense that I’m not seeing.

The main concern here is that it will create a narrow bridge (i.e, the digital ID system) between people and various services and opportunities which will make it an easy target for people who wish to wield power against someone. Perhaps your digital ID is needed to open a bank account, get a phone number, sign up for insurance, etc. Now, suppose some fascist government comes into power. They could start cancelling t…

We already have exactly this right now, without digital ids, it's not even theoretical. The government blocks plenty of residents from aspects of society (eg can't work based on visa rules, can't access public/health services at all without legal residency). Currently that's enforced by random members of e.g. medical staff looking at your skin colour to decide whether to ask to check your physical paperwork before they'll look at your weird looking mole. Governments enforce plenty of paperwork checks & blocks today. I think a digital id strictly improves this scenario.

Re: Digital ID – The New Chains of Capitalist Surveillance

#93

Post by afandian »

ta20240528 wrote: post #59
jcgl wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If smartphones are to be a requirement for participation in civil society, privacy- and freedom-preserving smartphones are needed at the very least. People shouldn't be required to submit to some company's Terms of Service in order to participate in society.

Should everyone be required to use private banks to access e.g. foreign exchange? The answer is yes: which is why banks are licensed and have ombudsmen. As are telcos. No modern society is going to maintain a parallel government economy to serve the vanishingly small minority who live in fear of private companies. Perhaps they should (IDK), but they won't.

> live in fear of private companies

It's not the _concept_ of private companies. It's specific things that those specific companies do. e.g.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-30/google-an...

Meaningful regulation would mean e.g. air-gapped infrastructure so they can't make inadvertent privacy mistakes. And guaranteed service levels, and a service of last resort.

Google have based built a business model without accountability and transparency. Which is fine, as long as we're not forced to use them by the state.

Re: Digital ID – The New Chains of Capitalist Surveillance

#94

Post by agnishom »

shangofox wrote: post #52
Muromec wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can explain the logic behind it. The first step you need to take is view a government as a hostile entity. It's not your government, it's occupational government. It's unjust by default and you don't agree with the rules it makes, including immigration and taxes. Now imagine there are three arms of the government -- the one that collects taxes, the one that administers unemployment benefits and the other, which giv…

But the government can already do all that without Digital ID. That's my question with the fear mongering. A hostile government can already link your data from all sorts of places. Digital ID at least helps us for more security. Without Digital ID + Hostile Government you have the worst of both worlds.

"But the government can already do all that without Digital ID."

That may be true, but the point is that it makes law enforcement less perfect, and that can be good. That is the point "stavros" is making.

Rosa parks broke the law by seating on a seat where she was "not supposed to". Hypothetically, if there were a quick ID check machine on the bus, it could have just prevented the whole thing from happening at all.

Re: Digital ID – The New Chains of Capitalist Surveillance

#95

Post by mytailorisrich »

buildfocus wrote: post #78
pjc50 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've spoken to friends who have foreign relatives and they've also pointed out the problem the UK has which is Lots of countries have this circularity, including Continental ones with ID systems, and I think it's an intentional anti-immigrant measure.

For Spain at least, most banks have foreigner accounts you can open with a passport, and convert into a normal account once you have local id later. It's a mildly unusual setup (and a bit confusing when you're new) but it's pretty widely available and it's not a significant blocker. There's plenty of other challenges and structural disadvantages as an immigrant, but this one at least isn't too bad. If anything, there…

It is not a problem to open a bank account with a foreign passport in the UK, and most banks have accounts for those who've just moved to the UK. Hundreds of thousands of people move to the UK every year...

Re: Digital ID – The New Chains of Capitalist Surveillance

#96

Post by renegat0x0 »

There are two sides of the story, as usual

- we already have some forms of IDs. Most of us have personal ID, driving license, you data exist in government tables

- we already have some forms of IDs online. Everything is stored per email address, and phone address

- this makes some people do not care

- until government starts using it for nefarious reasons. All it takes is one president to change, one super power to shift

- people are ignorant, until it is too late

- the problem with digital ID is with centralization, that it is goldmine for hackers, it can be used to spy on you if all your data are in one bucket

- therefore people who say that they have digital ID lack imagination on what can happen

- it all works, when everything is disconnected, platforms, governments, etc.

Re: Digital ID – The New Chains of Capitalist Surveillance

#97

Post by rjdj377dhabsn »

pjc50 wrote: post #32
rjdj377dhabsn wrote: post #23

I think privacy abuse can be largely prevented if a hard line is drawn saying that digital ids must only be used by the government for government services, such as voting, taxes, immigration, welfare, etc. If any private parties like banks, social media, or online stores are allowed to check your digital id, they are going to be a privacy disaster.

Banks are _required_ to check ID! And act as unpaid immigration enforcers. Already in the UK. https://www.fca.org.uk/firms/immigration-act-2014

Yeah the situation with banks is a whole other problem. Banks have basically become an arm of the government, but without the protection of due process.

Financial privacy is a pipe dream at this point, so I'd prefer basic bank accounts be run directly by the government. At least that way, they can more easily be held accountable for their actions.

Enforcement of the state's desires by private corporations leads to all kinds of evil.

Re: Digital ID – The New Chains of Capitalist Surveillance

#98

Post by jcgl »

afandian wrote: post #93
ta20240528 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should everyone be required to use private banks to access e.g. foreign exchange? The answer is yes: which is why banks are licensed and have ombudsmen. As are telcos. No modern society is going to maintain a parallel government economy to serve the vanishingly small minority who live in fear of private companies. Perhaps they should (IDK), but they won't.

> live in fear of private companies It's not the _concept_ of private companies. It's specific things that those specific companies do. e.g. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-30/google-an... Meaningful regulation would mean e.g. air-gapped infrastructure so they can't make inadvertent privacy mistakes. And guaranteed service levels, and a service of last resort. Google have based built a business model…

> It's not the _concept_ of private companies. It's specific things that those specific companies do. e.g.

It's not just the specific things that those companies do, it's the (lack of) structure of rights and entitlements that the users have.

Re: Digital ID – The New Chains of Capitalist Surveillance

#99

Post by scott_w »

stavros wrote: post #76
scott_w wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Every dystopian film or movie starts with some tyrannical society and a resistance movement. Now imagine you made resistance impossible, which is what perfect law enforcement will do. I dunno, the Nazis did a fucking good job without Digital ID. They weren't overthrown by a resistance movement, they were crushed by the combined might of the Allied and Soviet armies.

Therefore resistance is always useless?

Always useless? No. Useless most of the time? Yes. Don’t fool yourself into believing that you’re Luke Skywalker fighting the evil empire: your entire life already depends on the government and your fellow citizens working together in society. If that breaks down, or the government comes for you, there’s very little you can do to stop it. Multiple oppressive regimes, genocides, atrocities throughout history make my point for me.

Re: Digital ID – The New Chains of Capitalist Surveillance

#100

Post by scott_w »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #86
scott_w wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the UK and listening to people who don't have things like passports, it sounds like it'll make proving your right to work much easier for people, too. I've spoken to friends who have foreign relatives and they've also pointed out the problem the UK has which is: 1. To open a bank account you need an address 2. To rent somewhere (get an address), you need a bank account 3. See above The same happens for children…

The issues you mention have nothing to do with having an ID card so a Digital ID won't change anything. Regarding passports, really at this point people who don't have one don't want one.

Except they will? We require multiple proofs because there’s no central place a bank or company, etc, can go to prove that you live in the UK. The excessive requirements to provide multiple proofs to your employer of your right to work are explicitly because there’s no single proof of your right to work in the UK.

If you don’t have a passport, for instance, it’s much harder for a UK citizen to prove their right to work in the UK, for which your employer is liable if they get it wrong.

So please, tell me again how having a clear proof of identity tied to your right to work, and other things, will “not change anything.”

Post reply on HN