Your reply imagines a future in which id is simultaneously used for more things than in any country, and less secure than existing technology (it’s not possible for example to clone digital id in current implementations, just like you can’t clone a bank card off a contactless transaction)
So I don’t think this is a case of me being optimistic.
And if you’re pessimistic about all of this then that’s not unreasonable, but framing it as absolute opposition is unreasonable. The objections you raised are for the most part entirely surmountable by a sensible implementation. Why not change your opposition to “we shouldn’t have this until a concrete proposal is put forward which satisfied x y and z?”
What has told you in the past… 20 years? That this government, or the previous government, is capable of doing anything that isnt just 100% to fuck us all over?
The other guy is right, no one asked for this. We did ask to drop the “child” safety act, and were ignored or worse, called paedos.
Here, Ill play your game. “We shouldnt have this until we have a government that works for the people, and not to service and fill the pockets of the already rich and abusive. And even then, it should be an option. Not a demand.”
This is a continuation of the push, along with accessing our private messages, to control and monitor us all 24/7. Starmer is a right wing authoritarian masquerading as a left wing leader. And the end of the road he leads us down, will be one were we have no privacy. We wont even be allowed to protest this shit.
Your reply imagines a future in which id is simultaneously used for more things than in any country, and less secure than existing technology (it’s not possible for example to clone digital id in current implementations, just like you can’t clone a bank card off a contactless transaction)
So I don’t think this is a case of me being optimistic.
And if you’re pessimistic about all of this then that’s not unreasonable, but framing it as absolute opposition is unreasonable. The objections you raised are for the most part entirely surmountable by a sensible implementation. Why not change your opposition to “we shouldn’t have this until a concrete proposal is put forward which satisfied x y and z?”
What has told you in the past… 20 years? That this government, or the previous government, is capable of doing anything that isnt just 100% to fuck us all over?
The other guy is right, no one asked for this. We did ask to drop the “child” safety act, and were ignored or worse, called paedos.
Here, Ill play your game. “We shouldnt have this until we have a government that works for the people, and not to service and fill the pockets of the already rich and abusive. And even then, it should be an option. Not a demand.”
This is a continuation of the push, along with accessing our private messages, to control and monitor us all 24/7. Starmer is a right wing authoritarian masquerading as a left wing leader. And the end of the road he leads us down, will be one were we have no privacy. We wont even be allowed to protest this shit.