zlacker

[return to "UK Petition: Do not introduce Digital ID cards"]
1. dijit+N2[view] [source] 2025-09-28 18:23:32
>>DamonH+(OP)
As well as the Estonia eID system works (aside from that time it got hacked[0] and that other time they leaked all the photos[1]) and how well a digital (non-government) system works in Scandinavia… I have to say…

As a Dual British/Swedish Citizen, I really do not trust the UK government. They have proven over and over and over, that at every opportunity presented they will increase their own authority. I don’t believe I have personally witnessed any other advanced economy that so ardently marches towards authoritarianism.

So, no matter if it’s a good idea or not. I can’t in good faith advise the UK having more powers. Unfortunately the UK government themselves can sort of just grant themselves more power. So…

[0]: https://e-estonia.com/card-security-risk/

[1]: https://therecord.media/estonia-says-a-hacker-downloaded-286...

◧◩
2. skelet+fj[view] [source] 2025-09-28 20:22:14
>>dijit+N2
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 not someone who has the same name and birth date by accident.

I don't see how such a system gives the government more powers. It already has all the data on its citizens, but it is spread out, fragmented, stored with multiple conflicting versions, maybe some of it is stored in databases where no one cares about security, etc.

◧◩◪
3. madeof+VD[view] [source] 2025-09-28 23:15:44
>>skelet+fj
I'm somewhat indifferent to the concept of a Digital ID. The problem is that the UK government's reason for introducing it doesn't make sense - to 'solve' illegal workers, when the UK already has a (digital) system for proving right to work https://www.gov.uk/prove-right-to-work/get-a-share-code-onli...
◧◩◪◨
4. reaper+KE[view] [source] 2025-09-28 23:26:42
>>madeof+VD
I'm somewhat indifferent to the concept of a Digital ID. The problem is that the UK government's reason for introducing it doesn't make sense - to 'solve' illegal workers, when the UK already has a (digital) system for proving right to work

I saw some British politicians discussing this on Sky last week, and I really don't see the point of the British digital ID.

They say having yet another new ID number will make things "easier." But didn't really say how. Brits already have ID numbers for lots of things. It wasn't spelled out how having yet another number will make things better.

My tech mind tells me that it's just going to save some DB admins from having to JOIN some columns. But a number is a number. Why yet another number?

And the whole thing about having a number will somehow stop people from working illegally seems like a red herring. I believe Brits already have to have a national insurance number in order to work. That hasn't stopped people from working illegally. They talking heads didn't explain what's so magical about this new number that will suddenly do things that the old number or numbers didn't.

/Not a Brit. Just bewildered by what appears to be a solution in search of a problem.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. bamboo+8G[view] [source] 2025-09-28 23:41:46
>>reaper+KE
Sky is a really right wing partisan channel though, ofc they are going to say negative things about the incumbent government or basically anything it does.

Not to say the idea is good or bad, but how people watch hyper-partisan media and draw any conclusions from it is beyond me.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. reaper+LG[view] [source] 2025-09-28 23:48:08
>>bamboo+8G
Sky didn't say anything. The two talking heads from two different political parties said things.

As an outsider, I have no idea if Sky News is "right wing" or not. I watch Sky and BBC because those are the two British services I can get where I am.

(And occasionally ITV, but it seems to be all potatoes, and no meat.)

I note that instead of addressing the topic of discussion, you deflect into another topic. Why is that?

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. bamboo+wO[view] [source] 2025-09-29 01:21:11
>>reaper+LG
Sure, but it’s not like there media outlets just select any old person to discuss any old topic. They can choose who they want to be the mouthpiece for a certain topic and make sure they get plenty of airtime to say whatever is required…
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. agedcl+jr2[view] [source] 2025-09-29 16:40:46
>>bamboo+wO
Legally they have to provide "Due Impartiality" on the TV network. So they normally invite several people so they can claim they have provided balance.

I actually don't like that they are legally required they do this as often it becomes a shouting match between two participates. I want to hear someone's argument in full.

[go to top]