But it's not an incremental step. The French government already had that database. This is just using the data they already had in a new way.
Yes, it is a new, small, incremental step!
This is introducing a new procedure, a procedure they can change later to move the needle forward.
This is the whole point, doing small incremental steps. Each of which appears rather banal and unobjectionable.
That you don't care is proof it works!
An incremental step requires an increment. Nothing gets incremented here. The French government already had this data, and already used it to biometrically identify people. The only thing this inches toward is to a reduction in the number of public functionaries. This is the automated checkout system for State services, nothing more.
People's expectations and willingnesses are moved forward. Overton Window.
> This is the automated checkout system for State services, nothing more.
Look beyond the superficial, at larger issues.
Anyone can shoot any idea down by reducing it to a simple, innocuous sounding concept to make the other look ridiculous.
Claiming "there's nothing here" is wrong, saying "I recognize the potential for bad, but choose to accept that risk" is a different story.
No, they aren't.
> Look beyond the superficial, at larger issues.
I'm looking at the larger issues. I just disagree with you. I don't think you have made your case.
Just as anyone can argue that any change to process is salami slicing even when nothing of any real value is being incremented.
I do understand your concern and I think healthy skepticism is a good thing. I’m just not convinced your so arguments are consistent with the facts being presented.