Apologies, Britain is forcing digital ID for all citizens for Internet access. This is also been discussed at the European Parliament level, and there's a significant amount of public black lash. That's the fiasco, I should've been more specific.
By having people get digital IDs, you can require them to use it when registering for social network accounts, etc., because it's already in their phones and requires just one tap to 'sign' the account with your real identity. Want to complain about a local politician on r/uk on reddit? You'll need a valid UK account to even post there, and it'll be tied to your real name. Want to join a discord? You need UK ID and your real identity tied to it. Organizing a protest? Well, your real name is there, the police will be visiting soon.
On the other hand, according to The Times yesterday the cabinet isn't happy with digital ID. It's as obvious to them as it is to everyone else that digital ID won't make a jot of difference to illegal working. And may well lose them votes.
The government has also talked about making drivings licences digital (i.e. apps)
People suspect a lot more than it being used in conjunction with the OSA. it can be extended in all sorts of ways. Once available it will be used for more and more.
It is not necessary for employment and housing as there are already documents that can be checked on the rare occasions people rent housing or get a new job. It is only worth doing if it is something people will use daily. Essentially people will be coerced into carrying a Google or Apple smartphone with the ID app on it.
I hadn't heard about that one. Source?
https://bills.parliament.uk/publications/62773/documents/708...
> 16LB (1) The Secretary of State may by regulations specify a description of consistent identifier for the purposes of this section.
Such provisions are ripe for abuse – somewhat tempered by 16LB(6), but that relies on the designated person's discretion (which itself is constrained by 16LB(12), and my experience with educational folk suggests they take such guidance seriously, even when they profoundly disagree with it), and having a database in the first place is the major issue. Ignore the rest of this comment.
---
That doesn't seem to say that? It says:
> 16LB (2) “Consistent identifier” means any identifier (such as, for example, a number or code used for identification purposes) that—
> (a) relates to a child, and
> (b) forms part of a set of similar identifiers that is of general application.
School ID plus some school-specific identifier would suffice, if I'm reading this right.
That said, I'm not sure why you'd write this into a law under my interpretation, since it's already current practice to take actions that are "likely to facilitate the exercise by any person of a function of that person that relates to safeguarding or promoting the welfare of children", and to avoid actions that "would be more detrimental to the child than not including it", so maybe this is one of the things that you need to be a legal expert to understand.
It doesn’t really matter either way because the tyranny and authoritarian control will descend upon people regardless; but do they at least have some kind of guilt, maybe shame, or even realize they are also guilty, not just in basically helping their own enemy, the people in charge of the government implementing these things?
Or do they simply in a somewhat typical narcissistic way just hand wave it away and generously absolve themselves of any guilt and responsibility for the misery they are/will be responsible for?
Turns out the “…fools, and even the ambitious…” were also the “…traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely…”. It was a stroke of genius to psychologically and emotionally manipulate and wage war on the minds of the folks who were fools, i.e., the majority in a “democracy” who gleefully voted themselves into a trap under influence of the created reward system that had them getting feedback that told them they are the good people.
Care to explain how a state providing an official way to allow its citizen to prove they are who they say they are and avoid identity usurpation on the internet is somehow tyrannical and authoritarian?
That seems like a valuable public service to me.