Slashdot Mirror
EU Exploring Idea of Using Government ID Cards As Mandatory Online Logins (softpedia.com)
An anonymous reader writes from a report via Softpedia: Fears that fake online reviews might ruin the consumer market and damage legitimate businesses are making the European Commission consider the idea of forcing all EU citizens to log into online accounts using their government-issued ID cards. Details about these plans can be found in a proposal named "Online Platforms and the Digital Single Market Opportunities and Challenges," announced on May 25, 2016. According to this document, "online platforms should accept credentials issued or recognized by national public authorities, such as electronic or mobile IDs, national identity cards, or bank cards." The reasoning, according to the EU, is that "online ratings and reviews of goods and services are helpful and empowering to consumers, but they need to be trustworthy and free from any bias or manipulation. A prominent example is fake reviews."
While I think that, since we're all carrying chip & pin cards, that they should be useable as login credentials, they should not, in any way, be mandatory.
This is clearly a diversion; they just want everyone online logged.
Store reviews only? Come on.
Wait I thought big power grabs like this were "For the children" and always involving pedophiles.
I see no such mention.... I'm flabbergasted.
Any British citizens that don't vote for Brexit with this sort of shit going on must be masochists.
What could possibly go wrong with such an idea.
Let us count the ways...
This would be a good idea IF it was just used to verify identity and make it so if needed a person posting a review could be identified as this would help prevent fake reviews. Using it as the sole means of logging in, not a good idea. I think people posting should be able to remain anonymous in most cases, but they should also be able to be held accountable for the things they posted if need be.
First they came for the reviews, and I did not speak out,
Then they came for the online blogs, and I did not speak out,
Then they came for the shoppers, and I did not speak out,
Then they came for slashdotters, and I did not speak out,
And there was nobody left to speak for me.
Every time they think about stampeding all over human rights and privacy, every single one of them ends up exactly like Randy Marsh when there were "spooky ghosts".
Because nothing helps the spread of knowledge and information like Big Brother watching every single thing that we do :|
I limit what I see and do on the internet based on the assumption that the Government is watching everything that we do already. :| )
( And I'm so damned boring I don't even break any laws
Once / if it becomes mandatory to log in with a Government approved ID card, I'll just cease using the internet at all.
My generation ( X ) is the last one who can remember a life without it. Considering the current state of the web as an advertising,
surveillance and malware distribution platform, I can't say I would miss it much.
But paranoia runs much higher over there. Without a great big ocean to protect them from Russia and all the "refugees" coming home to roost, I can easily understand the rationale. I sympathize not. Let's all hope circumvention will always remain trivial.
that would be fine with me, every website i visit i put in my real name and driver's licence number for a password, and it is the same at every website i visit because they confirm it at a government database, i get tired of remembering passwords for every website i visit, plus sometimes i have to wipe my /home/user_name/* stuff because of old corrupted files or i upgrade or switch software or Linux distros, that way if i ever need to enter that info because my browser config got wiped i just pull out my drivers license and enter my licence number and BAM! every website i visit knows who i am
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
The (((nose))) knows.
...to make sure reviews are accurate. They aren't (nor should they be) the ones running the websites which record and display these reviews. Those websites are the ones who are responsible for making sure the reviews are real. The ones who do the best job are most likely to gain the most users.
It's called the free market. Let it happen, EU.
Of course I'm completely aware that review quality is not the reason behind this proposition, but it makes no sense that they would think that such a justification would make sense.
"No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session." -- Judge Gideon J. Tucker
fake reviews? now that's a huge step back from terrorism... the good old days, when high tech gestapo was justified with countering terrorism are no more...
People already use the bank provided id verification routinely. The web stores with the reviews already use the bank id services with their payment process. People wouldn't even finch. ID cards, on the other hand, tend to require a card reader and software for the utilization of the smart card certificate, unless it is incorporated into a sim card. Software issue is still there as many stores use only the services provided by the banks.
If this is such a great benefit for the consumer, then surely everyone will want to use one and making them "mandatory" is unnecessary.
From the article:
Those same men must have never used Facebook or, well, any online forum anywhere. If there's anything I've learned from Facebook and other sites with "real name" policies it's that many people have no shame. They'll write all manner of vile, hateful, misinformed, incorrect, funny, and fake comments and not give a fuck that their real name is attached to it.
... with the "NTIC" thing. Hey, we knew for years this was going to happen.
But do note the flaw in the plan. It's not a flaw according to governments, of course, nor is it according to facebook. But the users keep complaining. Being forced to use your real name everywhere, whatever you do? It's good for you, insists the EU. And obviously the EU knows best, right?
Consumer reviews are being cited as the reason for destroying anonymity online? That is the most fake reason for central control of your lifes ever invented. Never mind the 'think of the children', never mind 'terrorist', but 'consumer reviews'????? Shit. The real reason is not failing in line, not doing what some politician tells you, not paying tax on everything under the sun, leaking information exposing government corruption (oxymoron, government IS corruption by definition of the word), embarrassing some government official online, etc. Consumer reviews have nothing to do with anything.
EU was set up yo fix problems that apparently could not be fixed by individual governments. So to fix problems of governments a super government was set up. As if two wrongs can make a right. The reality is that people need less centralization not more, this includes centralization of government. It is better to have 1000 small corrupt governments that can be dealt with individually and that present competition to each other corruption than 1 massive super government that is the final authority, it is of-course also corrupt and there is no competition and no escape from it anywhere. Most people are actually stupid, so naturally many of the stupid people think the government should exist and be as massive and powerful as possible to 'protect' them from all the life's issues. What the stupid don't understand is that the massive government 'protects' them from life and gives them prison instead.
You can't handle the truth.
In Canada we already have this kind of thing (eg use your bank access (one of the big 5) to access your government paperwork stuff)
It sucks.
I tried it and basically it makes things so much more volitile. So now instead of maybe having a unique login to the government, you use a bank account site like you'd use Twitter/FB's Oauth2, and totally screw you if someone is guessing bank account numbers.
Want to screw with everyone in Canada? Canadian card numbers are just like American card numbers, 16 digits long, and most lock out the card after 5 tries. So just ping every valid card number (credit card algorithm), you can narrow it down to the last 12 digits.
If Amazon or eBay or Google wanted to adopt true name policies for online reviews, they could already do that (in fact, a few of them have "verified identities" and identify reviews with them). No national ID is needed, they just get it from the credit card info and verifying purchases. Obviously, they have decided that allowing pseudonymous reviews is better.
And unless you are a total idiot (like, apparently, Eurocrats are), you ought to be able to distinguish fake from true reviews fairly easily.
I see a lot of negativity about the idea here, but it doesn't seem to be an inherently flawed concept. As long as it's not imposed to be used on every site it seems rather reasonable. I'm struggling to see any obviously bad side effects, but could be convinced otherwise. I mean, I see some functional issues, like how to confirm that you are who you say you are during the registration process, but aside from that sort of obviously glaring one, it doesn't seem bat shit or anything.
So let's say companies like AirBnB had a way to tie into automatically verifying who you are, that sounds like a bonus. Let's also say they could let you register without it, but you were assigned less default trust. That also seems fair. Like I said, I struggle to see a reasonable reason to hate it aside from the fact that the API would probably be over engineered, would probably use SOAP, and take months of bureaucracy to get integrated with.
The Fine Document says:
which sounds like it would, at most, require "online platforms" to allow the use of national ID cards as credentials, but says nothing about requiring users to use them as credentials.
Their instinct is always that if something exists, the government bureaucracy needs to get its tentacles into it. The idea that a free marketplace of ideas can exist is just foreign to these guys. I honestly don't think even dyed-in-the-wool socialists like Sanders or Jill Stein would think to make everyone unambiguously identify themselves online with a government id.
... are different.
This is not wild honey.
This is a blantant ploy to legalize profits for big business.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
take them away? WTF. They admit they're a good thing in order to justify their plan to take them away? This is Republican-style doublespeak.
Is Hollander a Jew?
You guys are despicable, totally despicable
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
The idea of having a mandatory requirement of using online ids and removing anonymity from the Internet isn't too bright, and also opens up a gigantic single point of failure with the government login / authentication systems.
However, I'm more interested in whether any government at all allows third parties to use their ids for third party authentication, maybe something like having an OpenId server support like how Google, Facebook etc. logins can be used as the primary login on some other sites. This would potentially allow for someone who cares about 'fake reviews' so much, to allow people to authenticate using their presumably properly vetted govt id. Then, it would be up to that individual site to choose whether it should also allow other account types, whether using free email or their own site based solution etc. This makes it feasible to mark reviews that are from 'trusted sources' (trust as in, person has a verifiable identity and he can't just discard it for a new one easily) while allowing other reviews or even disabling that if desired.
I could see this as being actually very useful for certain scenarios, specifically thinking of the constant and currently-insoluble problem of trolls in online games. Say that Blizzard as a new MMO with Server A only allowing logins using trusted credentials. A user with govt id makes an account, chooses a nickname and starts playing as usual. But if he is banned for cheating or trolling, he can't just make a new account, as governments don't exactly let you have a different DL # or passport # without a really good reason. Those who don't want to or are unable to use a trusted id, would instead get to play on Server B which would not be used for official tournaments etc.
This kind of approach would see governments leverage their existing identity verification as a supporting mechanism to enable opt-in usage by commercial entities. Which also means that it will only be used when it makes sense and not just a new mechanism to track everyone's actions online. Sure, if Amazon.eu decides that fake reviews are a grave issue and only verified users can post them, that's fine - people can still leave anonymous comments elsewhere, and others will use whichever has more useful information. Certainly, besides the 'fake' comments there may be honest commenters who simply don't want to get sued for strong language or w/e.
So, back to my question - are there OpenId or similar authentication endpoints that EU or any of its member states make available currently?
That's when they actually want to implement something. This could be just a diversion while they erode rights in some other area :-)
Shut the fuck up!!!
Is there an existing mandatory EU ID card ? or would this be a new initiative in itself ? I also don't see how knowing who wrote the review would ensure a lack or bias or manipulation.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
In Europe and Canada criticizing the Jews is of no consequence. In fact the Jews have become their standard boogieman to be attacked
The killing of Jews is no problem either - in actual fact, part of the European continent becomes hyper-euphoric every time Jews got murdered
But if you ever dare to criticize the moslems, or Islam, you will get into trouble
BIG TROUBLE !
http://www.businessinsider.com...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...
https://news.vice.com/article/...
http://gatesofvienna.net/2014/...
http://www.breitbart.com/natio...
http://www.thenewamerican.com/...
http://www.gatestoneinstitute....
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Ignoring the 1984 references surely a huge potential disaster is identity theft. Now instead of compromising one account and getting what they can, they can compromise one account and access everything... I'll keep my multi username and passwords thanks.
Why don't we go all the way back, and make people wearing the Star of David for easy identification?
Europe criticizes China when the Communist Regime mandated that everyone who register for their weibo services must use their real name
The European parliament mourned for the loss of free speech in China, and poured money to support 'Chinese dissidents', even to the tune of awarding the noble prize to a certain Chinese writer (I read his books, in the Mandarin language, they were pure trash) just because he happens to be a 'Chinese dissident'
And no, I am not a supporter of the Communist Regime of China. I was an opponent of the CCP, and still am
The thing is, if Europe criticized China for the death of freedom they (Europeans) better don't repeat what the CCP has done
sigh!
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
When I see some of the possible outcomes of an election in the US, I have a strong interest in the government not being able to track everything I say or do online.
The present government isn't dangerous, but the collected information will endure and some day (soon?) we may have a government that will act against me for statements that were completely legal when they were made.
If this idea goes forward and is widely embraced, then perhaps there will be two "Dark Webs" - the current one, (used mostly by criminals), and "Dark Web Lite". The latter will be used mostly by the new class of criminals created by the new legislation; namely, those who say "fuck that" to the whole misguided 'papers please!' version of the Internet and establish their own online territory where anonymity is honoured, and where government ID's aren't required and don't mean shit.
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
Seriously, here in the US, I am amazed that the USPO, which does our passports, has not picked up a sideline of doing state IDs (IDs, not driver licenses), along with the ability to have a verified ID key. It makes sense for them to be able to create these (actually sell them), since they are already used to checking IDs, etc. Would I want to be verified everywhere? Not a chance. OTOH, when dealing with the IRS, stores, etc. I very much would love to have them require a vetted ID, esp. when dealing with CCs.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Terrorism, drugs, pornography and other criminal activities were not enough to justify this. But threaten the bottom line of big business and suddenly Something Must Be Done.
Have gnu, will travel.
If you want to use your credit card to verify you know a name that matches a number and maybe two other numbers and a checksum, good for you. Any credit card processor will verify it for you *AND* if you're not a customer of one you can just go try and buy ANYTHING online and if the credit card checks out you can go and use it.
Government IDs are different and the systems that can verify them run everything from C# to Ada to Cobol. https://fcw.com/articles/2013/...
There are -no- APIs to allow anyone to verify them, but moreover there won't be any APIs because OUR government doesn't want FOREIGN governments to be able to verify passports, SSNs, IDs, etc.
That same "concern" is shared by most every other country in the world. So right there you can kiss API verification goodbye.
Where does that leave us? Public-key? No... because that's not either
a) Government provided (read "verified and if they don't like you you can't have one")
b) Government authenticated (read "if you piss them off it won't verify" think Assange, Snowden, Aaron Schwartz, or ANYONE accused of a crime)
So given that governments won't provide an API, and we the free people don't want our ability to interact on the Internet taken away by ... or ... or
a) conscious act of government not wanting to auth you
b) government can't run a server well and it's not able to auth you
c) the contractor doing upgrades takes it down 6 hours each Sunday morning like some F** database servers...
this is a nonstarter.
E
Restricting free speech or quashing dissent.
"Papers please"
A mandatory National online ID is begging for even more Identity theft.
I use a different Identity for every site I use so that if one gets compromised then all of them don't.
If I have to use the same user id everywhere that is half of the work
Many sites require a phone number before allowing someone to post reviews. A code wrapped into a SMS is sent to that number, and the user validates the account by inputing the code on the site. How come this is not enough? Some people have two or three phones, but compared to the many mail accounts that may easily be created and used..
Using the ID card is the end of privacy. Sooner or later more sites and applications would require the ID, and people getting used to give it on the Internet would not hesitate anymore.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
Even if I am forced to use one, single, verified, form of identification (no matter whether this is as an EU citizen or not), there is STILL nothing that guarantees what I write in my review is truthful, accurate, competent, unbiased or consistent.
We would still get situations where suppliers offer "samples" to reviewers in return for them writing glowing reports of crappy products. We would still get situations where someone, who bought a faulty product years ago, continues a vendetta against a brand for their own bitter and twisted reasons and we would still get situations where people give products a 1-star rating simply because it was delivered late.
It also won't do anything to stop the negativity bias: that people are more likely to write a review if they have something to complain about, than if what they bought is just OK.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
"Novelty Item" reviews will become non existent.
sorry for my comments, I'm drunk
Please enlighten us in what way Vinnitsa Jews were "hostile invaders... in WWII Germany"? http://rarehistoricalphotos.co...
so that jacks online cheese shop and have my SS? just so I can login in?
What about jay's adult toy shop why should they have my real name?
Stories like this are why country after country are going to flee the EU in rapid succession.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Many thanks for the thought provoking answer to my lamentation
Although I do mourn for the tanking of quality comments in Slashdot I still come back - the type of enlightening comments such as yours is precisely why I am still here
Thanks again!!
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
That is because 'they' are pedophiles themselves, so pedophiles can't be mentioned as a problem, or else the government's monitoring capabilities will backfire on themselves
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
No, no, no, it's the terrists first and, failing that, the children. Now they are working the terrists angle (you're hurting the economy).
...as soon as the Brexit is a fact the interest will naturally rise and that same money will come back, looking for a profit.
Furthermore, during the inevitable next financial crisis (caused by the banking system) the Pound will devalue, thus preventing British assets such as utilities, oil fields, historical monuments, etc., to be grabbed by 'the elite' a la Greece.
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
As a total off-topic: I've never seen a clearer illustration of sheer peer pressure, ever.
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
>Whites must not be second class citizens i
how are we second rate citizens ?
Every European country was, at one time, some form of totalitarian monarchy. When various European countries broke from that, they went and dabbled with socialist economics and libertine social policy but largely stayed with large overbearing government and massive regulation. They have never actually been free people, which is why they never properly understand Americans and often misinterpret events in the US and American attitudes; Americans HAVE been free and have no memory of life under monarchs.
The American political spectrum is very broad, from those who want almost no government to those who want massive government, those who want nothing to do with the world beyond the national border to those who want no national border. The European political spectrum is very narrow and centered way over on the left somewhere between the totalitarian communists (the with European left) and the totalitarian national socialists (at the European right), with near universal agreement on huge government, nearly unlimited regulations, wealth redistribution, etc and anybody outside that tent automatically rejected as "far right" and "dangerous"
Their terrible dysfunctional history leads them to think that if they move further left they'll become the evil Soviets, if they move right they'll become the evil NAZIs, and if they reduce their massive bureaucrat-heavy elected governments they'll fall back into monarchy. It just never seems to occur to Europeans to actually try small government and ACTUAL FREEDOM.
if the UK, whose history brought them closer to freedom than most in the "old world", and who ultimately gave birth to the Americans (accidentally of course) have any sense left, they will declare their independence and get out of the EU this month thereby saving themselves from this sort of continental totalitarian nightmare. It's truly amazing to see the current generation of spineless and bought-by-multinational-bankers UK leaders claiming that Britain, which although a small island nation, once nearly ruled the world is now incapable of even standing on its own two feet.
If you are so concerned regarding being spied upon, you should actually look at your own government and what it's doing through its GCHQ agency. This EU proposal is peanuts compared to that.
Never underestimate the relief of true separation of Religion and State.
You 9-11 truther/moonlanding hoaxer/holocaust deniers have nothing to contribute to humanity. You deny established well-documented FACTS. This is not like people arguing about the effects of immigration, or international trade, or the interpretation of temperature data on climate and projections forward about future climate events which all involve opinion and projections. YOU are arguing that proven FACTS that PROVABLY DID HAPPEN did not.
I am one of what I suspect is a small group of people: I had relatives who I know to be absolutely trustworthy who liberated one of the death camps AND I knew some of the Apollo astronauts AND I am an engineer in the Aerospace field. I am absolutely certain that the NAZIs massacred millions of Jews in death camps. I am absolutely certain the moon landings happened and the 300,000+ Americans working on that program were not in on some grand hoax. I am absolutely certain that terrorists flew airliners into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon and a field.
You stupid, obnoxious, odious, dishonest, malicious, deceitful scumbag deniers of historical facts are usually just nasty trolls in your mommies basements who provoke people by in-your-face denials of reality. Most of you do not actually believe the garbage you utter/type, you simple luxuriate in, and savor the outraged responses of normal people to your pronouncements. You substitute this for what most other people have: normal human relationships and the general joy of life that results. The guy who used to chase Buzz Aldrin around harassing him until Buzz punched him probably actually cherished and savored that punch as the ultimate response to his trollish behavior. He probably secretly interpreted that punch as validation. I have no doubt you will love this reply in a similar fashion, but the joke's on you; this reply is not actually for you at all: it's for everyone else to read and think about.
This is a mostly US plateform everybody will jump on the gun and accuse EU of authoritarianism, dictature, compare to china and north korea. This is the standard fare here, look at past article.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
The article is lying about the proposal when it says that the European Commission is considering forcing all EU citizens to log into online accounts using their government-issued ID cards. That is not true. What the proposal really says (page 10) is:
However, the frequent practice of using oneâ(TM)s platform profile to access a range of websites and services often involves non-transparent exchanges and cross-linkages of personal data between various online platforms and websites. As a remedy, in order to keep identification simple and secure, consumers should be able to choose the credentials by which they want to identify or authenticate themselves. In particular, online platforms should accept credentials issued or recognised by national public authorities, such as electronic or mobile IDs, national identity cards, or bank cards. In other words: it wants to let consumers choose which authentication method they use, and they suggest online platforms should accept credencials issued by national authorities.
And why do they want the consumers to be able to use those credentials? Because (page 10):
It is recognised that a multitude of username and password combinations is both inconvenient and a security risk.
I wonder why the EU hating camp usually resorts to such dishonest bashing tactics (as if they weren't actual reasons to criticize the EU without having to spread lies).
In Belgium we have:
* Belgian state issued ID smartcards that contain public/private keys signed by the Belgian government
* Authentication for things like online submitting your tax forms
* Publicly available CRLs : http://repository.eid.belgium.be/certificates.php?cert=Root
* An (admittedly little known) OCSP server: http://ocsp.eid.belgium.be/ which you actually don't really need as you can just sync the CRL's.
Even if we all ignore that this is a suggestion, not something that would pass through the strong EU privacy rules etc.:
IN NO WAY DOES THE CURRENT TEXT INDICATE ONE WOULD BE FORCED TO IDENTIFY!
" ... consumers SHOULD BE ABLE TO CHOOSE the credentials by which they want to identify or authenticate themselves. In particular, online platforms SHOULD ACCEPT credentials issued or recognised by national public authorities, such as electronic or mobile IDs, national identity cards, or bank cards."
Or in other words: people should be able to choose to use ID cards as a credential online. - period
Not be forced to do so - the text is explicit that there have to be a choice from the consumer.
I'm totally in favor of free markets and companies trying to make profits. But the government should not be trying to guarantee profits for them.
Thank you, Bradley Manning, Edward Snowden and so many others, for courageously defending humanity, my freedom and more!
This is just another pathetic attempt by the eternal JEW to silence their 'cattle' (goyim), before we eventually rise up and expel them, for the 110th time...
Why have Jews been expelled from countries 109 times in the past 1,000 years?
No. No. No.
Just fucking NO, goddammit.
Eat the rich.
Oh boy, now I'm supposed to be a JEW
If I am a JEW then there will be over 1 Billion JEWS in China as well as more than 300 million other JEWS living inside and outside the many "JEWTOWNS" all over the world
With the sudden increase of 1.3 ~ 1.5 new JEWS I'm sure those running Israel will be happy like a clam
One important caveat: Most of the new JEWS can't pronounce "Fried Rice" correctly but some of them do make the most delicious dimsum this JEW loves so much!
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
So insuring* that reviews of products are from real users of a product and not one of the fake reviews ordered by companies that want to make a profit is guaranteeing profits for the same companies?!?
(* this wouldn't do that as it doesn't require reviewers to use IDs - but at least a consumer could read reviews and take into account if the reviewer is a real person or not)
I had some classes in EU law and above that am Belgian. I therefore have a rather close view on the limits of this issue.
The EU wants to make sure that a Belgian eID card for example is also accepted as a login for secured access in a different EU country.
for example;
I, a Belgian with Belgian eID move to Estonia for 6 months on a work related placement. In this case I am very lucky as Estonia has some of the best government E-services in the EU. I could use my Belgian eID card to confirm to Estonia, via online registration and administration that I will be living there for half a year on work business. I could also register for a tax account etc via the same login.
I wonder whether it should be governments who enforce this sort of thing at all. Since its the industry that has problems with people over- or underrating their products and services thus causing credibility issues with their client base, it should perhaps be up to them to find some sort of authenticity test. Perhaps this needn't even have to do away with anonymity.
How do you spell "single point of failure" in all EU languages?
"If a boss demands loyalty, give him integrity. But if he demands integrity, give him loyalty." (John Boyd, 1927-1997)
Wouldn't it be GOOD news if somebody proved that 6 million Jews weren't killed in the 'Holocaust'? Would that not be a good thing? If it all turned out to be a lie?
This is all about tightening the grip on dissenters, so that nobody can tell the truth about what the Jew has done to us for the past seventy years...
www.codoh.com
People are in prison, right now, all across Europe, for proving that the 'Holocaust' didn't happen. Not for simply saying 'it didn't happen', but for PROVING it didn't happen, using scientific facts.
I see a lot of mentally ill Nazi's commenting here..
No, this is a great idea. Lots of web sites want all your personal details so that they have run security checks on your identity. They are mainly trying to stop criminals ripping them off, so they want to know things like your address and phone number.
Say the government offered to sign ID tokens. They sign to say they have verified your identity to a certain standard, good enough for web merchants. You can now present the merchant with a token and permission to access the minimum amount of data necessary (delivery address, which might not be your home address, and name). They can pass that token on to the bank when doing credit card payment processing too.
Your privacy is enhanced by not having to give over lots of unnecessary personal data, and by having disposable tokens you can generate whenever you like. If the system goes down, oh well just log in the old fashioned way or wait until tomorrow.
Google is building something a bit like this already. A kind of hybrid between apps and web sites where the merchant's site can, with permission, use details from Google Wallet to speed up the check-out process and avoid making the user create an account. Of course it ties in to Google's payment platform, which is why a government run system that is neutral would be much better.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Seems petty when this is actually going on in the real world. Seems like a pointless thing to do when the panama papers show you cant even enforce integrity on ownership and operation of corporations.
youtube link to republish of public broadcast: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1-JCf1P8o8
http://www.news.com.au/finance/business/australians-named-in-global-leak-of-tax-of-dealings-of-rich-and-famous/news-story/4b9c7f2624d77dc039bb039e85e1f321
- you can register 800+ million dollar + companies in australia, with the same CEO human, and noone cares.
- it seems "legal" for a private citizen to lease his identity for this purpose
- without the leak, this link would not have happened, and the ACCC would never be involved
- australia's company register is public knowledge
- australia has some of the toughest financial rules in the world
And the EU parliament is concerned about the validity of the identity of the person reviewing toasters online?
The comments are worse than the articles.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Racists are second rate citizens, they are selfish and unhelpful. The easiest way to solve your problem is stop being a racist and only you can do it for yourself.
[site]
With the UK in the thrall of EU referendum I can't help think this would be a non story at any other time.
Its alarming how keen the media is to stoke racist devisions , please treat them with the suspicion they are trying to make you feel about other races instead of accepting it as valid.
[site]
Who cares what EU thinks about how people should use the Internet? If it wasn't an American-led endeavor, it would have died a long time ago. France had a national electronic communications network long before "information superhighway". It died because it was so heavily regulated by the government that it lacked agility to evolve. The same can be expected of any endeavor led by political bureaucracies rather than engineering bureaucracies. Ultimately, the agility of the Internet comes from the fact that it is US owned and US has the legal protection of freedom of speech. This protection trumps almost all other considerations in any legal challenge. This prevents any political bureaucracy from asserting absolute control over the Internet.
As an example, what if someone in Belgium wants to rant against increased Islamic immigration to Europe? Is he going to dare to do that if his name can be easily found through a court order? Well, if he does it through a US website, that would be laughable.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
How about "two wrongs make a right," otherwise known as "Affirmative Action?"
I do read the comments here and have realize a dichotomy of responses to the same article
Those from the West side of the Pond (USA) tend to see this as a creeping danger, a slippery slope that will end up gobbling up the rights of the individuals
Those from the Right side of the Pond (Europe), on the other hand, tend to espouse your point of view --- that the entire thing is nothing but an 'encouragement', a mere 'suggestion', with 'check and balances', and so on, and so forth
A guy even lament that we from the West side of the Pond are kinda 'over-reacting' to a totally harmless proposal
All I can see from this dichotomy is the difference in the way we were brought up
I am an America but I am a naturalized American. I came from China
In America I find that most of my fellow Americans (those who were born inside the USA) share with me a very strong suspicion against the government
But on the other side of the pond, you Europeans seem to put all your trust on the government --- for you, TPTB is nothing to fear, for TPTB is good, and will work for the good for all
I am not going to tell you that we Americans are right and you are wrong, however, I do need to remind you guys, the Europeans one thing ---
If you put too much trust on someone one day that same someone might betray you and you will be hurt, and hurt bad
Lest you forget, may I bring up the Snowden files?
Of all the info Edward Snowden has given us, one thing stand out --- that power corrupts
Governments, no matter if it is from US or UK or France of Germany, were all involved in the invasion of privacy, in clear violation of the rules
We from the West side of the Pond tend to not trust our government so much because we still retain that important quality you Europeans have long lost --- that sense of ever vigilance
You guys trust your government too much and one day you guys will grow to regret it
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
They didn't have the technology to data-mine. Even if all TVs were bugged, you would still need a lot of people actually listening - no speech recognition or automatic flagging of "interesting" recordings.
A "chilling effect" can occur not (only) when there is actual surveillance, but really when people think there is (or might) be surveillance. It is the (perceived) threat that is usually enough to change behaviour, and not the actual occurrence:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effect
So if people believe that their televisions are bug, whether they are or no, that would cause problems. And they don't have to cover all televisions, but just "enough":
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_sample
Put it in the trash before I allow the government to follow me like that.
Yes and here we see another one of the tricks, every negative economic review is fake according to power... we knew this was comming. Soon every company can demand money for nothing , there are no bad products... Time for war.
These guys are smoking some good stuff!
I so hope this happens. Dear Europe F you!
This is every government's wet dream.
Total identity control, penalties for NOT using your real identity.....oh I can hear the jackboots creaming in their pants already.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
We don't have them because we won - twice.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
On the plus side, just think how much easier it will be for companies to sue you when you publish a negative review...
Website Just Down For Me? Find out
Yeah right. They just want to track them 100% on the internet. I love how they use silly excuses for all this "Ohhh it is for the good of the people", "We are just trying to have a fair system". NWO is getting more ambitious than ever and speeding things up for sure
Go back to your White Power clubhouse and fondle yourself while you babble about your brain-damaged conspiracy fantasies and your bullshit versions of history.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Check out (((Brother Nathanael))) on (((yt))), (((dailystormer))), (((Gilad Atzmon))), or many other good sources before they get SHUT DOWN!
TFTFY.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
I guess the idea comes out of the eIDAS regulation that requires public administrations in member states to mutually recognize each others government backed eIDs. And it is not far from the existing requirements for mobile phone providers to identify people buying SIM cards and cell phone and data contracts. I would leave it up to service providers to decide if they want a) a service with verified ids, that they can choose to hide from other users or b) allow anonymous actions. e.g. a) a traditional newspaper going online b) b-tards at 4chan
Well there goes my fake Tinder accounts!!
Didn't Microsoft live try this once??
So Georgians can't be Jews. Got it, thanks.
Oh hey let's not mention the fact that the reason affirmative action need to be implemented was because the racist assholes would not hire women and minorities. Those old white ceos had to be forced to play nice because they otherwise wouldn't. That two wrongs shit is just that- shit. Retribution and restitution are perfectly fine forms of justice when no other justice can be found. It's the go to excuse for losers of a battle. You lost. Deal with it!
Bittersweet. I have been saddened by the lack of an internet license requirement to fight eternal September -- as much as the lack of such licensing for tech workers. From this point of view they still won't have any mandatory training, probably, but it would be as good a time as any to demand that all card carriers know a few minimal things like regarding file management, security, grammar and no-CAPS etiquette. But I can quickly see how that becomes abusive on my part
Please disregard for at least two weeks.
Then lay the blame at the old racist CEOs, and stop blaming all whites.
In other words, stop being a racist piece of shit you asshole.