Scrutable

dyqik wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 16, 2023 3:38 pm

If any kind of immigration, benefits, employment checks etc. are mandated, even nowhere near the hostile environment levels, the most liberal option is for there to be an approved method of proving identity, rather than the adhoc and exclusionary system we have now.

Only if there are no illiberal consequences of introducing the approved method, compared to the system we have now.

nekomatic wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 16, 2023 8:51 pm

dyqik wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 16, 2023 3:38 pm

If any kind of immigration, benefits, employment checks etc. are mandated, even nowhere near the hostile environment levels, the most liberal option is for there to be an approved method of proving identity, rather than the adhoc and exclusionary system we have now.

Only if there are no illiberal consequences of introducing the approved method, compared to the system we have now.

I've yet to hear of any in this thread.

The national databases already exist, so those don't count.

National biometric databases with compulsory enrolment? I must have missed those.

Data mining the proposed National Identity Register was always part of Blair's ID system plan.

This sort of stuff...

https://www.wired.com/story/algorithms- ... -politics/

Denmark has used AI for data mining its databases on benefit claimants activities - but most people flagged for investigation turn out to be innocent.

Lots of this data already exists - what an ID card system (backed by a central register) does is enable all these diverse data sources to be linked and trawled.

nekomatic wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 17, 2023 9:01 am

National biometric databases with compulsory enrolment? I must have missed those.

That exact thing doesn't exist yet, but databases covering the entire population, and databases that if you aren't on, you can find it hard to defend yourself against serious legal trouble, do exist.

So what bad things do a card and that database enable that couldn't otherwise happen, and what do they prevent (from the individual's point of view)?

bob sterman wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 17, 2023 9:06 am

Data mining the proposed National Identity Register was always part of Blair's ID system plan.

This sort of stuff...

https://www.wired.com/story/algorithms- ... -politics/

Denmark has used AI for data mining its databases on benefit claimants activities - but most people flagged for investigation turn out to be innocent.

Lots of this data already exists - what an ID card system (backed by a central register) does is enable all these diverse data sources to be linked and trawled.

There's not really anything preventing existing databases from being trawled, cross linked and mined for e.g. benefits fraud now though. It may well already happen to some degree.

The main issues with doing that is the cost and the even higher rate of false positives, due to mistaken cross links between the databases. But that doesn't prevent the government acting on those false positives (see the PIP system for an example of the government defaulting to denying benefits), and sorting it out without access to a robust identity is even harder and more expensive for an individual affected.

This argument is very much one of degree and depends on which risks you are most concerned about - the Blair era plans to track lookups of ID was generating new data for the government, with obvious risks, but a minimum viable biometric identity database and card is not that plan.

I default to worrying about front line bigotry, jobsworths, and incompetence leading to Kafkaesque situations, over centrally planned evil. Mostly because centrally planned evil will find a way anyway, in the absence of a real republican constitution that limits the power of government.

dyqik wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 17, 2023 11:41 am

There's not really anything preventing existing databases from being trawled, cross linked and mined for e.g. benefits fraud now though.

Other than the usual government ineptitude at big IT projects, that is.

bolo wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 17, 2023 1:35 pm

dyqik wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 17, 2023 11:41 am

There's not really anything preventing existing databases from being trawled, cross linked and mined for e.g. benefits fraud now though.

Other than the usual government ineptitude at big IT projects, that is.

Some of that ineptitude is included in the higher false positive rates I mention. And government isn't much worse at big IT projects than business (who are usually the ones doing the government IT projects anyway) or academic institutions - although the top-level management has its own peculiarities in the govt case.

Sciolus wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 16, 2023 8:07 pm

bagpuss wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 16, 2023 9:30 am

This is not specifically against id cards per se, but against the requirement, in France, to carry id and produce it on request.

Now, this is the sort of thing that gives ID cards a bad name. Not just the obvious invitation to racist abuse documented by Bagpuss. But, what earthly benefit, what rational justification, is there for requiring people to identify themselves arbitrarily to the authorities? How does it help, what purpose does it serve? It doesn't prevent crime or help capture criminals. Why?

(Yes, I'm aware that the same applies in the UK (England?) if you are driving a motor vehicle.)

You are not required to produce ID if driving. You can be required to give your name and address on the spot, and to produce your driving licence, insurance certificate, and MOT certificate within seven days at a police station of your choice (the choice being made on the spot). The police may have real-time access to driving licence photos from the DVLA database to help them identify you, but this is something they do and not something you are required to do.

The UK police do have real-time access to the Motor Insurers database. If you are stopped by the police and they discover that you are driving uninsured your car will be seized immediately and you will then have to prove insurance cover before recovering the car.

dyqik wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 17, 2023 11:41 am

There's not really anything preventing existing databases from being trawled, cross linked and mined for e.g. benefits fraud now though. It may well already happen to some degree.

Yes but currently data sources are not easy to link up because there is no single authoritative ID number. E.g. names on bank accounts, credit agreements, travel tickets, health records, education records, service contracts, rental contracts etc don't always match exactly. Some people have multiple national insurance numbers, some people use different variants of their name in different settings.

A National Identity Register would have solved a lot of this - making things much easier to link up.

bob sterman wrote: ↑

Sat Mar 18, 2023 3:01 pm

dyqik wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 17, 2023 11:41 am

There's not really anything preventing existing databases from being trawled, cross linked and mined for e.g. benefits fraud now though. It may well already happen to some degree.

Yes but currently data sources are not easy to link up because there is no single authoritative ID number. E.g. names on bank accounts, credit agreements, travel tickets, health records, education records, service contracts, rental contracts etc don't always match exactly. Some people have multiple national insurance numbers, some people use different variants of their name in different settings.

A National Identity Register would have solved a lot of this - making things much easier to link up.

I regard it being easier to link things up as more likely to be a good thing, that reduces the likelihood of someone being denied benefits, or getting arrested or deported due to mistaken identity. That it may enable certain kinds of oppression I regard as a lower risk, because the current government is going right ahead with that oppression anyway.