Show Navigation
Conversation
Notices
-
@moonman The states themselves are only borderline competent to collect, store, catalog, and protect the data they have for people's identification, much of which is not printed on the actual ID cards. Why would someone trust the federal government, which is even less competent (and more likely to misuse the data or to distribute it to some contractor who will misuse it) to take over this task?
@rw @se7en
-
@moonman @rw @se7en@freezepeach.xzy Compare, for example, the continuing saga of #OPM breaches with any other breaches anywhere. Ignoring #Yahoo!, no other breach comes close in the scope of data that was lost.
When you remember that this data collection was mandatory (that is, if someone applied for a federal job during the right time period, certain data about them and their neighbors, friends, relatives was required to be collected by contracted investigators), we cannot even imagine the information that would be mandatorily collected and repeatedly exposed in breaches.
-
@usblovedog That they do. But in many ID contexts, a picture ID is required. This is usually a driver's license, or a substitute card for those who are not allowed to drive a motor vehicle.
-
Note: I'm not against proving that you're you when you vote, but our current identity documents are poorly suited for that task, being (1) primarily designed to track permission to operate motor vehicles; (2) time-limited in order to increase state revenues (you're still you five years from now; other than updated photo and address information, there's no good reason for them to expire); (3) often absent from people that are poor, old, young, or have been affected by a catastrophic event (house fire, hurricane, earthquake, civil disturbance); and (4) still easily imitated, allowing use by those who should not vote in this country.