<story><title>The rise of biodigital surveillance</title><url>https://compactmag.com/article/the-rise-of-biodigital-surveillance</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>motohagiography</author><text>There is nothing friendly or helpful or optimistic about digital identity schemes, they are domestic passports for movement, and a pervasive, specific and ongoing threat against you as an individual for giving the appearance of non-compliance, or even a lack of enthusiasm for compliance. It&amp;#x27;s dominion. Honestly, a digital ID scheme is what the next global, multi year or even decade long land war will be fought over. I know we have a convention about avoiding discussions of violence, but digital ID, just like the ID schemes of early 20th c Europe and Russia, is the thing that you either nip in the bud in the present, or the number of lives that will be lost over it just grows every single day as the cancer of these systems establishes itself in our societies.&lt;p&gt;There is zero hyperbole in this. I&amp;#x27;ve worked on digital identity solutions, and fundamentally, they are not a consumer product anybody actually wants because their use cases are &lt;i&gt;all&lt;/i&gt; about enforcing rules &lt;i&gt;against&lt;/i&gt; the identity subject. The only way the tech survives is it must be mandated, and then it&amp;#x27;s a question of whose problem does it solve?&lt;p&gt;The only people that a global digital identity solves a problem for are the people administering it, literally against the whole world. The survivors will ask, &amp;quot;how did it all happen so fast, what were the warnings?&amp;quot; and this obscure comment will be the hunger stone and harbinger. I&amp;#x27;m literally saying millions of people will die, partially because of my inability to be persuasive, but mostly because of your misunderstanding of what this technology does and of what it is the effect.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>IYasha</author><text>I&amp;#x27;m in tears. So blissful to have understanding people among tech enthusiasts! Usually such topics as surveillance, biometry, privacy, control of people, digital currencies, dangers of wireless, etc. rise immediate skepticism and hate. I&amp;#x27;m glad more and more people around are shifting from indifference.</text></comment>
<story><title>The rise of biodigital surveillance</title><url>https://compactmag.com/article/the-rise-of-biodigital-surveillance</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>motohagiography</author><text>There is nothing friendly or helpful or optimistic about digital identity schemes, they are domestic passports for movement, and a pervasive, specific and ongoing threat against you as an individual for giving the appearance of non-compliance, or even a lack of enthusiasm for compliance. It&amp;#x27;s dominion. Honestly, a digital ID scheme is what the next global, multi year or even decade long land war will be fought over. I know we have a convention about avoiding discussions of violence, but digital ID, just like the ID schemes of early 20th c Europe and Russia, is the thing that you either nip in the bud in the present, or the number of lives that will be lost over it just grows every single day as the cancer of these systems establishes itself in our societies.&lt;p&gt;There is zero hyperbole in this. I&amp;#x27;ve worked on digital identity solutions, and fundamentally, they are not a consumer product anybody actually wants because their use cases are &lt;i&gt;all&lt;/i&gt; about enforcing rules &lt;i&gt;against&lt;/i&gt; the identity subject. The only way the tech survives is it must be mandated, and then it&amp;#x27;s a question of whose problem does it solve?&lt;p&gt;The only people that a global digital identity solves a problem for are the people administering it, literally against the whole world. The survivors will ask, &amp;quot;how did it all happen so fast, what were the warnings?&amp;quot; and this obscure comment will be the hunger stone and harbinger. I&amp;#x27;m literally saying millions of people will die, partially because of my inability to be persuasive, but mostly because of your misunderstanding of what this technology does and of what it is the effect.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>maroonblazer</author><text>&amp;gt; they are not a consumer product anybody actually wants because their use cases are all about enforcing rules against the identity subject. The only way the tech survives is it must be mandated, and then it&amp;#x27;s a question of whose problem does it solve?&lt;p&gt;Doesn&amp;#x27;t the CLEAR example in the article&amp;#x27;s opening paragraph contradict your claim?</text></comment>