Do not comply.

@etsyy @Intaglio_Dragon @Em0nM4stodon even suggesting it helps legitimize it. And we k.ow that they won't be using your bespoke crypto. They're uploading your ID to the pedophile Nazi vampire peter thiel, who then scans against 34 police databases (hey! We were promised this was just an age check!) And then leaves it so insecure the people who leak it Can't be called hackers because they didn't even have to hack anything to get all of it

@project1enigma @TheZwick32 @Em0nM4stodon who in turn is linked to Epstein

@etsyy @Intaglio_Dragon @Em0nM4stodon

The French came up with a technology to deal with overbearing elites a wee while back...

@etsyy @Intaglio_Dragon
I was once involved in an idea around technical id verification (which I abandoned for ethical reasons). There is no technical solution to this either that isn't completely dystopian as far as I can tell.

Chosing to trust people can only be done in a non-technical way, and the cost of broken trust is much lower than the cost of lacking trust.

I don't have the spoons to write down the whole argument, but I hope more people can trust this to be correct

@Em0nM4stodon

@iwein@mas.to @Intaglio_Dragon@furry.engineer @Em0nM4stodon@infosec.exchange on the surface, in a vacuum, I'm not against id verification or adjacent, but seeing as we don't live in a vacuum, I'm always forced to ask "why?" and then the subsequent "how?", neither of which have ever received a satisfactory response.

@iwein@mas.to @Intaglio_Dragon@furry.engineer @Em0nM4stodon@infosec.exchange they are always predicated on some sense of exclusion or superiority and are intended to be enforced via extremely easily manipulated and corruptible means.

tldr reductive and unproductive. a waste of time

@etsyy

I find the subject very interesting, so I'll go into it a little bit more. Even though I agree with your conclusion that it is a waste of time, I also think it's not a waste of time to understand the mechanisms you're touching on. And they're very poorly understood by most people.

I am myself a counter example to the premise that they're always based on exclusion or superiority…or I stand to be corrected (please feel free to do that).

I'll share the example. (1/n)

@etsyy why?

My (foolish) intention was to enable global universal base income for all humans.

The trick my left brain came up with was to id all humans, and then automatically give them a set amount of money on a certain schedule.

how? 1

The money would be sent to the wallet unlocked by an id, and naturally disappear from the system on the death of the individual. I still think that would create a fairer society in theory, but it hinges on the id mechanism. (2/n)

@etsyy
how? 2

To id people consistently (to prevent fraud), you'll need biometrics and/or some kind of central authority. And that's where the id breaks down into dystopia.

failure

in this design id becomes power, and id-ing people is not free. This means that identifying authorities have power over people, and whenever this happens, superiority and exclusion are more or less natural consequences.

I found that this idea was most appealing to fascists, for entirely the wrong reasons…

(3/n)

@etsyy I even ended up being invited to a meeting with a guy that publicly said the Neurenberg trials were illegitimate, while his friends were telling me it was a great investible idea, we should just nix the UBI from it and not deploy it in Africa.

Reads like bad fiction novel, but actually happened.

So yeah, I felt rightfully stupid for wasting my time on that, fried my brain, and became the crazy commie activist idiot I am now (The End)

@fluffykittycat @TheZwick32 @Em0nM4stodon Exactly.