Not sure what invoking children here does for the sake of argumentation. Digital ID is not bad; the issue is the implementation of digital ID that will cause huge issues such as giving billions of pounds to friends of MPs

▲

graemep 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Not sure what invoking children here does for the sake of argumentation.

Because by requiring children, but not adults, to have digital ID as part of a much larger (and pretty terrible) law that is already close to being passed and disguising it as a safeguarding measure they are sneaking it in for some people AND getting the next generation used to it.

> Digital ID is not bad;

The opposition to digital ID is largely coming from people who do think Digital ID is bad.

	▲	vablings 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Digital ID is a very wishy-washy concept that has been co-opted by various groups to make strong statements about government overreach. If you want to make criticism you should make narrower statements, for example. A centralized ID system that can be used to safely verify the authenticity of a presenting party is good! If that system can be used to track this person in more invasive ways than already possible with IMSI catchers, credit cards and facial recognition that is bad! People think Digital ID is bad and this everlasting evil concept that will further make the most surveilled country in the world an Orwellian nightmare overnight which is a dramatization. The devil is really in the details here and depending on what flavors of implementation determines the "goodness"

▲

nephihaha 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Digital ID alone is not the endgoal but a system that will encompass every aspect of people's lives, and can be switched off in an instant.

	▲	vablings 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I heard the same hogwash over covid and vaccine passports, it didn't happen.