Comment by Muromec

Comment by Muromec 10 hours ago

5 replies

I can explain the logic behind it.

The first step you need to take is view a government as a hostile entity. It's not your government, it's occupational government. It's unjust by default and you don't agree with the rules it makes, including immigration and taxes.

Now imagine there are three arms of the government -- the one that collects taxes, the one that administers unemployment benefits and the other, which gives out visa, including family reunification permits.

You, as natural born citizen want to bring another person from the outside as a partner and for that you need to sponsor their visa. Government in their infinite wisdom decided you need to earn a certain amount of income for a certain time to be able to sponsor a partner (otherwise you both will be able to claim benefits). To do so you get a list of unemployment premiums paid from one agency and submit to the other.

Now here is the kicker -- if the government is able to aggregate the data from all the agencies mentioned above, they can better implement their policy, i.e. deny you family reunification visa AND bust your for not paying taxes. To aggregate the data they need to have the primary key to join datasets, including data sets from the governments from other countries (see CRS).

In this imaginary situation you can get your partner a visa and immediately stop working. If the government is able to join datasets, something will automatically trigger and you will get the letter saying visa is revoked.

You can disagree or agree with any specific policy, or you can deny government the capability to implement privacy invading policies.

Think of it as a backslash against tracking by google on all the sites with ad sense, algorithmic feeds and the rest. Maybe gestapo is not sending you gulash tomorrow, but it's symptomatically not great.

Add:

Can the government ask Palantir to join datasets without the primary key? Sure they can and they do, that goes against the same principle as above. Is it better to have civil freedoms and privacy protection that come from literally doing Holocaust? It's better, but it's not on menu yet.

shangofox 10 hours ago

But the government can already do all that without Digital ID. That's my question with the fear mongering.

A hostile government can already link your data from all sorts of places. Digital ID at least helps us for more security.

Without Digital ID + Hostile Government you have the worst of both worlds.

  • agnishom 9 hours ago

    "But the government can already do all that without Digital ID."

    That may be true, but the point is that it makes law enforcement less perfect, and that can be good. That is the point "stavros" is making.

    Rosa parks broke the law by seating on a seat where she was "not supposed to". Hypothetically, if there were a quick ID check machine on the bus, it could have just prevented the whole thing from happening at all.

    • Muromec 7 hours ago

      There was a "quick check", just not the one based on identity. You can always publicly disagree with the result of the id check too.

  • Muromec 9 hours ago

    If you start with the premise that the government is hostile by default, it logically follows they will get some capability they didn't have before or increase the one they had. You will have less chance to fall through the cracks and the friction you get from not having the convenient thing is a proof that the beast is at least partially crippled.

    It's very often that government has a capability to retroactively assemble a very detailed information about a specific person, but doesn't have a capability to proactively screen the whole population and implement policy.

    Illegal immigration is a good example of it -- when somebody is already sitting in a van it's possible to figure out whether they are a citizen or not and maybe even find pictures of watermelons on their phone. It's however impossible to selectively block phone numbers and bank accounts of all the people who are present in the country without government authorization.

ta20240528 9 hours ago

Your entire post is motivated to allow people to deliberately scheme to break a multitude of laws.

SMH