Is Digital ID a threat to freedom?

[Infidel Dog]

Look, you're fooling nobody. You're for it and against it. For the idea the of too much control is a problem for a sentence or when it's convenient to you then it's all, "We have firemen so don't worry about secret police. It'll be fine."

 

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

Look, you're fooling nobody. 

Right. Like I care so much I would miss represent my views on here.  Your condition is known in pathological neurology as "pretzel brain".  The worst day of your life is when I agree with you on some things, clearly. ?

 

Here's the Sun's take.

 

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/furey-digital-ids-just-the-beginning-canadians-need-to-think-hard-about-these-issues/wcm/d40f05f2-5685-4546-ba01-65cd572a81ef/amp/

 

... I thought of another take on this: maybe some big money consultants are selling this to government as a way to bill them for some massive new project.

It will go wrong so I won't be getting one of these until about 10 years in.

[Infidel Dog]

There was no problem, freezing the bank accounts of people disagreeing with mandates. Right, Mikey?

[Michael Hardner]

1 minute ago, Infidel Dog said:

There was no problem, freezing the bank accounts of people disagreeing with mandates. Right, Mikey?

Did that happen?

In your quest to disagree with me on the worst day of your life, I respectfully request a cite.

[Infidel Dog]

Some of us and more every day won't play boiling frog to you and yours. We're jumping out of the pot. Don't like it? We don't care.

[Infidel Dog]

Forget about cites. You know the image that's frozen in mine and many others' heads?

Trudeau at the podium telling us why he's freezing bank accounts and Chrystia Freeland nodding like a dashboard bobblehead in the background.

But we didn't see that, right? Because I won't jump the fence for you and wrestle with the metaphorical pig. "You just get dirty and the pig likes it."

Edited February 12, 2023 by Infidel Dog

[Michael Hardner]

26 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

Some of us and more every day won't play boiling frog to you and yours. We're jumping out of the pot. Don't like it? We don't care.

Worst day of your life.

[blackbird]

"Alberta has joined Saskatchewan as the only Canadian provinces opposed to implementing a national health-care “digital ID.” Premier Danielle Smith tweeted Friday afternoon that she stands firmly with Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe in protecting private health information. I agree and stand firmly with @PremierScottMoe in protecting Albertans’ private health information."

Premier Smith says no to national health-care 'Digital ID'- Rebel News

These are the only Premiers that have any brains on this digital ID.  I guess the rest of them don't care or are in favour of it.

Especially the BC NDP Premier will be all for it.  The more government control, the better for the NDP.

[scribblet]

The digital IDs are a tool for government control and compliance as are so called 15 minute cities .

OTTAWA — The federal government has presented a new health-care funding offer that would see Ottawa shift $196 billion to the provinces and territories over the next 10 years in exchange for commitments to massively upgrade health-care data collection and digital medical records

 https://ca.news.yahoo.com/trudeau-present-health-care-offer-090000116.html

 

[Zeitgeist]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

I'm trying to understand what the difference is between the digital ID and SIN#.  Can you explain what additional power the digital ID would give the government?

 

If the government wanted to show medical records to border guards couldn't they do that today?

When it’s digital it’s much more accessible.  Basically all of your personal data is stored digitally and accessible by decree.  We already learned from Snowden that the public is under surveillance, but we at least have the pretence of “no search and seizure without a warrant” in a court of law.  When that information is available at the speed of light from the comfort of someone’s laptop, you’re asking for abuse.  We already know that “emergency powers” and “national security threat” give a pass to such surveillance.  We also know that if security services want to skirt due process, for example using surveillance without a warrant, they can find the evidence and use it retroactively.  We saw retroactive crime law implemented during the pandemic.  People who legally donated to a protest were suddenly deemed to be engaged in criminal activities (and therefore had their money seized) for doing something that wasn’t a crime at the time they did it (making a donation).  The sheer willful ignorance and lack of indignation among people in positions of authority and supposedly intelligent people, including on this forum, was incredible to watch.

The take away from history is that we must protect individual rights, including the right to privacy.  That’s why we have laws and a constitution.  That’s the theory anyway.  I don’t think our rights are protected enough. Why would we give another inch of access to personal information to the powers that be?  You know it only takes a crisis for government to justify further infringements to privacy and individual rights.  

Edited February 12, 2023 by Zeitgeist

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

"Alberta has joined Saskatchewan as the only Canadian provinces opposed to implementing a national health-care “digital ID.” Premier Danielle Smith tweeted Friday afternoon  

What.

 Seems to be online now.

 

https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/e-services/e-services-individuals/account-individuals/myalberta-id-help.html

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://account.alberta.ca/&ved=2ahUKEwihhpqK8JD9AhUZjYkEHXTjBY4QFnoECA8QAQ&usg=AOvVaw2CZQIHyaUtFHfsjhCzPyVZ

 

 

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

1. When it’s digital it’s much more accessible.  Basically all of your personal data is stored digitally and accessible by decree.   

1. I think that your post mostly laments a situation that has existed since forever, but I think that I get it now at least. 

It's not a new ID# as much as it's a data service that allows apps to validate your ID.

There's no new information, other than the key itself, but a way to see who you are quickly.

So that validates what I said somewhat, but really it validates what people like you are saying about privacy, security etc. 

And it seems to me that they don't want to use a SIN because that's supposed to be secure.  But then they're going to unleash this new number that will be less secure.

Like I say, I don't think that the folks who brought us Phoenix can be trusted to do this right.  I'll wait.

[Zeitgeist]

18 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. I think that your post mostly laments a situation that has existed since forever, but I think that I get it now at least. 

It's not a new ID# as much as it's a data service that allows apps to validate your ID.

There's no new information, other than the key itself, but a way to see who you are quickly.

So that validates what I said somewhat, but really it validates what people like you are saying about privacy, security etc. 

And it seems to me that they don't want to use a SIN because that's supposed to be secure.  But then they're going to unleash this new number that will be less secure.

Like I say, I don't think that the folks who brought us Phoenix can be trusted to do this right.  I'll wait.

Okay good, you’re paying attention.

As someone who was mostly left of centre most of my life, even I can see how dangerously overreaching our government has become, but when I try to find a political movement that opposes the stakeholder capitalist tecnocracy, there’s a dearth of opposition.  This has been my point over the past year.  You don’t want to live in a country where diversity of thought, including political views, are unacceptable and state dogma is reinforced technologically and through media that are highly dependent on state funding.  Such a country quickly becomes a de facto one party system.

Digital ID makes it easier to gather comprehensive information about citizens and to restrict access to freedoms at the speed of light.  China loves social credit systems and surveillance because the government can socially engineer the public to follow state dogma with rapid efficiency. Punishment can be instant.  No trial necessary.  

Edited February 12, 2023 by Zeitgeist

[eyeball]

8 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Punishment can be instant.  No trial necessary.  

Just a couple drones to escort you to the nearest disintegration chamber.

Baaaa?!

[Infidel Dog]

You know who Digital IDs will one day be weaponized to protect us from?

People like 16 year old Josh Alexander:

"

That Canada is becoming less tolerant comes as no surprise, but even so a Catholic high school getting one of their 16-year-old students arrested is a bit of a shock, especially when the heart of the issue is his religious beliefs.

Josh, a Christian, believes there are only two genders, that people can’t switch genders, and that male students shouldn’t use girls’ washrooms. But expressing those views in a classroom discussion on gender at St. Joseph’s Catholic High School in Renfrew, Ont., got him suspended.

“I walked into one of my classes. I sat down and everyone looked pretty surprised to see me there. Within two minutes the vice-principal was in the classroom asking me to leave,” Alexander said of his attempt to reenter the school this week, adding that he was met with police almost immediately after leaving class."

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/catholic-school-has-student-arrested-for-expressing-catholic-beliefs

 

Except the middle man in the future won't be some Prog wokey teacher who somehow scammed a position in a Catholic school.

It will be the legally required reporting of an infraction to a central data base that will be alerted by a digital ID. The consequences will be more certain and there will be consequences. Even if it's just 10 points against his social credit score.

[Michael Hardner]

7 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

You know who Digital IDs will one day be weaponized to protect us from?

1. This has zero to do with Digital IDs.
2. The student in question was banned from campus, which is why they were arrested.
3. You can't provide cogent criticism of policy if you are so easily triggered by every issue that you barf all over a thread with unrelated complaints.  Try to focus, is my suggestion.

[Nationalist]

23 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. This has zero to do with Digital IDs.
2. The student in question was banned from campus, which is why they were arrested.
3. You can't provide cogent criticism of policy if you are so easily triggered by every issue that you barf all over a thread with unrelated complaints.  Try to focus, is my suggestion.

And my suggestion Mike, is that you come blossoming out of the closet and proudly proclaim your progressive liberalism. It's OK Mike. Don't be afraid of being yourself.

As for these digital IDs...it puts our Healthcare uses and needs directly into a DB where it can be used in a myriad of ways. Some beneficial...some abusive.

Is it necessary? No.

[WestCanMan]

On 2/11/2023 at 5:32 AM, blackbird said:

"Despite the obvious paternalism, a regulator of online expression appears to be coming down the pipe, based on consultations underway by the Department of Canadian Heritage. Such a system would run counter to our actual Canadian heritage, which includes the right to free expression — not government-regulated expression, which will be the practical result of censorship legislation.

That's just dripping with irony.

The Dept of Cdn Heritage is pushing fwd legislation that will ultimately say "Attacks on Canadian heritage will be mandatory, regardless of how inaccurate they may be, and no truth shall be spoken in its defence."

I guess our culture needs to go. It's the most wishy-washy, worthless, gutless culture in the history of mankind. I'm ready for a change. 

[Infidel Dog]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. This has zero to do with Digital IDs.
2. The student in question was banned from campus, which is why they were arrested.
3. You can't provide cogent criticism of policy if you are so easily triggered by every issue that you barf all over a thread with unrelated complaints.  Try to focus, is my suggestion.

It has everything to do with what Digital IDs will eventually be used for. That was the point. Go ahead, pretend you missed it.

Try banning an LGBTQ student for saying LGBTQ things and see if the police come to arrest him.

 

[Michael Hardner]

9 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

1. It has everything to do with what Digital IDs will eventually be used for.
2. That was the point. Go ahead, pretend you missed it.
3. Try banning an LGBTQ student for saying LGBTQ things and see if the police come to arrest him.

 

1. Your exhaustive and exhausting imagination should not be deployed to drift a thread into "what possibly could be done by future scary people or evil Trudeau".  Let's ban staplers because .. my god can you imagine ?
2. Paranoia shortens lifespans, my friend.
3.Any student banned from campus is not allowed on, regardless of reason.  Piling your dislike of LGBTQ+ identities onto this is like lasagna on ice cream - unnecessary and unappetizing: send it back to the kitchen.


Try posting without a logical fallacy sometime. 

Edited February 13, 2023 by Michael Hardner

[Infidel Dog]

25 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Your exhaustive and exhausting imagination should not be deployed to drift a thread into "what possibly could be done by future scary people or evil Trudeau".  Let's ban staplers because .. my god can you imagine ?

Try posting without a logical fallacy sometime. 

And your Net Nannying is getting tedious.

Wrong-speakers being arrested for saying the wrong thing will be moved to the internet soon then quietly managed and arrested as offences when nobody is looking. It's already happening without a digital ID in the UK. Imagine when they get one.

Using the Christian speech as wrong-think example, we saw 3 more examples in Alberta during the scamdemic. Go ahead, ask for the cite. We both know you'll be watching video of an Alberta reverend being pulled out of his car into a waiting police car. These are the kinds of things Digital ID will facilitate. It won't be so messy and much broader is the only difference That's the point you continue to pretend you don't get.

Others see it though, no matter how much you think you can net nanny them away from believing their lying eyes.

Edited February 13, 2023 by Infidel Dog

[Infidel Dog]

Oh and speaking of logical fallacies, I love that stuff. I notice you didn't want to name the one you're accusing me of. 

Go ahead, name it. Let's see how big an expert you really are.

[Moonlight Graham]

From my understanding of past discussions (correct me if I'm wrong Michael), Michael wants mass surveillance of everyone and to have it publicly accessible to everyone.

Michael is big on transparency, not big on privacy or rights like warrants for search and seizure.

Michael likes public order, and compliance to authority.

[Infidel Dog]

46 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

Oh and speaking of logical fallacies, I love that stuff. I notice you didn't want to name the one you're accusing me of. 

Go ahead, name it. Let's see how big an expert you really are.

I'll even help you, Mikey. Would you like to go with this one:

https://www.thoughtco.com/hasty-generalization-fallacy-1690919

I couldn't remember the name of it so I had to look it up. I call it Lassoing.

Will that do?

I hope so because I'd like to make it famous. It's the left's favourite trick. The parameters don't quite catch what I'm talking about once you stop pretending you don't understand I'm talking about a projected possibility based on real life examples and not claiming that projection as existing fact.

 

Edited February 13, 2023 by Infidel Dog

[blackbird]

Bit of positive news on the television this morning.  Premier Scott Moe of Saskatchewan was answering questions and said there will be no digital ID information shared about individual Canadians or their health records.  He said they received a few hundreds letters expressing concern about it.  Letters do make a difference.

He said the only information that would be shared is aggregate information as he called it.  He said this is the only kind of information that is asked for.  This is information about the number of people treated for various things, and such statistical information.  He emphasized it will not include personal health records or personal information about individuals.  He says releasing personal information would be illegal anyway.  The only people who have a right to personal health information are health professionals.  Let's hope he is correct.

The only question I have is why didn't the federal health minister or Trudeau himself make this clear in a public statement to the public.  They have had months to tell the public, but as far as I know said absolutely nothing about what kind of information they were talking about.  Very strange and irresponsible.

Edited February 13, 2023 by blackbird