The disturbing thing is that instead of breaking monopolistic behemoths who are feeding their empires from our data, governments are offloading more power to them. If some form of Digital ID is required it must be done on government level with proper public oversight and always available analogue procedures and backup.
But this is convenient, you say.
What is this? Because you have a digital gizmo, knowing all about you, you cannot comprehend the magnitude of situation? You trust a private corporation more than actual laws and government procedures and you feel right and cool?
You have nothing to hide and everyone is having your data anyway?
The Minority Report version of the future is building in front of you and you don't care, because is convenient?
Are you not informed? Are you technically uneducated? Or are you blind? CCP Social rating is working in China. In the next two years will work globally, under different "democratic" branding.
What is a logical response? The logical response is simple. It is time to balance convenience with privacy and some form of "realistic" view of the world.
This corporate power will be abused. The question is how soon.
>You trust a private corporation more than actual laws and government procedures and you feel right and cool?
Governments all around the world have proven many times that they are corrupt, incompetent, constantly make _horrible_ mistakes that impact our privacy, etc.
What's your point exactly?
So have private corporations. The point is that government at least has a mandate to protect it's citizens. Corporations explicitly do not care... and in fact there are many situations where they would be taking on significant liability if they put user privacy above profit (putting any above profit risks a shareholder suit or shareholder activism to bump executives/board)
In Brazil the government has its own app, through which you can produce both your driver's license (it's a national license) and the registration for you vehicle when required. A QR Code is generated along with a fac-simile of the paper-version of the document.
Solutions must be created publicly with active participation of experts from different domains.
Regulations and laws must be defined with expertise and care for the future of humanity, with proper protection of privacy and existing legislative frameworks.
There are proven principles that define our world.
The tech overlords are playing gods at the moment, and the minions are following the lead.
Solutions arise when expertise is manifested trough political and public action.
Bed time stories about convenience and trust are for kids. Grown-up humans are using history as a reference to protect the future and work actively towards balanced implementation.
One logical tech solution is everything that is of critical importance to be open-sourced and scrutinized on a regular basis. The other is to regulate big tech and create a line that cannot be crossed.
What is Apple anyway? Entertainment company? Utility company? Automotive company? Digital services company?
Now they are police and government?
Whats going on actually?
A corporation like Apple has by definition a conflicting view on upholding the law. They have financial interests, and putting someone with that in charge of identity (and therefore all freedom rights) is the definition of as corruptable as possible.
Apple cannot be trusted as long as they even don't give a damn on paying taxes. They only give a damn about the law when it fits their financial agenda.
> The disturbing thing is that instead of breaking monopolistic behemoths who are feeding their empires from our data, governments are offloading more power to them.
I was on the ISO standard body for a short time on this. Not sure how much impact I had, but I advocated for this. There were also proposals for letting you only disclose subsets of information, although I don't know the state of that adoption. This would, for example, let you present your verified ID at a supermarket for restricted items purchase without disclosing anything other than that you are of a sufficient age and a photo (no name, address, etc).
RDW (the Dutch DMV, except allowed to be technologically competent) allowed the excellent prototype work that they funded (built by engineers at UL) to be open-sourced (https://github.com/mDL-ILP).
As per the announcement, the prompt will show you what information specifically the reader is requesting, which implies that depending on the use case it will be configured to request only the information needed (if your local supermarket requests your home address or anything else besides your age), you'd see that and be able to refuse the prompt.
Thank you for advocating for it, I am sure it made a difference!
I know even in the US when stores started scanning physical drivers licenses people were / are irked when we're talking about validating a birth date... I think just presenting what the user wants is a good proposal.
> I don't want to hand an unlocked phone over to someone just to show ID.
this reminds me of a time when i traveled to Canada from U.S and the customs dude wanted to see my return flight ticket. I handed over my phone without thinking much and i can see from the glare on his eyeglasses that he opened my Messages app and scrolled through them and also went inside my conversation with my Dad. it was a learning experience.
What a creep... People will often abuse any little power they have. You should have reported the guy, anonymously if possible.
As for the problem at hand, ideally we should be able to 'lock' the device on a certain screen or while using a certain app whenever we wanted. Notifications disabled as well.
How long until we get a video of the first officer demanding the person hand over their phone because "I just need to take this back to my cruiser to verify your ID"?
You can currently use Wallet and Apple Pay without unlocking the rest of the phone. I'm sure they've thought of this and probably made it so that only the license can be unlocked.
In my state of Australia, NSW, we have digital IDs we can access through the state services app. I was glad to know I was never required to had my device over. The cops can look but not touch which is great.
> Biometric authentication using Face ID and Touch ID ensures that only the person who added the ID to the device can view or present their ID or license in Wallet.
I assume it works similarly to Apple Wallet currently does:
If you double click the power button without looking at the screen, it’ll request face unlock for the payment card; and after exiting this screen, it still requires another face unlock for the phone itself.
If you are aware that your iPhone has been stolen, the first thing you should do is mark it as lost/stolen in iCloud. This will deactivate all functionality behind a newly assigned pin code.
Does that mean you don't sign in to your email provider (or any websites) on your phone? Or that you only use the browser in private mode and close all tabs as soon as they are done?
Just curious how you mitigate the danger of a third party accessing your private information if your phone is ever lost/stolen.
> Arizona, Connecticut, Georgia, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Oklahoma, and Utah are among the first states to bring state IDs and driver’s licenses in Wallet to their residents
This currently may only be for a TSA usecase but this area of using a phone to show ID starts to get very murky very quickly
My insurance company has an app that will display my proof of insurance - just hand your phone to the police officer at the stop.
The trouble is you are legally surrendering the possession of your unlocked phone to a police officer who can then search through it. I asked a lawyer friend about this and he said the law doesn't allow you to granularly declare the terms under which you surrender your property (ie you can't say "don't look at anything else officer, just keep that app window open").
It's the same with finger prints as biometric - no one considered that you can plead the 5th when asked for a pin code but you can't decline to have your fingerprints taken (including on your own phone sensor). I'm assuming face recognition is same.
Back to this Apple Wallet announcement, TSA scanning is a very restrictive usecase that feels like just a wedge otherwise it's pretty low value.
But then why would anyone want to hand over their phone to the police (or another government agency) so they can take the phone with the ID on it back to their cruiser to write up your ticket. Of course they are going to have a quick search through your phone. That's not paranoia, that's good police work on their part.
Adding your government ID to Apple Wallet just seems like something that sounds technically cool but not properly thought out OR will only have very limited usecases.
There's an iOS feature called Guided Access[1], which allows you to hand over your phone in a limited-access state (locked to the current app, optionally with areas of the screen disabled for input - or whole input classes like touch/keyboard/motion/volume control disabled). You can also apply a time limit, after which time the phone requires you to authenticate (you can even prohibit Face ID to exit guided access, requiring a PIN instead).
Once enabled and in an app, you just triple-click the side button to start
It's not designed for fully-untrusted users, of course - my understanding is that no in-memory key storage is invalidated. It's useful for handing a phone to friends and relatives to browse some photos with limited access to the rest of your files, and without notifications appearing
Too bad that apps cannot access integrated Guided Access APIs. It's a little clunky for most people to remember to use this setting for sharing something like an ID.
> It's the same with finger prints as biometric - no one considered that you can plead the 5th when asked for a pin code but you can't decline to have your fingerprints taken (including on your own phone sensor). I'm assuming face recognition is same.
Always worth mentioning that you can hold power and either volume button for 3 seconds on an iPhone to disable biometrics until the next unlock. It brings up the power off/SOS controls, but dismissing those will require a passcode to unlock.
Good to know as it's fairly easy to do in a pocket or when under duress.
You still need to Face/Touch ID for Wallet, as you already do.
It won’t unlock your device as well, is their point. Just like Wallet currently operates.
> Biometric authentication using Face ID and Touch ID ensures that only the person who added the ID to the device can view or present their ID or license in Wallet.
That's fair point which I both missed and not personally familiar with as I'm an Android user (Android's equivalent of Apple Wallet does require you to unlock your phone).
I still worry about relying on my phone to hold my ID and then surrendering my phone when it's reasonable for the other party (presumably a government entity) to want to look at it in more detail or take the ID away for a period of time (eg during a traffic stop they will take your ID to run you through the computer and write your ticket up)
I also worry functionality like this leads to changes in general expectations which leads to more implementation that may not be as carefully executed
Not only that but you are legally permitted to withdraw your consent to search at any time. Just merely handing your phone to an officer unlocked does not permit a limitless search and seizure.
However if during that time the officer sees material that constitutes probable cause for a search, they can seize the phone without your ability to withdraw consent.
However it'll very likely require first unlock which puts the phone in a very vulnerable state (storing unencrypted data, or at least the keys in memory).
It is way easier for law enforcement to get into phones after first unlock than it is from a powered down phone.
And one day these bugs will be worked out and it'll be commonplace.
We do a great job of pointing out the things people will stub their toes on, technologically, and then fail to take advantage of the improvements when they become commonplace.
Sure, using my phone as my identity, medical record, car key, and ATM has potential flaws...but then they're mostly worked out (or end up being not an issue) and...hey, it's a pretty neat idea.
(that just happens to lock you into a walled garden, leasing the hardware, for the rest of your life.)
I’ve seen the non-tech version of this first hand. A wallet was handed to a police officer at a traffic stop to show the ID in the clear plastic window. The cop then rifled through the rest of the wallet and found a second fake ID.
Imagine a cop taking your unlocked phone back to his car to “run your license”.
One use case for this is places like Pennsylvania where you typically need to produce a government-issued ID to purchase alcohol.
In 100%-proof-of-ID stores, cashiers often don't look at the photo on the ID, they scan the bar code on the back of the Driver's License that's presented.
Why not use the Digital ID in an Apple Wallet in those situations?
THIS is what strikes me as the use case for this, and 100% absolutely not using it with any interaction with the law. Preferably the only way I ever go through any law interaction with my phone on me is if it's turned off, or at the very very least have used the emergency function to disable Touch ID/Face ID which also discards the transient keys for decrypting storage (and no I don't use iCloud Backup or iCloud Photos). Smartphones and computers at this point fare essentially exocortexes, but the law does not protect them the same way it protects the contents of our minds.
However, there are lots and lots and lots of private interactions where cryptographic assertable proof of identity would be enormously valuable and a big win for privacy, fraud reduction etc, but the other party certainly has zero right or capability to demand your device, go through it and use force against you based on what they find there. Not just in retail but particularly online the state of identity verification in the US is just fucking abysmal even now. Common workarounds include stuff like literally taking a photo of your government ID and then emailing it, which of course is terrible in every respect.
From the description and example screen it appears this offers reasonably fine-grained information options. So if there was a secure generally available API ala Apple Pay wherein sites could simply request the minimum needed like age verification and address verification (obviously I'm supplying the address anyway to have things shipped, but this would help assert that yes that was my address) that could be quite valuable if still imperfect.
I'm surprised so many of the comments jumped right to presenting ID to the government. This sort of thing was exactly what I had in mind too. My watch can already:
- stream music when I go for a run in the park
- give emergency info to first responders if something happens to me while I'm out
- pay for the bus or train home if I need it for some reason with Omny + Apple Pay
- pay for things I stop to buy with Apple Pay
Giving govt-issued proof of age so I can buy a beer on occasion after a workout without taking my drivers' license with me is a welcome addition to all the rest of that power.
If I'm crossing a border, I've already got alternative hard-copy ID on me.
In the words of Neil Postman "What problem is this technology trying to solve??"
I just don't get it. How much easier do you need it to be than to hand someone an ID card?
The trade offs being made here for the ever slightest convenience make absolute no sense to me.
It is this weird technological addiction to novelty even when there is basically no value or even difference. The only gain is that it is new and novel.
It's not just convenience -- it's also about privacy. For example, I don't like disclosing my home address just to prove I'm old enough to buy alcohol.
With this, I won't have to since it allows for asserting proof of age without disclosing additional information.
Makes sense. COVID vaccination credentials are a great example. The work done with SMART health credentials and vertical solutions like NY Excelsior Pass and Israel’s Greenpass pave the way.
Being able to pay to bypass TSA or cut the line for TSA has always been a thing. Private jets, Precheck, and this monstrosity where you pay a private company to become a more equal member of US society:
I'm not sure it's ALWAYS been a thing, or at least it's scale has definitely grown more recently, but, yeah, that's why I thought of it being extended to 'those with e-wallets', of course.
I do won't do any of that "clear" or even "pre-check" stuff just on principle; most everyone I know thinks I'm crazy. I try to fly as little as I can these days, even before pandemic, it's just so unpleasant both in terms of security/dignity as well as physical comfort.
Digital ID for everyone, here we go.
Globally, right?
Not for me do. Until there is no other option than this, I will refuse it.
If I am lucky I have 30-40 something years ahead of me, more is a bonus territory.
So I intend to live as a human being, not some database record "because of digitalization".
If this means not to have smartphone or using computers in local networks, so be it.
Big F--- you for corporations and governments of the world for collaborating behind the scenes to move us to Minority Report reality.
Apple the global leader in surveillance and government control. Who would guess?
What is the new slogan Apple: You are living it wrong?
> So I intend to live as a human being, not some database record
You are already a database record, so are you not currently living as a human being? Do my medical records prevent me from living as a human being? I have so many questions.
I'm not grandparent poster, but depending on who supplies and configures the ID reader, a digital system makes it easier to track people. E.g. if you show your ID at a liquor store, currently the cashier would just check your age and then forget about you. If s/he has a barcode scanner or an Apple ID scanner, then that scanner can log your visits. And your whereabouts can be tracked by following where your ID was scanned throughtout time.
In China, ID cards have RFID and they have to be scanned when entering a train station or airports (or the old town of Lhasa in Tibet), so a future government here might abuse a similar system to track you and maybe harass you by saying "You were in this area yesterday, there was $SOME_BAD_EVENT, what's your alibi?". China also implements long distance travel bans by refusing you entry to the train station/airport, e.g. if you have a bad "social score", which, I imagine would be ripe for abuse in a Trumpian regime. (Although the FBI already abused the no-fly list for the purposes of harassing individuals)
Can someone explain the huge net gain in conveinence you get from not carrying a wallet?
I know if I drop my wallet, the cards inside will still work. They won't be out-of-service-area or forgot to be charged.
The wallet also caters to many use cases the phone will never support. That can be high-tech stuff like some obscure closed-loop fare card or keycard system that isn't NFC-compatible, or the paper punch card from the local burrito place.
And it lets me carry cash, which is still less of a production number for plenty of informal payments-- I'm not walking through a Apple Pay/Zelle/PayPal transaction at a yard sale.
Maybe it's because I'm fat and wear loose fitting clothes-- having a wallet in my pocket is not a huge frustration.
I am preserving your and some other (more explicit) heavily-downvoted comments here that paint a disturbingly prophetic picture of where things are going to go. We know what's happening to our freedoms and what the future will look like. Too bad there's not enough of us to fight back.
>> Too bad there’s not enough of us to fight back.
I don’t think so. You can see glimmers of hope in people who refuse to buy into propaganda every day if you go looking for it. Just today, for example, Project Veritas successfully got a California high school teacher fired for literally trying to convert his students to communists.
There are lots of people doing horrible things with tech, and programmers willing to write the shit code that executes on those desires, but all of that comes from the desire for more money and power. It has always been the case that smart humans with drive chase money and power, but it often only takes a small handful of people to bring change to even the worst tyranny. Don’t lose hope for freedom, friend.
Why is this being done by Apple and not the government itself? This should be device agnostic.
Like Indian Govt's DigiLocker.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DigiLocker
What makes you think governments aren't involved? The article says:
> Apple’s mobile ID implementation supports the ISO 18013-5 mDL (mobile driver’s license) standard which Apple has played an active role in the development of
If you do a little casual googling, you will find references to the Australian government being involved in the development of that standard. You can also find proposals from the US Department of Homeland Security that refer to the standard.
Speaking of Google, Wikipedia says
> For example, Android's JetPack suite comes with specific support for ISO 18013–5 from version API 24.
REAL ID only happened because of 9/11 (reactionaries are against it) and figured out how to use it to suppress voting. Individual states vary greatly in the US - there are people who don’t want people to have easy access to ID.
Im not super fond of the idea of having a brand lock-in to make it easier to work with the governments. This feels a bit like a world where Turbotax was the only game in town for softwares to file taxes. So you'd have either the manual way, or Intuit and that's it.
This isn't as bad, and I didn't look much into it so maybe there's stuff I don't know that lessens the negative, but seeing it being Apple specific doesn't make me feel so good.
Readit News
But this is convenient, you say. What is this? Because you have a digital gizmo, knowing all about you, you cannot comprehend the magnitude of situation? You trust a private corporation more than actual laws and government procedures and you feel right and cool?
You have nothing to hide and everyone is having your data anyway? The Minority Report version of the future is building in front of you and you don't care, because is convenient? Are you not informed? Are you technically uneducated? Or are you blind? CCP Social rating is working in China. In the next two years will work globally, under different "democratic" branding.
What is a logical response? The logical response is simple. It is time to balance convenience with privacy and some form of "realistic" view of the world. This corporate power will be abused. The question is how soon.
Governments all around the world have proven many times that they are corrupt, incompetent, constantly make _horrible_ mistakes that impact our privacy, etc. What's your point exactly?
You use either a PIN or FaceID to log in to the app, and it provides the above as well as our covid QR logins for contact tracing.
Regulations and laws must be defined with expertise and care for the future of humanity, with proper protection of privacy and existing legislative frameworks.
There are proven principles that define our world. The tech overlords are playing gods at the moment, and the minions are following the lead.
Solutions arise when expertise is manifested trough political and public action. Bed time stories about convenience and trust are for kids. Grown-up humans are using history as a reference to protect the future and work actively towards balanced implementation.
One logical tech solution is everything that is of critical importance to be open-sourced and scrutinized on a regular basis. The other is to regulate big tech and create a line that cannot be crossed.
What is Apple anyway? Entertainment company? Utility company? Automotive company? Digital services company? Now they are police and government? Whats going on actually?
Sorta like credit scores?
Apple cannot be trusted as long as they even don't give a damn on paying taxes. They only give a damn about the law when it fits their financial agenda.
It's called a partnership, I think
That was my first concern.
I don't want to hand an unlocked phone over to someone just to show ID. I'm not surprised, but still glad they covered this use case.
RDW (the Dutch DMV, except allowed to be technologically competent) allowed the excellent prototype work that they funded (built by engineers at UL) to be open-sourced (https://github.com/mDL-ILP).
Thank you for advocating for it, I am sure it made a difference!
I know even in the US when stores started scanning physical drivers licenses people were / are irked when we're talking about validating a birth date... I think just presenting what the user wants is a good proposal.
this reminds me of a time when i traveled to Canada from U.S and the customs dude wanted to see my return flight ticket. I handed over my phone without thinking much and i can see from the glare on his eyeglasses that he opened my Messages app and scrolled through them and also went inside my conversation with my Dad. it was a learning experience.
As for the problem at hand, ideally we should be able to 'lock' the device on a certain screen or while using a certain app whenever we wanted. Notifications disabled as well.
Dead Comment
Is that still the case?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28311722
> Biometric authentication using Face ID and Touch ID ensures that only the person who added the ID to the device can view or present their ID or license in Wallet.
same way someone steals your wallet they can access your id or "use it".
If you double click the power button without looking at the screen, it’ll request face unlock for the payment card; and after exiting this screen, it still requires another face unlock for the phone itself.
They do also state that:
>Apple and the issuing states do not know when or where users present their IDs.
That's nice too.
I wonder if I'll even be able to use it for IDs.
Just curious how you mitigate the danger of a third party accessing your private information if your phone is ever lost/stolen.
My insurance company has an app that will display my proof of insurance - just hand your phone to the police officer at the stop.
The trouble is you are legally surrendering the possession of your unlocked phone to a police officer who can then search through it. I asked a lawyer friend about this and he said the law doesn't allow you to granularly declare the terms under which you surrender your property (ie you can't say "don't look at anything else officer, just keep that app window open").
It's the same with finger prints as biometric - no one considered that you can plead the 5th when asked for a pin code but you can't decline to have your fingerprints taken (including on your own phone sensor). I'm assuming face recognition is same.
Back to this Apple Wallet announcement, TSA scanning is a very restrictive usecase that feels like just a wedge otherwise it's pretty low value.
But then why would anyone want to hand over their phone to the police (or another government agency) so they can take the phone with the ID on it back to their cruiser to write up your ticket. Of course they are going to have a quick search through your phone. That's not paranoia, that's good police work on their part.
Adding your government ID to Apple Wallet just seems like something that sounds technically cool but not properly thought out OR will only have very limited usecases.
Once enabled and in an app, you just triple-click the side button to start
It's not designed for fully-untrusted users, of course - my understanding is that no in-memory key storage is invalidated. It's useful for handing a phone to friends and relatives to browse some photos with limited access to the rest of your files, and without notifications appearing
[1] https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT202612
Always worth mentioning that you can hold power and either volume button for 3 seconds on an iPhone to disable biometrics until the next unlock. It brings up the power off/SOS controls, but dismissing those will require a passcode to unlock.
Good to know as it's fairly easy to do in a pocket or when under duress.
From the announcement:
>Users do not need to unlock, show, or hand over their device to present their ID.
It won’t unlock your device as well, is their point. Just like Wallet currently operates.
> Biometric authentication using Face ID and Touch ID ensures that only the person who added the ID to the device can view or present their ID or license in Wallet.
I still worry about relying on my phone to hold my ID and then surrendering my phone when it's reasonable for the other party (presumably a government entity) to want to look at it in more detail or take the ID away for a period of time (eg during a traffic stop they will take your ID to run you through the computer and write your ticket up)
I also worry functionality like this leads to changes in general expectations which leads to more implementation that may not be as carefully executed
Dead Comment
Dead Comment
However if during that time the officer sees material that constitutes probable cause for a search, they can seize the phone without your ability to withdraw consent.
IANAL
It is way easier for law enforcement to get into phones after first unlock than it is from a powered down phone.
We do a great job of pointing out the things people will stub their toes on, technologically, and then fail to take advantage of the improvements when they become commonplace.
Sure, using my phone as my identity, medical record, car key, and ATM has potential flaws...but then they're mostly worked out (or end up being not an issue) and...hey, it's a pretty neat idea.
(that just happens to lock you into a walled garden, leasing the hardware, for the rest of your life.)
Deleted Comment
Imagine a cop taking your unlocked phone back to his car to “run your license”.
In 100%-proof-of-ID stores, cashiers often don't look at the photo on the ID, they scan the bar code on the back of the Driver's License that's presented.
Why not use the Digital ID in an Apple Wallet in those situations?
However, there are lots and lots and lots of private interactions where cryptographic assertable proof of identity would be enormously valuable and a big win for privacy, fraud reduction etc, but the other party certainly has zero right or capability to demand your device, go through it and use force against you based on what they find there. Not just in retail but particularly online the state of identity verification in the US is just fucking abysmal even now. Common workarounds include stuff like literally taking a photo of your government ID and then emailing it, which of course is terrible in every respect.
From the description and example screen it appears this offers reasonably fine-grained information options. So if there was a secure generally available API ala Apple Pay wherein sites could simply request the minimum needed like age verification and address verification (obviously I'm supplying the address anyway to have things shipped, but this would help assert that yes that was my address) that could be quite valuable if still imperfect.
- stream music when I go for a run in the park
- give emergency info to first responders if something happens to me while I'm out
- pay for the bus or train home if I need it for some reason with Omny + Apple Pay
- pay for things I stop to buy with Apple Pay
Giving govt-issued proof of age so I can buy a beer on occasion after a workout without taking my drivers' license with me is a welcome addition to all the rest of that power.
If I'm crossing a border, I've already got alternative hard-copy ID on me.
I just don't get it. How much easier do you need it to be than to hand someone an ID card?
The trade offs being made here for the ever slightest convenience make absolute no sense to me.
It is this weird technological addiction to novelty even when there is basically no value or even difference. The only gain is that it is new and novel.
With this, I won't have to since it allows for asserting proof of age without disclosing additional information.
Deleted Comment
Deleted Comment
https://www.clearme.com/support/tsa-precheck/how-does-clear-...
I do won't do any of that "clear" or even "pre-check" stuff just on principle; most everyone I know thinks I'm crazy. I try to fly as little as I can these days, even before pandemic, it's just so unpleasant both in terms of security/dignity as well as physical comfort.
https://www.clearme.com/
If I am lucky I have 30-40 something years ahead of me, more is a bonus territory.
So I intend to live as a human being, not some database record "because of digitalization". If this means not to have smartphone or using computers in local networks, so be it.
Big F--- you for corporations and governments of the world for collaborating behind the scenes to move us to Minority Report reality. Apple the global leader in surveillance and government control. Who would guess? What is the new slogan Apple: You are living it wrong?
You are already a database record, so are you not currently living as a human being? Do my medical records prevent me from living as a human being? I have so many questions.
Is there something concrete you're worried about or is it you just don't like giving big brother too much of your info?
A dead battery and a virus on my phone stealing all of my data, identity, and then time to get it straightened out again.
In China, ID cards have RFID and they have to be scanned when entering a train station or airports (or the old town of Lhasa in Tibet), so a future government here might abuse a similar system to track you and maybe harass you by saying "You were in this area yesterday, there was $SOME_BAD_EVENT, what's your alibi?". China also implements long distance travel bans by refusing you entry to the train station/airport, e.g. if you have a bad "social score", which, I imagine would be ripe for abuse in a Trumpian regime. (Although the FBI already abused the no-fly list for the purposes of harassing individuals)
I know if I drop my wallet, the cards inside will still work. They won't be out-of-service-area or forgot to be charged.
The wallet also caters to many use cases the phone will never support. That can be high-tech stuff like some obscure closed-loop fare card or keycard system that isn't NFC-compatible, or the paper punch card from the local burrito place.
And it lets me carry cash, which is still less of a production number for plenty of informal payments-- I'm not walking through a Apple Pay/Zelle/PayPal transaction at a yard sale.
Maybe it's because I'm fat and wear loose fitting clothes-- having a wallet in my pocket is not a huge frustration.
I don’t think so. You can see glimmers of hope in people who refuse to buy into propaganda every day if you go looking for it. Just today, for example, Project Veritas successfully got a California high school teacher fired for literally trying to convert his students to communists.
There are lots of people doing horrible things with tech, and programmers willing to write the shit code that executes on those desires, but all of that comes from the desire for more money and power. It has always been the case that smart humans with drive chase money and power, but it often only takes a small handful of people to bring change to even the worst tyranny. Don’t lose hope for freedom, friend.
> Apple’s mobile ID implementation supports the ISO 18013-5 mDL (mobile driver’s license) standard which Apple has played an active role in the development of
If you do a little casual googling, you will find references to the Australian government being involved in the development of that standard. You can also find proposals from the US Department of Homeland Security that refer to the standard.
Speaking of Google, Wikipedia says
> For example, Android's JetPack suite comes with specific support for ISO 18013–5 from version API 24.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_driver%27s_license
Does that qualify as device agnostic?
I don't see a reason it can't be used with the government or that the government needs to make its own app.
REAL ID only happened because of 9/11 (reactionaries are against it) and figured out how to use it to suppress voting. Individual states vary greatly in the US - there are people who don’t want people to have easy access to ID.
Dead Comment
I'm of the opinion that Apple is a defacto arm (back channel) of the government now based on recent developments.
Deleted Comment
This isn't as bad, and I didn't look much into it so maybe there's stuff I don't know that lessens the negative, but seeing it being Apple specific doesn't make me feel so good.