Mazder
@mazder.bsky.social
24 followers 66 following 220 posts
I have no idea what the hell I am, what I am doing, or where I am going. Why do you follow me?! Anyone using/posting genAI content gets an insta-block. Pick up a pencil and learn ya lazy fucks!
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
mazder.bsky.social
If you have to vote tactically the LibDems are currently opposing digital id and are in the least looking to reform the OSA, I'd not actually repealing it.
mazder.bsky.social
And if, and only if, they show some actual care for data security and privacy.
I mean if there is an MoD style leak, or worse, an Estonia styled hack then everyone on the system is at risk. And if 13 y/o are on that system we'd've essentially ruined their lives as you can't unleak that data.
mazder.bsky.social
This is also not taking into consideration bad parents have been buying their kids non-age appropriate games for YEARS, hell I've seen with my own eyes parents openly buying GTA for their, like, 7 year old.
Government oversight causing platforms to over-restrict won't stop that, ever
mazder.bsky.social
It's less "warning" and more "restriction via a form of payment many people don't have"
A similarly silly comparison would be moving sales of alcohol to a form of crypto that's linked to a Veteran's ID.
Any restriction is just a restriction on top of the existing moderation tools
mazder.bsky.social
It is really weird for the EU to have such a hardon for biometrics when they have so many tourism based economies within their nations.
Nothing says "don't come here" more than "we'll but your biometric data on file with no ability to remove it".
mazder.bsky.social
These things should be outlined before the announcement they're definitely going to do it, and as per the response to the petition they are doing it.
Personally we need a lot more reassurance of actual data security first before we even consider it
I mean the OSA has just had data leaks so...
mazder.bsky.social
No, I'd also argue that with real names and faces that nuance would be further lost.
Americans don't "get" sarcasm as it is stereotypically, you want them coming for us with legal actions that can follow our real lives because they can't handle banter?
mazder.bsky.social
global system, who would, in this example, be the arbiters of what is/is not permitted to be said in the global eco-sphere where everyone is their real selves?
Are we going to have international warrants issued for a "crowd" of people protesting war crimes when that nation takes offense to it? 4/4
mazder.bsky.social
"I don't care if they burn the hotel down" it's going to go from fringe cases to common.
Hell I've said in public "Guy Fawkes had the right idea" to express my general distaste for government across 8 different prime ministers, does that class me as part of the problem?
Also the internet is a
3/?
mazder.bsky.social
arrested over pretty minor stuff.
We've all seen videos of officers being sent to people's homes over a bad social media post. Even if fake with the laws currently set as they are it's inviting more of that if you simply express exasperation. Lucy Connoly went to prison for essentially saying 2/?
mazder.bsky.social
True but if you wish to expose the crowd mentality people will get caught in the crossfire with the silly implementation of people saying "mean" things online being criminalised.
Actual harassment has been outstripped by negligible instances of people not using moderation tools getting people 1/?
mazder.bsky.social
The adage "don't feed the trolls" comes to mind.
There has been no end of heinous shit said online, but if you don't interact, block and ignore the "movements" fizzle out into tiny enclaves of irrelevance
mazder.bsky.social
Fraud isn't the concern for me, it's weak security causing leaks, hacks and scams
UK cyber security is abysmal, just look at the OSA where there has already been rumours of leaks of IDs within a month of it's implementation, actual reports will come sooner or later
mazder.bsky.social
So don't treat anyone online as 100% serious
We have no obligation to assume anything anyone says online to be true, opinions included.
Block features and content moderation should be sufficient if you also treat everyone as a potential liar and not push to "expose" everyone
mazder.bsky.social
Online, none can, that's the entire point.

In the wider world we already have multiple forms if id that already do that.
The question is the mandatory nature, who decides what is/is not allowed to be included or is/is not safe to display.
ATM the govt fails at this and I don't trust their abilities
mazder.bsky.social
1) those authentication systems are in lieu of anonymous systems that can work by auto-generating codes instead.
2) I have never used biometric data unlocks on my phone/bank as I don't want that being attached if that data is hacked, not should we link biometrics to our behaviour and activity
mazder.bsky.social
In the same way that the MoD kept all the info about Afghan people who helped us against the Taliban we were supposed to keep safe?

If the MoD can't keep a few hundred thousand ID's safe, what makes you think the UK can keep every single ID safe?
One hack/data leak and we're done
mazder.bsky.social
LibDems are looking to at the very least reform it so it's more privacy oriented. And they're against digital ID's too.
So a left-side alternative to going Reform if you're interested.
I am still waiting on LibDem's plans to decide if I'm going with them
mazder.bsky.social
So you want hackers and scammers having an easier time of accessing the data they'd use to scam and hack parts about your life?
Being anonymous isn't just about privacy it's also about personal protection and is the very 1st lesson we used to get taught in out first IT classes.
mazder.bsky.social
So the UK government responded to the petition against their MANDATORY digital id.
You can guess the response.
They may as well say "go pound sand little slave, you can't be free in your own home country".
Yeah, this Labour Govt has lost my vote forever, so LibDems better step up with opposition
mazder.bsky.social
Then thank you for correcting me (to be fair I heard it in passing and hadn't put as much into looking into it so it was only a "I thought I heard it somewhere" type of deal)

See I wish the UK would have even half the intelligence to keep privacy at it's forefront
mazder.bsky.social
I heard that the EU was trying to make them mandatory in 2026, obviously not Finland but if the UK were to rejoin the EU it'd be mandatory at some point, just depends on who you trust more
mazder.bsky.social
And even if it were issued by private companies in the UK we usually have them handled by small, unverified, foreign companies in nations with even weaker data and privacy laws than our shite ones, instead of local ones that would keep it secure id we strengthened those laws 2/2
mazder.bsky.social
This is the biggest thing that irks me when people say "well the EU does it so why shouldn't we?"

We're not going to do it the same way.
For us it's mandatory, not voluntary. For us our data security and privacy laws are ridiculously open (look to the Online Safety Acy if you want an example) 1/2
mazder.bsky.social
And what would happen if all those other systems become "redundant" because this one key opens all the locks?

It may not happen with this government, nor the next one, or even the next 10 governments, but one will lump everything together and there will not be other options