China's Giant New Gamble With Digital IDs (economist.com) 48
China will launch digital IDs for internet use on July 15th, transferring online verification from private companies to government control. Users obtain digital IDs by submitting personal information including facial scans to police via an app. A pilot program launched one year ago enrolled 6 million people.
The system currently remains voluntary, though officials and state media are pushing citizens to register for "information security." Companies will see only anonymized character strings when users log in, while police retain exclusive access to personal details. The program replaces China's existing system requiring citizens to register with companies using real names before posting comments, gaming, or making purchases.
Police say they punished 47,000 people last year for spreading "rumours" online. The digital ID serves a broader government strategy to centralize data control. State planners classify data as a production factor alongside labor and capital, aiming to extract information from private companies for trading through government-operated data exchanges.
The system currently remains voluntary, though officials and state media are pushing citizens to register for "information security." Companies will see only anonymized character strings when users log in, while police retain exclusive access to personal details. The program replaces China's existing system requiring citizens to register with companies using real names before posting comments, gaming, or making purchases.
Police say they punished 47,000 people last year for spreading "rumours" online. The digital ID serves a broader government strategy to centralize data control. State planners classify data as a production factor alongside labor and capital, aiming to extract information from private companies for trading through government-operated data exchanges.
Re: (Score:2)
That being said, there are instances where police bypass the constitution and law buy purchasing from 3rd party this information.
Re: (Score:1)
Just because the US judges are in bed with the cops, doesn't make the logic behind it any different.
Re: (Score:2)
The police seem to think that if they purchase the data, it's somehow not "collecting it".
The courts disagree, but the police don't care.
Re: (Score:1)
At least the CCP aren't cowards about it. I never thought id see the day where i call american police more cowardly than the CCP. America, how low can you go?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Papers Please (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: Papers Please (Score:3)
Re:Papers Please (Score:5, Informative)
Having to show ID to access free speech online is the surest sign that US is sliding towards a China style dystopia. Thanks Supreme Court.
Or simply walking/driving...
US citizen detained by immigration officials who dismissed his Real ID as fake [theguardian.com]
Family members outraged as U.S. citizen detained by federal agents in downtown LA on way to work [cbsnews.com]
Even after proving they're U.S. citizens, many are still detained because they "assaulted" the usually masked, unmarked officers refusing to identify themselves as LEO and/or their agency, which make things seem more like a kidnapping. The "they assaulted/resisted us" excuse is getting a bit old, especially when there are usually 5-10 "officers" attacking someone. But, you know, as long as they're only going after "very bad criminals", and not people going to work, simply because they're brown ... /s Stephen Miller, with his 3,000 people/day quota, is the worst.
Donnie jealous of Xi, Kim, and Putie (Score:2)
Rumors such as Xi is a ruthless dictator.
("Rumours" is the UK spelling.)
Re: (Score:2)
("Rumours" is the UK spelling.)
It's also the spelling in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, and probably among English speakers in India.
Re: (Score:1)
I know this is super 'not-for-slashdot' community, but damn, I love this shit. Imagine everyone who posted antivax stuff online going to prison. Everyone on twitter saying the 'n-word' or harassing trans people going to prison.
Except, none of those things are crimes, so why would you go to prison for doing those activities?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Harassing people MAY POSSIBLY be a crime, depending on the circumstances.
As for proper countries...,they don't throw people in jail for expressing an opinion.
Re: (Score:2)
Everyone on twitter saying the 'n-word' or harassing trans people going to prison... That would fucking rule. The internet would be so much better.
And what about people who use the word 'fuck'? That offends a lot of people, and by your wishes YOU would be on your way to prison for what you just wrote. Is that really the world you want to live in?
Take your time. But not too much time, because you never when they'll come for YOU.
Re: (Score:3)
However tens of thousands and more died because of covid misinformation
Re: (Score:2)
However tens of thousands and more died because of covid misinformation
I don't see any evidence of that. Perhaps the CDC telling people they shouldn't wear masks because they didn't know how to wear them properly. Unlike the hospital staff the masks were being reserved for. Or telling people that once they were vaccinated it was safe for them to stop wearing a mask or social distancing. But the reason the United States lead the world in COVID deaths likely had nothing to do with "misinformation" spread online. For that you can probably point the finger at our crappy health ca
Re: (Score:2)
If we assume that availability of healthcare was the same for both groups, this isolate the vaccine as a variable.
We also KNOW that smallpox was eliminated thanks to vaccines, and the large increases in mumps, rubella, measles, etc in unvaccinated groups.
Re: Not for slashdot (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
the idea of 'alternative facts', there is no such thing, facts are facts and that is a fact.
"alternative facts" are things that contradict people's world view. Facts are either accurate or inaccurate, but I suppose you can argue that a fact that is inaccurate isn't a fact. But accuracy is usually not the problem.
For instance, "Ivermectin was shown to kill the coronavirus" is an accurate statement, but it isn't really true since it was in a lab petri dish. So do you punish someone for saying it even though its accurate? That "Ivermectin is a horse dewormer" is also accurate, but its not really tr
Re: (Score:2)
the Nazis forced the jew's to register (Score:2)
the Nazis forced the jew's to register
Re: (Score:2)
It didn't take long before the Jews took over the oppression themselves.
"The Jews" aren't responsible for Israel going rogue. The claim that criticizing Israeli genocide is somehow antisemetic is Israeli propaganda. There are plenty of Jews who don't support it's genocide even if they continue to support Israel. Expecting anything else is sort of like asking a mother to abandon their wayward child.
Gamble? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Non paywalled version [archive.today]
Re: (Score:2)
I did laugh at the usual report mistake that Chinese companies willing cooperate with the government, in this case writing "Firms help with gusto". Chinese companies have zero choice. For example they don't have to supply data to the government as is often claimed, because the government can simply take it u
Social credit score and Internet License (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
History teachers can get arrested in FL for pointing out LGBTQ+ people exist.
Re: (Score:1)
I would LOVE an internet license (Score:2)
Much like a driver's license. There could be variations of it, where an A-license would allow you the bare minimum (banking, whatsapp, google maps, email access, etc.). A B-license could allow for specialist forums and a C-license could allow for actual social media. Finally a D-license allows everything.
Then there'd be tests in order to see whether you'd be suited to be allowed on the internet. Those with shit for brains would only get an A-license, where actually intelligent people could get a B-, C-, or
Re: I would LOVE an internet license (Score:2)
Note to self: post anon more often.
Re: (Score:2)
What would you need to do to earn a D license?
Re: (Score:2)
Those with shit for brains would only get an A-license...
And here's your sign...err...A-License.
That is a ridiculously, tremendously stupid idea (even though I can completely understand the reason for the suggestion). There can never be appointed a group of people who get to decide what ideas are true and false under the force of law. The desire to do so is so strong, and the ramifications so profoundly harmful, that the U.S. Constitution was written to make sure that never happens.
Re: (Score:2)