China's Giant New Gamble With Digital IDs

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.

Re: "Submitting personal information to police"

[ihavesaxwithcollies]

You already do it all the time in america. It just isnâ(TM)t overt. The police track you 24-7. They just do not tell you. If in court, theyâ(TM)ll lie about it or refuse to disclose. Itâ(TM)s all ok, since they buy the data from a third party. At least the CCP arenâ(TM)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:

[Marful]

The police "technically" are limited in what they collect, how they collect and when they can access.

That being said, there are instances where police bypass the constitution and law buy purchasing from 3rd party this information.

Re:

[ihavesaxwithcollies]

Like my momma used to always say, if someone tracks you 24-7 and someone pays for that information, they're paying them to track you.

Just because the US judges are in bed with the cops, doesn't make the logic behind it any different.

Re:

[Marful]

Exactly!

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:

[ihavesaxwithcollies]

You already do it all the time in america. It just isn't overt. The police track you 24-7. They just do not tell you. If in court, they'll lie about it or refuse to disclose. It's all ok, since they buy the data from a third party.

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:

[ihavesaxwithcollies]

Keep it coming, troll.. nom nom nom nom!!!

Re:

[ihavesaxwithcollies]

You already do it all the time in america. It just isn't overt. The police track you 24-7. They just do not tell you. If in court, they'll lie about it or refuse to disclose. It's all ok, since they buy the data from a third party. 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:"Submitting personal information to police"

[MooseTick]

I guess you don't have a government ID like a passport or driver's license. If you did, you already gave the government your picture, home address, height, weight, birthday, race, sex, and more.

Papers Please

[RegistrationIsDumb83]

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.

Re: Papers Please

[ihavesaxwithcollies]

You sure you are old enough to be here? I need to see your ID.

Re:Papers Please

[fahrbot-bot]

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

[Tablizer]

Police say they punished 47,000 people last year for spreading "rumours" online.

Rumors such as Xi is a ruthless dictator.

("Rumours" is the UK spelling.)

Re:

[jenningsthecat]

("Rumours" is the UK spelling.)

It's also the spelling in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, and probably among English speakers in India.

Re:

[sabbede]

That's only because George III instituted a tax on the letter U and made people insert it into words where it didn't belong. It was one of the main causes of the Revolution, and thus why Americans spell words like labor and color correctly.

Re:

[syn3rg]

King George: "Rumour."
America: "Rumor."
King George: "Labour."
America: "Labor."
King George: "Colour."
America: "Color."
King George: "What are you doing?"
America: "Getting rid of U."

Re:

[registrations_suck]

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:

[makotech222]

Harassing people certainly is, as well as fraud/scams, but a proper country would ensure the others are also crimes.

Re:

[registrations_suck]

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:

[jenningsthecat]

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:

[sit1963nz]

Last time I checked, no one died by the word fuck.
However tens of thousands and more died because of covid misinformation

Re:

[RossCWilliams]

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:

[sit1963nz]

Unvaccinated people died at over twice the rate of vaccinated.

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:

[RossCWilliams]

Unvaccinated people died at over twice the rate of vaccinated. If we assume that availability of healthcare was the same for both groups, this isolate the vaccine as a variable.

Most people died before vaccines were available. COVID vaccines which were designed and tested to strengthen the part of the immune system that fights off the infection after it establishes itself. Although they do appear to reduce the chances of someone getting the disease, they weren't tested for that. They were explicitly tested to reduce the severity of the disease. And they worked extremely well for that. Deaths plummeted even while cases increased substantially. I suspect largely because people were t

Re:

[kackle]

Actually, the opposite has happened: Lots of life was created by the term.

Re:

[Ol Olsoc]

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.

While I'm not offended by the word, constant use of the word "fuck" tells us about both the fuckutterer's personality and their inability to frame a cogent argument.

What really is fascinating in these China discussions is how instantly they get swamped with people trying to shift the discussion to how the US is worse, or general posts desperate to change the argument.

All that said, I need to get Amimojo's take on this.

Re: Not for slashdot

[LindleyF]

Right up until someone else gets into power, pardons them all, and decides a different set of ideas get you locked up.

Re:

[ukoda]

I lived with the great firewall of China for 2 years and it was a big part of the reason that I refused to renew my contract and stay in China. I'm not really political so not being able to be critical of the government there didn't really worry me. I had no motivation or desire to stir social unrest so in theory the great firewall should not be an issue. However in practice it was hugely annoying. Firstly you didn't always know if something was actually being blocked. Pages would often start loading,

Re:

[makotech222]

Sadly, american companies don't wanna follow these rules; they weren't banned, they simply didn't set up shop in China, as far as I know. Honestly a good thing, overall.

Re:

[RossCWilliams]

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:

[ukoda]

Facts can be difficult because there are shades of grey, semantics and subtly, but let me be pedantic. I would say that the "The White House is painted white" and state that as a fact. You could then state an alternative fact that "The White House is painted black, and was painted that colour by white people, hence the name". Then we coulds get into a stupid flame war about the photos of it are CGI. Alright, a stupid example to make a point given how stupid some alternate facts are and how easily they c

Re:

[RossCWilliams]

I do feel that much of the problems today is people don't seem to be taught critical think skills.

I think it worse than that. They have been taught to rely on authority rather than critical thinking skills. They don't really make a distinction between facts and conclusions based on those facts. And they judge both by the authority of the source.

Re:

[IDemand2HaveSumBooze]

Fair comment, I do feel that much of the problems today is people don't seem to be taught critical think skills.

These days I increasingly feel like it's not so much that people aren't taught those skills but they actively don't want to learn them.

This is gross generalisation, but back in the Middle Ages the prevailing paradigm (at least in Europe, Middle East and a few other places) was that the holy book of your religion held the answers to all the life's questions. I'm not preaching atheism here, but whatever religious beliefs you may hold, should not stop you from figuring things out for yourself. Starting with Re

Re:

[sabbede]

As I recall, the term was first used to describe true things that weren't being reported because of the political bias of the reporters. Those same reporters then went on to mislead the public about what was meant by it, due to the aforementioned bias.

You seem to be speaking mainly about context and whether it is sufficient to prevent misunderstanding/distortion.

Re:

[RossCWilliams]

You seem to be speaking mainly about context and whether it is sufficient to prevent misunderstanding/distortion.

No, I am talking about propaganda. Information and facts, accurate or not, designed to persuade, not inform. Unfortunately, that applies to almost all the information available through the media.

The reality is "journalists" need to have a regular stream of interesting stories. There is a whole PR industry of "sources" ready and willing to help them produce them. The PR industry is not in the business of educating people. They are in the business of getting stories created that serve their clients interests

Re:

[sabbede]

Oh, I'm sorry, I meant in the context of your bit about truth and accuracy, where you seem to be saying that - and I'm going to reverse how you used the words - a thing can be true, but not accurate without some necessary context. Hmm, I don't like the terms in that order either. Let's drop it in favor of "misleading". A statement can be true, but misleading without the necessary context.

As for the news industry being crap, I can't argue there.

Re:

[RossCWilliams]

I think misleading is the preferred term of "fact checkers" when the facts are accurate and they don't like the conclusion. But I think many people don't really make any distinction between objective facts and conclusions.

Re:

[sabbede]

That's ironic satire, right?

the Nazis forced the jew's to register

[Joe_Dragon]

the Nazis forced the jew's to register

Re:

[RossCWilliams]

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.

Re:

[sabbede]

Israeli genocide, i.e the genocide of Israelis, is what Hamas is trying to accomplish. You're referring to something that isn't a genocide because the intent isn't to eradicate a people, only the portion of the people engaged in trying to eradicate the Jewish people.

Re:

[RossCWilliams]

You're referring to something that isn't a genocide because the intent isn't to eradicate a people, only the portion of the people engaged in trying to eradicate the Jewish people.

Which apparently is everyone in Gaza according to the current Israeli government. People who were already forced out of their homes in Israel and into Gaza. It also includes the Palestinians living on the west bank. Israeli government leaders have explicitly said they want to make room for settlers in the ancient land of Israel which includes both the west bank and Gaza. They have allowed settlers to attack the Palestinians who live in those areas to force them out. That is genocide.

There is a lot more e

Re:

[sabbede]

Okay, no. First off, it is misleading to say they were forced out of their homes, they are the remnants of the dead-enders who refused to accept the formation of the Nation of Israel, took up arms against it, and lost. That's why they left (forcibly or otherwise). More ethnic Arabs stayed than left, and the ones who stayed became Israeli citizens with full rights. They are also not the same people as in the West Bank, which is a different situation entirely and is not run by Hamas.

On multiple occasio

Re:

[RossCWilliams]

they are the remnants of the dead-enders who refused to accept the formation of the Nation of Israel, took up arms against it, and lost.

That is complete BS. They were refugees who fled a war zone. Those still alive were children, they weren't taking up arms against anyone. It is pretty clear that the existence of Gaza is the result of the creation of the state of Israel.

They are also not the same people as in the West Bank, which is a different situation entirely and is not run by Hamas. The people on the West Bank are still being killed.

On multiple occasions, all of Israel's neighbors launched simultaneous invasions.

The last time Israel was invaded by its neighbors armies was over 50 years ago. Your apparent argument is that justifies genocide?

That is an active controversy in Israel,

"From the river to the sea" is an explicit demand for ethnic cleansing.

Again BS. "From the river to the sea, Palestine must be free" is not a call for ethnic cleansing or genocide. It certainly can be interpreted as a call for the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state. But demanding a change in government is not "genocide".

They were the people who did not want Israel to exist in the first place

But, in fact, Israel was established a long time ago. The only people still alive were children then. Again, you are justifying genocide because these people's ancestors opposed the establishment of a Jewish state. We are talking about the Israeli government. There are plenty of Israelis and people who support Israel as a Jewish state who oppose the genocidal policies of the current Israeli government.

Hamas is evil. They murder children.

The IDF is evil. It murders children. A LOT more children than the handful killed by Hamas terrorists. Again you are justifying genocide. Over 50,000 people have been killed in Gaza. How many had anything to do with killing children? Very few. But they are being killed and starved nonetheless.

I am not defending Hamas. But you are defending vengeance on all the people of Gaza for what they did. The Israeli government is controlled by people who share both that thirst for revenge and that everyone in Gaza is a legitimate targets for the vengeance. Thus genocide.

Re:

[sabbede]

No, you absolutely are defending Hamas. You're repeating their talking points without even knowing it.

The "refugees" in Gaza did not flee war, they started one and lost. And while you can say that Gaza exists as it does because of the creation of Israel, that's like saying a murderer is in prison because someone they hated wouldn't stop being alive. Which is really the problem. They hate Jews and don't want them to exist. The Jews got a nation, and they don't want it to exist. They won't accept any

Re:

[RossCWilliams]

The "refugees" in Gaza did not flee war, they started one and lost.

You are justifying genocide. The hate that drives it bleeds out of every pore. It wasn't the armies fighting the war that fled to Gaza. It was civilians caught in the fighting. Yes, the people who fled were Arabs so in your world "they" started it and now their descendants deserve to die.

The notion that Hamas has or ever had the capacity to commit genocide against Israeli's, or Jews in general if you prefer, is ridiculous. Its an Israeli government talking point to justify their own actual homicidal genoci

Unsanitary apostrophe!

[sabbede]

How did the Jews possess "to register"?

Gamble?

[ukoda]

What is the 'Gamble' here? The upstream story is paywalled so I couldn't see why the title claims this a gamble. Its China, the citizens do what they are told when it comes to these things. So what is gamble here, that citizens rise up over this? I doubt it. There are things the Chinese government could try to do that could cause people to rise up, but this is not it. The people in Chine are not stupid, they know everything they post online is monitored and tracked, so just being more format about tha

Re:

[NewtonsLaw]

Non paywalled version [archive.today]

Re:

[ukoda]

Thanks for that. While a reasonably written piece the word gamble is 100% click bait. It appears nowhere in the body and there is nowhere where there is any mention of risk in what they are doing.

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

Re:

[sabbede]

Well, I guess it could fail to work as intended and then they'd have thrown away everything they've spent on it. Though that's true with any new thing and stupid to include.

Social credit score and Internet License

[sinij]

Any free country would be doing EXACTLY the opposite of what China is doing right now. Unfortunately, both UK and Germany have people getting arrested and jailed for posting mean messages online, just like China.

Re:

[Tablizer]

History teachers can get arrested in FL for pointing out LGBTQ+ people exist.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Stop spreading obvious FUD.

You first sinij

Re:

[sabbede]

What a profoundly stupid and false claim.

I would LOVE an internet license

[Schoenlepel]

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

[Big Hairy Gorilla]

A lot of guys would want a Double D licence. Would that cost more? For access to the dark web, I guess.

Note to self: post anon more often.

Re:

[DrMrLordX]

What would you need to do to earn a D license?

Re:

[StormReaver]

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:

[wyHunter]

Why would you want a driver's license or a license plate? After all, the former is merely a way to track you and the latter is so an agent of the state can find your vehicle.

Re:

[sabbede]

A driver's license is a qualification to sling a ton of metal around at 60mph.

Re:

[sabbede]

I don't like the idea of having to get a license to exercise a fundamental right.

Re:

[kaatochacha]

As has been historically proven, appointing gatekeepers to determine if someone is worthy of discussion will simply result in siloed nonsense or one sided viewpoints.
My assumption is that you believe this system would somehow either fit your beliefs, or actually be run by you or someone like you.
Imagine, now, someone telling you this idea is absurd, and banning you from the internet.

Voluntary

[kaatochacha]

Yeah, sure. voluntary.