Under the pretense of fortifying digital security in the United States, newly proposed legislation seeks to transform the United States Postal Service (USPS) into a hub for digital IDs. Senators Ron Wyden, a Democrat, and Bill Cassidy, Republican, have put forth the bill known as the Post Office Services for Trustworthy Identity Act. The proposed legislation opens new discourse on digital privacy and the potential for abnormal surveillance measures, sparking debate over the delicate balance between biosecurity and preserving citizens’ fundamental rights.

We obtained a copy of the bill for you here [PDF].

The proposed legislation comes in response to the piecemeal approach taken towards biometric identification in America. Historically, disjointed programs have been created by different states and separate agency undertakings, giving rise to the necessity for a more coherent national strategy. The Post Office Services for Trustworthy Identity Act could mark a landmark shift, focusing on service provision rather than overarching digital ID strategy.

  • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Right now we treat social security numbers like one, but

    They were never meant to be used that way. The solution is to stop using them that way. We do not need a digital-compatible id system in the US.

    • AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      We definitely do need one. Right now it’s a hodge podge of crap that wasn’t meant to be an identifier and it makes identity theft easy, and our privacy isn’t even being protected because we still have an SSN and tax ID.

      Having worked in the medical space, a lack of identifier is actually a huge issue that causes problems for people daily, especially people changing their names for whatever reason.

      • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        I think it would be better to do everything with accounts that are not necessarily permanently connected to a person’s identity. Any government mediated, definitive system for identifying people is way too risky from a general privacy and freedom perspective.

        • AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          9 months ago

          The government can already identify you, and your identity is easy to steal. Making a better ID system just removes the identity theft issue.

          The other nice thing would be you could use the id number instead of your name so you can stop giving your PII out to every business. Just “here’s my ID number, bill my insurance, you don’t need anything else.”

          • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            The government can already identify you, and your identity is easy to steal.

            Fixing both of these problems would be better than just one.

              • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                9 months ago

                The issue is that the surveillance state is actively bad, and expanding it and making it more official is a much bigger problem than the problem of ill-conceived verification systems, which could be better solved other ways. I don’t want things to be perfect, I want to prioritize moving away from a dystopian panopticon.