(GUF) DIGITAL OVERDOSE

On paper, a digital ID sounds like a godsend - making banking, booking and buying much smoother/easier. Everyone should have the right to one if they choose.

But choice is the key word. Because the same 'gateway app' that promises convenience could just as easily become a gatekeeper — deciding who gets to bank, shop or even claim benefits.

We must defend the right to live and trade offline. Cash isn’t just old-fashioned; it’s freedom with a face value. Passports and driving licences already prove who we are when needed, we simply don’t need a digital leash - link

My concern is simple; give too much control to a centralised ID system, and dissent stops being inconvenient, it becomes impossible.

On 15 July 2025, China launched the National Network Identity Authentication - a system requiring citizens to verify their identity via official ID and facial recognition, linked to their mobile number. Officially, it’s voluntary; in practice, critics say it will become unavoidable.

The system replaces existing real-name and SIM registration requirements, meaning the police and cyber regulators now have unified access to every online identity. As in the UK, authorities claim it helps protect personal data and reduce fraud. Critics, however see it as extending state oversight over everything from online shopping to browsing history, travel and communication.

Those critics haven’t gone unpunished. Law professors Lao Dongyan and Shen Kui, who publicly challenged the plan had their social media accounts muted and posts censored. Lao’s account was silenced for 90 days after criticising the system. The chilling effect is real, tie every digital act to a single ID and dissent becomes traceable.

China’s long-standing Social Credit System already publicly labels 'untrustworthy' citizens; naming and shaming them online to 'encourage moral compliance.' Fail to pay a fine, criticise the wrong policy or default on a loan and your details are published as a warning to others.

Add to this deep dive inspections, facial recognition, predictive policing and cross-linked databases and digital identity becomes less about convenience and more about control.

These examples show that a unified digital ID doesn’t just simplify life; it simplifies surveillance. When anonymity disappears, accountability stops being reciprocal; it flows one way, from citizen to state.

One of the laziest defences of digital ID is, “If you’ve got nothing to hide, why worry?” The answer is another question - do you have anything to hide in your home? No? Then why do you have curtains?

Privacy isn’t secrecy; it’s dignity, the right to decide who gets to look in. The danger of digital ID isn’t the convenience it offers. It’s the power it gives others to pull those curtains back whenever they choose. Make up your own mind - link - Artificial lawyer - link - More like this (ID) - link - more like this (government) - link