In the Netherlands it is mandatory to carry your ID card or passport at all times.

Not true. You have to be able identify yourself on the street in case the police wants to talk to you. A driver’s license is also valid identification.

Germany as well

What are the penalties for not doing so? I'm always amazed at the willingness of Europeans to follow rules like these, regardless of their impact on personal sovereignty. People in Finland were the most extreme example of this behavior that I've ever encountered. People would look like you murdered a child for jaywalking in Helsinki.

In the Netherlands the fine is 110 euro. But they can't usually ask for your ID without cause, so the risk is quite low.

It's a nothing burger really. I have a card wallet for bank passes, transport cards and the id thingy. Not a single cop ever stopped me (I'm not in the usual suspect demographics, so that helps), so I didn't have to show it ever in 7 years. I imagine I would have a different attitude if cops did actually ask for it for no reason.

I however heard about things like riding a bicycle without lights and being fined 50 bucks for that, which triggers asking for an id, which in it's turn triggers a 100 euro fine on top. In the story I heard the second fine wasn't actually given.

maybe you can help by writing a threat scenario. And I can help if it really occurs.

(but buying alcohol you need also a personal document)

Nope. You have to possess a valid ID or passport, but you are not required to carry it. Keeping it at home is perfectly fine.

Carrying it is practical and most Germans do carry their ID, but it's not a requirement.

Why carrying it is practical? What is it used for?

The only time I need my ID is during elections, but I can also show the one I have in our government produced app.

Older people in Poland do carry those, mostly out of some kind of habit and some kind of fear that police might need it. I can drive a car and get a speeding ticket, and all I need police to know is my ID number (it is not the identifier of my identity card), which I know by hard, it consists of my birth date plus 5 semi-random numbers). I don't need my ID, my driving license nor my insurance data - everything is located in police database based on my ID number (or my license plate).

Bad sides of carrying it is that you might loose it, and that is a PITA, because you need to block it right away (someone might take a loan with it, happens I kid you not) by calling your bank or similar service.

So I take it out from my wallet (which I don't carry also) only when I go to the airport.

Not exactly. The Netherlands has an identificatieplicht (an obligation to identify yourself), not a formal draagplicht (an obligation to physically carry ID at all times).

Police may require identification only in specific situations connected to their duties, not arbitrarily. If you cannot show valid ID when requested, you can still be fined or taken to a police station to establish your identity, so in practice most people do carry ID anyway.

The distinction is historically sensitive in the Netherlands because compulsory identification documents were heavily associated with Nazi occupation policies during World War II.

Welcome to our brave new digital world, governments and DOJs do this because now they can, I am afraid this is only the beginning.

The saddest part is, most people simply do not care, my parents constantly echo the sentiment that if I have nothing to hide, I have nothing to fear. I would argue this slippery slope came about 20+ years ago during the initial Patriot Act. They normalize the behavior, take a few more freedoms, and keep on trucking. I used to be proud to be American. Now I am just worried.

I understand why they don't care and I don't fault them. The truth is that this doesn't affect most people in their daily lives. It sounds entitled to say that this demands their attention.

A totally fair point, and I think you are correct, wish I knew a solid answer. Because their indifference is watering down all of our rights.

It affects everyone, the question is whether or not they're held to account. Some people think of themselves as low-risk until they're detained at the border for a Facebook post they made.

I used to be a proud patriot. Now I am just owned.

How is this, in principle, any different from the DOJ using a subpoena to get customer records from an adult store that was allegedly selling illegal explicit material?

Just because you use the internet to commit the crime doesn't make it not a crime.

I’d say a big difference is that in your example the thing that was supposedly sold was entirely illegal to possess for any reason.

The case being discussed is one where someone might be able to use the product to break the law.

So it’s more like demanding that Home Depot, Walmart, Amazon give the names of every American who’s ever bought a crowbar because the DOJ has heard that some people are breaking into buildings with crowbars.

It has been alleged that the government doesn’t want to prosecute these people who are the ones committing the crimes, they “just want to talk” in order to prosecute the company. Not sure I’d trust that without a signed immunity agreement. If I were forced to speak to these goons, I certainly wouldn’t say a word unless they gave me one of those - regardless of what I was using the gadget for.

Tyranny comes and goes, and sometimes just changes shape and serves some more than others, and that gives the illusion to those it serves that it's gone. It's always been around in some form or another.

Democratic governments can be held accountable, corporations cannot.

I understand the move but I also see bears on the road. When the politicians control their communication apps then it is sooner or later also very convenient for politicians to ask the operators to disappear conversations that shouldn't have taken place or conversations that somehow are political liabilities.

I agree, it is shortsighted (next quarter syndrome). First of all the AI does not need source to find vulnerabilities and further it breaks the unwritten contract to exchange source for eyeballs which creates better source. I guess the CEO wants less security and stopped evolution of it's code.

Not only conservative media, people are so afraid to really communicate with each other (be tolerant of each others viewpoint), that they constantly cancel each other on the fear of that viewpoint, thus do not give each other a chance to communicate. And things becoming worse each generation, younger generations are not learnt to think for them self anymore.

So this will be one of the ways that people will die from AI

That regulation would not have come into existence if there were no privacy problems caused by the ones that have to comply to the regulations

Right, and that regulation has a cost. I hope it's worth it.

There were certainly problems.

But the GDPR and ePrivacy directives don't protect us from nefarious cross-site tracking cookies.

Prior to the GDPR, websites just tracked us.

Now they track us AND present an irritating warning that users have learnt to mindlessly "accept"

I first read it the wrong way, as if I had to bear that damaged luxury cars was actually a person in a costume, strange headline.

I would say it counts as a garden path sentence, much like "The old man the boat" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden-path_sentence

Get some older friends, they are fun, they have a lot of info, they are generally less scared of consequences so they let you do stupid stuff, they give you room to grow and get wiser, they generally have more money and cause better opportunities. As young person I always were around the generation of my parents and I never regret it, it provided me with the baggage to get through life without too much problems. When middle aged make younger friends to keep you young and to be able to pass on the culture to young people that want to be around older ones.

To add to that: get some younger friends as well.

As someone pointed out in this thread, the group think that forms in same-age groups can be downright dangerous.

It does not, it just seems that way. The electron just jumps to an empty slot in the next atom (metals have empty electron slots in their atoms, that is why they conduct energy) and leaves a bit of energy in the current one. So if the electron jumps to the next atom on the right, the current seems to go left.