Daniel Dainty
@danieldainty.bsky.social
Looks like they've all shouted "beam me up Scotty" about 30 years ago
December 16, 2025 at 5:44 PM
Looks like they've all shouted "beam me up Scotty" about 30 years ago
Yep. @theregister.com not being available. Also tried @downdetector.com but couldn't get past the anti-bot captcha because Cloudflare is limping along
November 18, 2025 at 11:45 AM
Yep. @theregister.com not being available. Also tried @downdetector.com but couldn't get past the anti-bot captcha because Cloudflare is limping along
I disagree. They have had the reason all along, it just wasn't high on their priority list ... until now.
Without proof that you are who you say you are, how you can you prove you belong where you say you belong?
This is an education problem sadly (RIP the US's Dept for Education by the way).
Without proof that you are who you say you are, how you can you prove you belong where you say you belong?
This is an education problem sadly (RIP the US's Dept for Education by the way).
February 13, 2025 at 11:18 AM
I disagree. They have had the reason all along, it just wasn't high on their priority list ... until now.
Without proof that you are who you say you are, how you can you prove you belong where you say you belong?
This is an education problem sadly (RIP the US's Dept for Education by the way).
Without proof that you are who you say you are, how you can you prove you belong where you say you belong?
This is an education problem sadly (RIP the US's Dept for Education by the way).
> As the birth certificate contains no markers that can be realtime linked to the holder (in the same way that a photo or fingerprints can), it should not be used as ID (from an infosec/AAA perspective).
Though I do get the point of your post and I agree, this is gerrymandering -- but with gender.
Though I do get the point of your post and I agree, this is gerrymandering -- but with gender.
February 12, 2025 at 10:38 PM
> As the birth certificate contains no markers that can be realtime linked to the holder (in the same way that a photo or fingerprints can), it should not be used as ID (from an infosec/AAA perspective).
Though I do get the point of your post and I agree, this is gerrymandering -- but with gender.
Though I do get the point of your post and I agree, this is gerrymandering -- but with gender.
> and it *almost* had the impact that the tories wanted (www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-poli...) but on a much, much smaller scale than in the US. This, in my opinion, is probably because in the UK a lot of us have passports, photo driving licence, or something else that is legal identification. >
ID rules stopped 14,000 people voting, watchdog finds
Minority and unemployed voters were more likely to be turned away, the Electoral Commission suggests.
www.bbc.co.uk
February 12, 2025 at 10:36 PM
> and it *almost* had the impact that the tories wanted (www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-poli...) but on a much, much smaller scale than in the US. This, in my opinion, is probably because in the UK a lot of us have passports, photo driving licence, or something else that is legal identification. >
But a birth certificate is not proof of identity. It's just proof that someone with that name was born and when/where/etc. In the UK, anyone can get a copy of anyone else's birth certificate, because it's a public record.
The UK did a similar thing, though, with registering to vote...
--> 🧵
The UK did a similar thing, though, with registering to vote...
--> 🧵
February 12, 2025 at 10:34 PM
But a birth certificate is not proof of identity. It's just proof that someone with that name was born and when/where/etc. In the UK, anyone can get a copy of anyone else's birth certificate, because it's a public record.
The UK did a similar thing, though, with registering to vote...
--> 🧵
The UK did a similar thing, though, with registering to vote...
--> 🧵