Except there is no ID/age verification when you create a Google or Microsoft account (no idea about Apple, don't use that crap), so you're suggesting that the "birthday" field where I can set whatever date I want should be a standard age verification method?
The only entity able to connect you in this case is the identity verification third party. The premise is that a government-backed identification system is more secure than a rando private company.
Private company asks government "hey is this user real and unique", government replies "yes". Private webiste does not need to know your ID. No identifying element needs to be transmitted by the government.
Of course some private companies will need more, and in that case the user, you, can grant them access to data, much like the current authentication systems using Google accounts & co.
In which case the flow would be:
- Rando insecure company asks government "is this user real and unique? I need their name"
- Government website asks you "this rando company wants to know your name"
- You accept
- Goverbment replies to rando insecure conpany "yes, user real, name is X"
That's how it should be.
My thought exactly. Their definition of privacy is... interesting
It's still important to recognise Palestine as a state. And it doesn't delay any other action.
It seems to me that the progress you see is not the progress you want, so you consider it pointless. But the truth is, it's still progress, and it doesn't take away from the other priorities you mention.
So, once again, I don't understand your point.
Recognising the state of Palestine in over a month doesn't change the urgency to let aid reach Palestinians. Of course work on that front must be done as well, and sooner than September.
I just don't understand your point. How does officially recognising the statehood of Palestine now or in a month affect the current starvation crisis?
At the next UN assembly. It says right there in the article.
Basically France now recognises the State of Palestine, and will make it official at the UN assembly.
You can be an anarchist if that's what you believe is best. But belittling people who don't think like you is stupid and childish.
Luckily, they don't own any of Wikipedia's content, and it's all downloadable at anytime by anyone wanting to create a mirror.
I'm having a really hard time donating to wikipedia now that I've learned they are actually doing pretty well and don't need donations as urgently as their invasive banners say.
Now, of course their main revenue stream is donations (not only, I don't have the numbers but they sell commercial access to big tech through a for-profit company, Wikimedia Enterprise). But the whole guilt tripping strategy they've been using for a decade without actually needing it is disgusting.
I strongly recommend watching this 10min, sourced video on the topic from fern.
I'd rather donate to non profits that actually need it and yet don't resort to these emotionally manipulating campaigns.
Well, it's not like there was a donation campaign to finance the war in Ukraine.
A country's budget is complex and compromises have to be made. You have to deal with more than one issue. The security of Europe is important as well as the purchasing power of nationals.