Digital Identity Dilemma: Why Users Resist Government IDs for General Web Sign-ins

The growing push for official digital IDs, potentially replacing current login methods like "Sign in with Facebook," raises significant questions about privacy, online identity, and the future of digital interaction. While these official IDs are under development, community sentiment reveals a predominant reluctance to adopt them beyond very specific, official governmental purposes.

The Reluctance to Link Official Identity with General Online Presence

There's a near-unanimous sentiment against using a government digital ID for general online services. Users strongly indicate that the only acceptable use case is for official government business, such as accessing tax portals or specific government agency websites. Even in these instances, the login is often treated as a one-time validation or used sparingly, driven by necessity rather than preference.

The Value of Pseudonymity and Privacy Concerns

A central argument for this reluctance is the importance of pseudonymity in online environments. Many online communities thrive on the ability for individuals to interact without their real-world identity attached, fostering more open and diverse communication. Introducing a government-linked identity is widely seen as having a "damping effect" on this dynamic, potentially stifling speech and interaction by linking it directly to an official record.

Privacy is a paramount concern, with individuals expressing deep distrust in both government entities and commercial third-party login providers. Worries extend to data collection, surveillance, and the lack of user control over their digital accounts. Some users highlight past experiences where third-party accounts could be revoked on a whim without recourse, further solidifying the desire to keep their official identity separate from their general online activities.

Distinguishing Privacy from Secrecy

An interesting perspective introduced into the discussion differentiates privacy from secrecy. This view suggests that privacy is more about the "politeness of neighbors" rather than their ignorance, implying a social contract. Anonymity, in this context, is sometimes framed as a means to escape social consequences rather than an inherent right to secrecy, though exceptions for free speech in unfree societies are acknowledged.

Ultimately, the current sentiment reflects a strong preference for maintaining distinct boundaries between one's official, verifiable identity and their online persona for non-governmental interactions. The drive for a secure, official digital ID for governmental functions is understandable, but extending its reach to general web services faces significant public skepticism rooted in fundamental concerns about privacy, autonomy, and the nature of online communities.