this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2025
500 points (97.3% liked)
Political Memes
9641 readers
2189 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Just because you don't see it happening now, it doesn't mean it could not be used against people to persecute them, especially in fascist countries, where this would be a perfect tool for tracking people and mass surveillance.
This is a slippery slope logical fallacy.
Thing could be used with nefarious intent therefore thing should not exist.
I'll admit I'm not really across the technical implementation details. The equivalent apps here in Australia don't have the capability to track or surveil you.
There's different variants but the ones here basically just show a photo of your ID with an animated background and generate a time based token that can be scanned and verified.
How will I benefit from having a digital ID? I won't.
So why give away my privacy and gain nothing?
Sounds unnecessary and therefore stupid.
And then you say:
There's your tracking, you've just been scanned and both your location and timestamp have now been recorded by the scanning app, and all the other data associated with whatever you were doing, like buying alcohol or entering a nightclub.
I don't think this qualifies as a slippery slope fallacy. The outcomes they describe have backing in the form of places like China and the claims aren't extremely divergent from what can be expected of corps and govs.
The way you are applying it would mean precluding all outlooks with any negative future to them. It's not wrong to foresee a bad outcome. What would be a slippery slope is if there were no reasonable examples of abuse of this kind of tech or examples of approaching the explained outcome. Alternatively if they took it to an extreme that wasn't realistic in amy scenario like determining how many kids you were allowed to have who you could date/marry and all determined by a corp or gov.