Yes, the websites for digitally checking my medical files and for doing my taxes. I could do both of those in person with my physical ID.
And yeah, you just press a lil button that says ‘im over 18’. No proof required.
They did write into the law that it’d never be required to have digital ID. But the concerns make sense, thanks for your reply!
Ok so. I’m Austrian, I’ve had a digital ID for a few years now. Use it to access all my medical files, sign stuff without having to own a printer, and do taxes. Loads of people do not have digital ID and it’s not being pushed. It’s very much and optional opt-in. There’s nothing you need it for that you can’t in some way do on paper or in person with your physical ID.
They don’t have any additional data on file due to this. Except that I have the ID, I guess. Not even my phone number- it uses 2fa through an app that I had to activate with a password I got on a piece of paper. The app doesn’t have any permissions. I in fact have it on a phone that doesn’t have a sim card. They could probably find out where my wifi is, but they obviously already have my address on file. My digital ID is linked to the exact same file they already had linked to my physical ID.
Can someone explain to me why digital ID seems to be such a hot topic these days and what the risks are? I may just be super out of the loop.
The issue isn’t that the premise is false, it’s that it’s a non sequitur.
I usually just dry them to have as herbal tea!
Prolly depends on climate, I do fuck all for mine, they blossom beautifully and are like 2.5 metres high at this point. One year I cut off the fruits (idk the English word for them) in the winter and got even more blossoms for very little work.
Knowing the template, this actually does make sense. The first three are ones where it’s super clear that you’d have to be quite stupid to fall for it. Then the fourth one, a lot of people wouldn’t immediately realise you have to be stupid to fall for them, but it’s stupid to fall for them nonetheless.
True to the meme format, the point isn’t that it isn’t stupid to fall for the first three. It clearly is. But falling for the fourth one is stupid, too.
(though I must admit, the selection of some of the examples is pretty weird)
Am I understanding correctly that you’re saying nobody gets to feel unsafe as long as there’s someone who’s even more unsafe? Or are you saying something else?
Why would Syria et al. provide asylum to trans people fleeing the US?
Literally the first thing about what you’re trying to say. Like, I’m not following at all, can you explain what youre trying to say with the above comment?
Would you kindly share with us what your point is?
I’m not saying that there’s people who become professors to spread their conservative ideas. Just like how there aren’t really any people who become professors to spread their liberal ideas. Nobody would become, let alone remain, a professor if they used their platform to convince students of their ideology. What I’m saying is being highly educated in one area is absolutely not a guarantee you’ll become a leftist, or even a liberal. And there’s plenty of professors that will never share their political views, just how it should be. Some of them are certainly conservatives.
They already exist. They’re usually found in law, business, or theology departments (though not all professors in those departments are conservatives). They also exist in departments that don’t require you to apply your critical thinking skills to social issues, such as maths, IT or engineering. You wouldn’t know whether your professors in those subjects are rightists, conservatives, liberals or leftists though, because politics doesn’t actually ever come up in classes that aren’t related to societal issues. The only way you’d find out is if a professor is obviously biased against women and/or minorities, which does happen sometimes. The people in the original post don’t care about any of this though, the outrage is the entire point and the truth doesn’t matter.
With how unessecarily smug you were being, I honestly wasn’t sure.
A brand written on a product is an ad. Let alone the ads everywhere in public. Acknowledgimg that you’re seeing an ad makes you less likely to be sub consciously influenced (‘brand awareness’). Pretending you’re immune might make you more susceptible.
Maybe you don’t need an appointment to see a GP in Canada? I’m from Austria and GPs are walk-in for most things here, maybe they’re the same. But yeah, the graph is pretty useless without explaining what kind of appointments and what kind of surgeries.
To your last point: it could be, eg, your orthopedist (who isn’t a surgeon) referring you to an orthopedic surgeon, no GP required in that case. But that just makes it even more complicated, because in some countries, you need a GP referral to any specialist. I think sometimes even every time you see the specialist.
That first one isn’t just American christian zionism, it’s the literal reason modern day Israel was created.
Mike Pence was marked for assassination on Jan 6. Searx ‘Pence assassination attempt’ to see if you find sources you personally find credible. I find it reasonably believable.
Through the definition of the words, it would mean that everyone gets, for example, chemo meds, regardless of if they have cancer. So, it doesn’t make much sense.
Adderal is an amphetamine, which is different from methamphetamine. Not nearly as potent and addictive.
Well then that would be the point where it becomes important to protest it. Being against it right now, with what it’s currently like here, seems paranoid to me.