If you go to my local library and tell them you want a library card, but you don't have any ID, they ask you to give them your address. They send you a postcard, and when you bring it in, they'll give you a library card. No QR code necessary.

The USPS could function quite successfully as an ID system and a bank, were they allowed.

In fact postal services in many countries do function as banks. When I was a primary school student in South Korea, we all made a savings account at the local post office and learned about how banks work and the importance of saving money.

And indeed the United States Postal Service itself operated a savings bank system from 1911 until 1967: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Savings_S...

I've never understood this. There doesn't seem to be a natural synergy between delivering mail and storing money. Is it just because post offices are everywhere? Why not make court houses banks? At least they would have security. Or town halls?

It just feels kinda random.

Because in some countries it is/was rather common to receive payments (most often pension payments) in cash that where delivered by the postman. That's why it makes sense in a way.

Few reasons (US Centric)

1. Court Houses are not everywhere like Postal offices

2. Court houses are not part of the Executive Branch, where as a Service like the Postal Service or banking would need to be part of the Executive Branch, not Judicial. A Better counter would be DMV or some other government service.

3. Court Houses are not nearly as accessible and are much harder to get in and out of due to their nature. Not consumer friendly

4. Court Houses by the nature have alot of criminals going in and out of them all the time, probably a bad idea to put money services in the same place....

for the record I do not support the idea of USPS being a bank either.

Post offices have to be able to handle money orders paid for in cash, so I guess they already have the infrastructure to do a significant subset of bank-like things. At least with respect to document authentication and cash management.

https://faq.usps.com/s/article/Money-Orders-The-Basics

This is what California did for RealID when they made a mistake early on. Federal government didn’t recognize one of two forms of verification California used and California mailed a post card to those affected. Was able to just go online with the code and verify receipt of the card.

Most countries whose postal service offered banking stopped.

Know why?

Wikipedia had a pretty good summary of implementation in different countries[0]. It seems most implementations are stopped because of privatization efforts, but the blurbs don't give much context.

I can see people having different opinions of this trend. What is your take on it?

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_savings_system

I agree with everything you're saying, but disagree with the reason.

The US federal government has to be too loose about keeping track of citizens specifically to avoid looking too fascist. One of your many American rights is to have no ID at all. Protecting that right for two dozen people makes everything extremely complicated for the rest of us.

The federal government is not too loose in tracking citizens, and you cannot effectively operate in the U.S. without I.D of some form. Birth certificates and tax ID's are necessary for everything from school to work. Infact those that forgo it originally struggle as adults heavily to get those documents later, if at all.

It’s probably true that you can’t operate properly without an ID, and yet the US government is specifically avoiding the one necessary prerequisite to having reliable and convenient IDs: a complete list of its citizens, with place of residence and a mandatory assigned unique identifier.

It fuck people coming and going. You can’t get an ID if you don’t have a place of residence, and yet you can’t just go about your business without an ID.

> One of your many American rights is to have no ID at all.

Ha, if only. Everyone from FB to the NSA is keeping tabs on individuals in all aspects of life. There is no hiding in the US

The point isn't to prevent a skilled attacker. The point is to prevent casual lying and low-skill fraud. Most people who lie/cheat/steal do so because it's easy or because they're dumb. Your QR code idea will cost more money to implement and won't block skilled attackers either, as it doesn't take a genius to figure out a way to get mail from a mailbox you don't own.

Utility bills are the DMV's equivalent of a cheap lock. A smart attacker can pick the lock, and a determined attacker can cut it off. But the majority of thieves are walking around looking for unlocked car doors instead.

Do you really think DMV asks for a copy of a utility bill because it's a good way to suppress your rights? I would think that there are plenty of more effective ways to do so, if that were actually their goal.

Do you think low skilled fraud doesn't have access to a printer? If it cannot be implemented properly, then it shouldn't be done at all. It doesn't matter what good intent it may have had, in effect it is a suppression of individual rights. This entire process would be grounds for a civil war in the 1800's. Yet today we think being a citizen isn't enough to have rights. You have to be apart of a socioeconomics nomic class of people to have those rights.

The DMV complies with whatever regulations are imposed on them. Those rules are created by legislators whom are entirely disconnected from their constituents and are paid for their votes.

Yes, there are absolutely people who do not have the equipment or ability to fake a document.

> If it cannot be implemented properly, then it shouldn't be done at all.

Perfectionist fallacy. I can't think of any civic requirements that are perfect. We always compromise on perfection because our civic processes also have to be reasonable.

Implimenting it reasonably is properly. I did not say perfect.

> it doesn't take a genius to figure out a way to get mail from a mailbox you don't own

iirc stealing other people’s mail by tampering with a mailbox is a ~~felony~~ federal crime. If they threw out the mail and you went through their trash it might be different. I anal though.

And election fraud isn't a crime or even a felony? If one is going to commit one of those things, would the threat of another charge REALLY stop them?

You can also rent mailboxes, or use a friends. Neither of those are crimes.

And do you suppose nobody keeps track of who is renting that PO Box?

>they can simply mail you a unique qr code which you could then scan and complete the process entirely online. Or at a minimum bring physically to an office.

How is that any different than bringing any other piece of official mail that you receive at your home address?

Because it actually validates your address. Plenty of “official mail that you receive at your home address” can be accessed (or produced) without access to the listed address, but you can't spoof knowing information that you never received.

It would be reasonably easy to check my mail before I do every day.

Or maybe I conspire with someone that doesn't live here but wants to appear to live here (which can obviously also be done with utility bills).

I'm all for making it as easy as possible to vote, I'm analyzing the properties of the piece of mail that the government sends.

If you want to make it as easy as possible to vote, you can't have a permanent address requirement as such. As has been said, many, many people don't have one.