plant lover, cookie monster, shoe fiend
16917 stories
·
20 followers

The digital tyranny of needing an account for everything

1 Share

It’s the nightmare travel scenario. The bookings are made, the suitcases packed, and you realize on the day of your travel that someone in the family has an expired passport. In this case, it was my youngest daughter, on the day of our Easter trip to Ireland. After going through the seven stages of grief in about an hour, we ended up splitting up our traveling party. I went to Ireland with my oldest child, while the youngest stayed home with her Mom.

Let me warn you that this post will take a series of turns. We start with me screwing up my daughters passport renewal, and somehow end with a critique of the American administrative state. Stick with it. If you are more of a visual learner, I mapped out what to expect.

As soon as I returned to the US, I set about renewing her passport. To renew a kids passport, both parents must be physically present at a passport office, or more realistically, a post office. If not, its a lot more paperwork to reassure the government that one parent is not surreptitiously trying to kidnap the kids. So, three people together then. It took a couple of weeks to get an appointment at a nearby post office or a good deal longer if we did not do it during school hours. I prefilled the form and printed it out, went to CVS to get a passport photo, grabbed the birth certificate, our IDs, and her old passport. The post office was fairly busy, but they kept our appointment time, and courteously went through the paperwork with us. [Update: we got the passport back in 12 days with the expedited process - which is really impressive!]

One snag: their copier was broken, and they needed to keep copies of the documentation. So, could we go somewhere and get copies for them? Sure. We drove to a nearby library, got the paper copies, drove back to the post office and dropped them off.

One lesson here is that the US federal government has relatively few bricks-and-mortar options where it can engage with the public. The post office is really the only game in town, with more than 30,000 locations (down from about 40,000 at its peak in the late 1990s). Social Security, which is probably the next most physically represented non-military federal agency across the US, has about 1,200 offices.

This is not new. The US Postal Service has been the tangible physical representation of the emergence and westward expansion of the American state in the 19th century. When the Social Security program was being created in the 1930s, the government relied on local post offices to quickly enroll tens of millions of applicants.

The USPS accepted 7.5 million passport applications in 2022, and it’s efforts are concentrated on the trickier ones — kids and first time passports that require more documentation than renewals. It is great that we can rely on post offices. Not only are they plentiful and easy to find, they are relatively neutral administrative spaces that people do not have a strong aversion to, as some people might with welfare offices or police stations. That physical space helps to ensure the government can reach people in a way that private digital actors cannot. For example people who are having problems with facial ID verification to sign up for login.gov can go to a post office to be verified, while those who rely on private ID verification systems have no such back-up.

Anyway, lets do the time count for the passport renewal process:

  • Photos: 45 minutes x 2 people

  • Trip to post office, library: 2 hours x 3 people

  • Prefilling and printing online form, pulling together documentation: 30 minutes X 1 person

Total: 8 hours

This experience reminded me that my Irish passport was expiring, and needed to be renewed. Which took me about 20-25 minutes all in, done entirely online. And half of that time was getting my kid to take a photo on my phone, and figuring out how to save that photo as a jpeg. There was no form to fill in, and no documentation to provide. I clicked through a series of intuitive questions, uploaded the photo (which was rightsized to the appropriate dimensions automatically), entered my old passport information, my address, and paid. It was extraordinarily easy.

One nice touch with renewing my Irish passport is that I did not need to set up an account just for this process, which would have meant creating a login and a password.

Share

One of the tyrannies of modern life is the rise of the mandatory accounts, apps or portals. If you need to buy a ticket to an event, communicate with your doctor, or apply for a job, you need to set up an online account. If you are really lucky, there will be a recaptcha at the end of the process, where you unsuccessfully try to identify a motorcycle, or make sense of a scrawl of letters.

The day after I renewed my passport, I created an appointment for one of my kids to get a haircut, which required a login with a password. I tried calling the location, but no-one picked up. And why should they, when the answering machine encourages people to make an online appointment? When I tried to set up an account, my sense of deja vu was confirmed when I was told there was already an account under my email. So I had to reset my password.

I spent only slightly less time setting up my kids haircut appointment than I did renewing my passport. Something is wrong here.

The espoused logic for all of these online accounts is convenience. But whose convenience? How much time are we wasting with an endless array of these interactions, many poorly designed? The mandatory account primarily serves the needs of the company, or more precisely, its desire to collect your information, and monetize it somehow. To send a survey, to pitch new products or reminders, to sell your data to others.

Digital interactions can really add convenience. Mandatory accounts, especially for infrequently used services, do not. Instead, they shift burdens onto users. In some cases there might be legitimate security needs. But lets face it, no-one is going to steal my haircut appointment. Because people tend to use the same username and password across sites, your patterns are likely to be revealed when one of those sites gets hacked, reducing your security. We’ve all read the articles telling us to not repeat user names and passwords, but again, this puts the burden on users when for many of these sites, a login is not truly necessary.

One solution is fewer logins for more interactions, e.g. using login.gov for federal services has saved people lots of time. Or you could use your google or facebook logins when offered that option, though many are understandably reluctant to give tech giants more of their personal information. I use password managers, but that does not remove the time spent setting up the account, and they don’t work perfectly when sites have odd password requirements.

Another solution is to not require accounts with logins and passwords! For social safety net services, the best practice is to not mandate accounts unless necessary. Code for America’s field guide for safety net service design says: “Requiring account registration is a key accessibility barrier for many clients. Applications should have a prominent pathway to applying without completing registration first.”

Passports, unlike haircut appointments, seem like a big deal, since they deal with identity. Isn’t this a case where an account would be a good idea? Not really. Once I get the passport, I won’t need to interact with this service for another decade. The interaction requires me to reveal information (a current image of myself, personal payment information, and prior passport information) that validates my identity and the government can check against its own data. This is an example of shifting burdens away from citizens because a government is able to use administrative data to benefit the user, rather than to monetize that data.

Thank you for reading Can We Still Govern?This post is public so feel free to share it.

Share

Its not unreasonable to ask, if Ireland (and other countries) can do online passport renewal, why can’t the US?

The good news is that virtual passport renewals should be available sometime in 2024. In December 2021, in an executive order aimed at improving customer experience in government, President Biden ordered that “The Secretary of State shall design and deliver a new online passport renewal experience that does not require any physical documents to be mailed.”

The need for virtual passports reflects a massive increase in demand. The US has gone from issuing less than 5 million passports per year in 1994 to 24 million in 2023. Some of this increased demand emerged from Americans wanting to travel more, but also from post 9/11 policies, like requiring passports to travel to Mexico and Canada. There are currently about 160 million passports in circulation. Shifting more passport interactions to a digital space should be a win-win for both citizens and the government. And so, the goal of virtual passport renewal processes can be traced back as far as the Obama administration, but with seemingly little progress until recently.

How is that going? In 2022, the State Department piloted a virtual passport renewal system. About 500,000 people used the system, which was suspended in March of 2023, with the explanation that the system would be revised and improved based on customer feedback. This is completely normal. It is generally a bad idea to roll out a digital product all at once. The IRS DirectFile is a pilot for this precise reason. The pilot worked pretty well for the public, although digital photos proved to be a problem. Another problem is that the digital system dramatically increased work for the government employees processing the passports. This is an instance where moving to digital was not a win-win, and in fact created inefficiencies because the back-end workflow processes proved to be more complex than with the traditional paper applications.

Multiple contractors have worked on digital renewals using different platforms. One person I spoke with said the project has run into every IT bungle possible: the contractors are not nimble, unable to adapt to changing demands, and focus on maximizing profits. Government overseers lack the capacity to manage the contractors, and procurement processes make it easier to restart the process with a new contractor rather than fix the problems with an existing system.

A few months ago a US Digital Services team were tasked with fixing the problems and bringing a virtual renewal option back this year remains a presidential goal. But its hard not to think of this as a basic capacity problem. Providing appropriate identity to allow people to travel and work is a core government function. The fact that three administrations have not been able to bring this to fruition, even as other countries have, reflects a governance failure.

The head of state of a country like the US ought to be able to say “lets make passport renewal processes digital” and see it done after some reasonable amount of time, say in a year or so. This only seems unrealistic if you know something about how American public sector tech processes work, where it might take a year just to select a contractor. We could blame the US government addiction to contracting out, but this will not change anytime soon. If governments are going to contract for tech we need a) government technologists with the capacity and political support to hold contractors accountable, and b) procurement processes that are adaptable to meet the evolving need of projects. There is more of those technologists in government than before, but not in every department, and the procurement processes remain an obstacle. (Jen Pahlka’s Recoding America is excellent on this point).

All of this is to say, if the Biden administration finally gets digital passport renewal done, it deserves some credit. Because the track record here is not good.

As for my daughter, she took the disappointment of not being able to see her cousins in Ireland with impressive stoicism, though did note she would hold it over me for the rest of my life.

Read the whole story
sarcozona
2 hours ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

Man dies after 613-day COVID-19 infection that underwent 50 mutations

1 Comment

Read the whole story
sarcozona
3 hours ago
reply
This poor man
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

★ Amy Star @ Celeste mod% ★ (@AmyZenunim@unstable.systems)

1 Share
Read the whole story
sarcozona
5 hours ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

Separated Bike Lanes Means Safer Streets, Study Says — Streetsblog USA

1 Share

Cities that build protected lanes for cyclists end up with safer roads for people on bikes and people in cars and on foot, a new study of 12 large metropolises revealed Wednesday.

Researchers at the University of Colorado Denver and the University of New Mexico discovered cities with protected and separated bike lanes had 44 percent fewer deaths than the average city.

“Protected separated bike facilities was one of our biggest factors associated with lower fatalities and lower injuries for all road users,” study co-author Wesley Marshall, a University of Colorado Denver engineering professor, told Streetsblog. “If you’re going out of your way to make your city safe for a broader range of cyclists ... we’re finding that it ends up being a safer city for everyone.”

Marshall and his team of researchers analyzed 17,000 fatalities and 77,000 severe injuries in cities including Denver, Portland, Dallas, Seattle, San Francisco, Kansas City and Chicago between 2000 and 2012. All had experienced an increase in cycling as they built more infrastructure. (Update: All of those cities also have varying rates of gentrification, which needed to be factored into the results, specifically because of "the safety disparities associated with gentrification." Researchers said safety improvements in largely gentrified areas "suggest equity issues and the need for future research.")

Researchers assumed that having more cyclists on the street was spurring drivers to slow down — a relic of a 2017 study that found that cities with high cycling rates had fewer traffic crashes. But it turned out that wasn’t the case.

Instead, researchers found that bike infrastructure, particularly physical barriers that separate bikes from speeding cars as opposed to shared or painted lanes, significantly lowered fatalities in cities that installed them.

After analyzing traffic crash data over a 13-year period in areas with separated bike lanes on city streets, researches estimated that having a protected bike facility in a city would result in 44 percent fewer deaths and 50 percent fewer serous injuries than an average city.

In Portland, where the population of bike commuters increased from 1.2 to 7 percent between 1990 and 2015, fatality rates fell 75 percent in the same period. Fatal crash rates dropped 60.6 percent in Seattle, 49.3 percent in San Francisco, 40.3 percent in Denver, and 38.2 percent in Chicago over the same period as cities added more protected and separated lanes as part of their Vision Zero plans.

“Bike facilities end up slowing cars down, even when a driver hits another driver, it’s less likely to be a fatality because it’s happening at a slower speed,” Marshall said.

Perhaps even more important: Researchers found that painted bike lanes provided no improvement on road safety. And their review earlier this year of shared roadways — where bike symbols are painted in the middle of a lane — revealed that it was actually safer to have no bike markings at all.

“We found they’re worse than nothing. You’re better off doing nothing,” Marshall said. “It gives people a false sense of security that’s a bike lane. It’s just a sign telling cyclists it might just be there.”

Not all protected bike lanes provide the same level of security for cyclists and drivers. In Denver, for instance, some protected lanes have plastic bollards that are interspersed along the roadway, allowing cars and trucks to park in the bike path and forcing cyclists to swerve into the street.

“When you have them designed like that, even if it’s a protected lane, that might create a more dangerous situation because cyclists are merging in and out of the road versus places with foot-wide concrete planters,” Marshall added.

New York was not included in this longitudinal study because the high number of cyclists and lanes would have overwhelmed their models, but will be a focus of a future study, Marshall said. New York's Department of Transportation consistently touts how its protected bike lanes improve safety for all road users — but often denies neighborhoods the full protection of such infrastructure when some car owners complain of lost parking.

Sometimes, it's not always "safety first." 

Read the whole story
sarcozona
7 hours ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

McNadoMD: "If bird flu starts transmittin…" - the Octodon

1 Share
Read the whole story
sarcozona
1 day ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

Down-to-earth drought resistance

1 Share

Drought is a serious threat to global food security. In upstream research, crop drought-tolerant traits are often studied under extreme drought conditions, which can seem irrelevant in the eyes of breeders.

Although wildfire may have positive ecological function (as we discussed in our February editorial1), drought — its related, but seemingly lesser, stressor — is harmful or even devastating, particularly to agricultural ecosystems. Drought develops gradually and its start or end can be difficult to identify, but its effects are often long-term and catastrophic. Climate change is predicted to lead to more frequent and severe droughts in many parts of the world. Last year was one of the hottest and driest in historical record, and people in the Horn of Africa suffered particularly badly2; a record that is likely to be surpassed all too soon. Breeding drought-resilient crops is often proposed as a solution for mitigating the negative outcomes of drought and has become an important and urgent goal for global research communities. But this endeavour is impeded by the gap between basic research and breeding practice.

A Comment published in Nature3 in September 2023 highlighted that many previous publications have oversold the effects of their reported genes in yield gain. Out of 1,671 reported yield-increasing genes, only one showed constant yield benefits in maize across years and locations in a large-scale field trial. Without close collaborations between molecular biologists (or geneticists) and breeders, unrealistic field trials have overestimated the agronomic effects of tested genes. The authors proposed five criteria for evaluating yield gain in field trials, including standardized definitions of yield, and multiple-location and multiyear experiments.

Drought resistance is also a complex trait that is defined differently under different scenarios, and is greatly affected by the environment. This complexity causes a similar disconnect between genetic studies and the breeding of drought resistance. Multiple breeding programmes have been undertaken worldwide by large research units such as the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) and the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) in pursuit of drought-resistant crops. At the same time, molecular biologists and geneticists continue to report the cloning of genes with drought resistance or tolerance traits, but these genes are rarely beneficial to crop breeders. As drought resistance expert Lijun Luo said at a recent conference in Sanya last month, “out of the over 300 rice functional genes claimed to increase drought resistance, none of them has been successfully applied in breeding!”

The main problem, according to Luo, is that these molecular studies focus on ‘drought tolerance traits’ rather than ‘yield under drought’. There is a well-established trade-off between stress tolerance and the productivity of plants; many wild relatives of crops exhibit strong stress tolerance but poor yield potentials. Conversely, upland rice varieties, such as IRAT109, that display stable yield under drought tend to have very poor drought tolerance (according to Luo). Improving the drought tolerance of crops without considering yield in the field is shooting at the wrong target.

If IRAT109 is not drought tolerant, then the question arises of what guarantees its yield stability under drought. The answer is its elite drought avoidance. It has long been realized that drought resistance can be achieved by multiple traits that are broadly classifiable into three main types: drought escape (by short life duration), drought avoidance (by deeper root distribution) and drought tolerance4. Scientists who use model plants such as Arabidopsis and rice to study drought resistance mechanism often focus on drought tolerance traits — such as the ability of plants to survive drought when dehydration has already occurred in the plant tissues — using water deprivation or polyethylene glycol treatment to screen for resistance. The resultant phenotypes often bestow a higher survival rate of the plants under drought or a higher recovery rate during rehydration, but not necessarily a higher yield. Without deciding beforehand the specific drought-resistant trait that is needed to improve the productivity of the specific crops in the target environment, laboratory-based studies can become aimless and futile.

Knowledge about environments is also important. According to the levels of yield loss (from 85% to 40%) under drought, Kumar et al. classified drought stresses as very severe, severe, moderate and mild5. Henry and Torres in the IRRI tested the performance of several rice varieties and found that the varieties that are adapted to mild and moderate drought with stable yield are different from the varieties adapted to more severe drought stress6. As mild drought stress affects a large proportion of drought-prone rice-growing areas in the world, a laboratory experiment that applies severe stress treatment can hardly be expected to identify genes that are useful in most drought-affected areas. In addition, droughts can be of different durations (short or long), different frequencies (continuous, intermittent or once per season) or occur at different growth periods of the crop. Crops use different drought-resistant traits or mechanisms to adapt to these types of droughts. Purely laboratory-based research can oversimplify drought stress treatments and so fail to understand the severity or types of droughts that are agriculturally relevant7.

In a paper published in 2021, Xiong et al.8 reported that climate change has increased the ranking changes of wheat varieties in breeding trials over the past four decades. In other words, the relative performance of crop varieties is becoming less easy for breeders to predict. However, breeding trials targeted to drought or heat stress environments have not been affected. Breeding trials would also benefit from precisely targeted agronomically relevant stress environments.

To better cope with future droughts, drought-related crop research needs precision. Molecular biologists must cooperate with — or at least consult — agronomists to better understand their needs. It is certainly informative to study a drought avoidance trait such root architectures or a drought tolerance trait such leaf rolling9, but it is also crucial to monitor yield under drought. Moreover, high-yielding and widely planted varieties make a more appropriate genetic background than poor-yielding model genotypes when testing for drought resistance in the real world.

The natural variations of crops held in their wild relatives or in adapted landraces (such as upland rice) provide a valuable genetic resource to help to balance yield and drought resistance. The increasing availability of their genomes provide opportunities for researchers to identify the genes or quantitative trait loci that are most likely to complement the current breeding pool for drought resistance. Better evaluation of these materials, followed by their utilization in precision drought research, will hasten the development of resilient crops.

Read the whole story
sarcozona
1 day ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete
Next Page of Stories