[akira2501]

> can't stomach a poor person getting to ride the bus for free.

If you don't accurately measure ridership you can't accurately serve that ridership. You'll waste money on useless services and you'll waste peoples time by not creating necessary services.

The system needs to exist.

It probably doesn't need to be outsourced. We're well past the internet revolution and it's time for these core competencies to be reabsorbed by government departments. Or it's time for private companies to be held liable for their complete and total failures to serve the public.

Ideally it should just be a system that lets you scan your identification card or drivers license. If you're of the correct age it should serve as a transportation pass. Simple. Compliant. Captures useful data.

[avianlyric]

> It probably doesn't need to be outsourced. We're well past the internet revolution and it's time for these core competencies to be reabsorbed by government departments.

TfL’s ticketing system isn’t outsourced, it was built in house and is sold to other transit operators like New York’s MTA.

The UK has no official identification card (something the public have rejected countless times), and in London many people don’t drive and don’t have a driving licence.

[akira2501]

> TfL’s ticketing system isn’t outsourced

The operation of it? Or the development of it? I'm seeing information that conflicts with this statement.

> and in London many people don’t drive and don’t have a driving licence.

My presumptions are rooted in the USA. For those that don't drive having a state ID card is still quite common. These always have barcodes on the back which would make them useful in POS like applications. You'll need a photo ID to cash a check, buy tobacco or alcohol, or when applying for most jobs. It's unusual here to not have one.

Is that also the case in the UK? Is there no similar system or demand for ID? Would those using it in this free application be less likely to have one?

[avianlyric]

> The operation of it? Or the development of it? I'm seeing information that conflicts with this statement.

Both, although it’s a little more nuanced than that. The original oyster system was bought in from a company called Cubic, and Cubic still provide all the physical gates and readers on the TfL system. But the newer contactless/Tap-to-Pay system was developed in-house by TfL, and the old oyster system has been mostly migrated onto the ticketing system.

However TfL license the new system to Cubic, who then resell it to other Transit systems around the world.

But for London, both the development and operations of the ticketing system is managed in-house (they obviously contract out parts of that work, as TfL probably shouldn’t be in the business of designing, manufacturing and performing major refits of their physical barriers themselves etc)

> Is that also the case in the UK? Is there no similar system or demand for ID? Would those using it in this free application be less likely to have one?

No it’s not the case in the UK. There is no national/state ID, beyond a passport (which you only need if you intend to leave the UK). With regards to photo ID for proof of age, it’s a little complicated. People use a mix of expired passports if they have one, there are some recognised “age ID” cards that you can purchase, in London, a TfL issued photo Zip Card (the free travel Oyster card for those under 16, or under 20 in full time education) is often used as a form of Photo ID.

You don’t present photo ID here for job applications, or opening banking accounts, and most people never need to “cash” a cheque (I’ve personally never cashed a cheque), because bank transfers are fast (i.e. sub 1 second), free and secure. If you need to prove your identity for a bank or job application, it’s done via a slightly arcane mix of providing a proof of address (bank statement, utility bill etc), and some kind of vaguely official photo ID with your name.

Proving your identity in the UK is a slightly circular problem, as you often need to have some kind of proof of ID, to get a document that you can use to prove your identity, which often causes headaches for people who’ve recently immigrated here (natives will have something like a child bank account opened by their parents to provide that initial proof). But there are various escape hatches that break the circular dependency, although they’re not obvious.

[ThePowerOfFuet]

>Ideally it should just be a system that lets you scan your identification card or drivers license. If you're of the correct age it should serve as a transportation pass. Simple. Compliant. Captures useful data.

Privacy nightmare, and disenfranchises those with no paperwork.

[akira2501]

> Privacy nightmare

The current system doesn't do this somehow? You're taking _public_ transport. Presuming privacy from the operator to be a thing is odd.

> and disenfranchises those with no paperwork.

Then if they want free public transport they should get free papers. I'm not sure the goal of an "identityless public society filled with free rides" is at all worthwhile or even agreed upon to be good.

[avianlyric]

What free papers? The UK has no national identity card, so there is no officially recognised “free paper”. Both passports and driving licenses cost money.

[akira2501]

Then make those free. We can't stand behind other poor implementations as an excuse to avoid appropriate levels of public service. What I'm trying to project is there's no reason to cast this as "people don't want poors riding trains."

Of course people want this. It's absurd to suggest otherwise. Solve actual problems and stop giving contracts to people who abuse the public trust and effectively siphon tax money away from people who need it the most.

The level of argumentation here is bizzare. We can't use IDs because of privacy but we will give them unique smart cards? We can't let them use IDs because those cost money for historical reasons but we will pay a third party for a single use smart card?

This is why people don't engage with public service. It's absolutely punishing for no appreciable reason.

[avianlyric]

> Of course people want this. It's absurd to suggest otherwise. Solve actual problems and stop giving contracts to people who abuse the public trust and effectively siphon tax money away from people who need it the most.

You’re making a lot of incorrect assumptions about how TfL works here. TfL don’t outsource their ticketing system, either its development or operation, it was built by TfL and it’s operated by TfL. There no private entity making a profit off this situation.

> The level of argumentation here is bizzare. We can't use IDs because of privacy but we will give them unique smart cards? We can't let them use IDs because those cost money for historical reasons but we will pay a third party for a single use smart card?

> The level of argumentation here is bizzare. We can't use IDs because of privacy but we will give them unique smart cards? We can't let them use IDs because those cost money for historical reasons but we will pay a third party for a single use smart card?

The TfL Photo Zip card for those eligible for free transit basically is a form of free photo ID in London. Just about every institution in London, and most of the UK will accept it as a form of photo ID. In London it basically is the “free papers” you think should be used to provide free transit, and you literally do just tap it on a reader and get free transit. But like all forms of ID it expires and needs to be renewed, unfortunately this incident at TfL is preventing those renewals from happening.

For the absolute avoidance of doubt here, TfL is for all intents and purposes an arm of the London regional government. TfL chairman is the mayor of London, any state funding it gets comes via the Greater London Authority. The state of TfL, and the services it provides to Londoners is a top tier political issue in every single mayoral election, because the London mayor is the single most powerful entity when it comes to the operation and direction of TfL as a whole.