Don't banks have their own id:s as well? At least in another nordic country, you have quite many login possibilities to many services. Banks even provide cross-login.
As I understand it, BankID in Sweden is still run by one organisation co-owned by the big banks, and banks handle verification for issuance. There is still a single point of failure for the operation of the system.
I was under the impression that all of those services and login methods rely on suomi.fi in the end, but I admit that I don't understand the system terribly well.
MitID and NemID before it was pretty much bought by the Banks and the government together.
It is to avoid the banks needing their own id for customers, as people would need to go into the banks using their passports etc to register.
Some banks do have their own logins and IDs for various purposes, but you often need MitID somewhere in there simply to verify the actual identity of the person with the account. All the other logins simply give you access to the ID it doesn't actually verify it. MitID does that.
For example Lunar doesn't need MitID during 3D Secure (online payments), but that is only because you used MitID at some point to store your proof on your phone, that you can unlock with a secure enough method, and then do the payment. This is considered enough, as you still use an identity that has been verified by MitID at some point.
No. As I understand it the previous system, NemID was actually (co?)designed by the banks so this is what they all use. Likewise MitID is another unholy alliance of Nets (a Danish payment provider) and Danish banks.
Given the Swedish version of it is called BankID I assume the situation is nearly the same in Sweden.
No. Many/most of them support login through hardware ID on your smartphone (i.e fingerprint/TPM-style pin), but the actual authorization of transfers or any privileged access is entirely MitID
What do you think is the most complex thing here, genuinely? Masten Space's Xombie first flew in 2009 and has done 227 launches and landings.
These are of course small rockets with modest performance. So maybe the hard part is the scale or the mass optimization to a real orbital rocket's first stage.
Again, not saying it's easy, just trying to get insightful comments on what are the hard parts more specifically.
Consistent and sufficient funding that won't evaporate when you inevitably fail the first few times. Investors and political officials get a bit upset when the billion dollar prototype they funded crashes and burns two or three times in a row. But that's kind of what it takes.
I'm foremost a guitar player which probably shows, so this was something I assumed could be a problem indeed. I'll have to think about it, but many of the suggestions sounds good. It's really easy to do feature development with the automatic deployment after pushing.
I also on purpose built this without checking what other pages are out there. I only checked afterwards, and it turned out at least sampling the search results a bit, every page seems to have somewhat different focus so I didn't end up creating exactly what already was done by very many others.
How does that influence how you feel about the result? As you more proud, or less (than if you hadn’t used AI)? If the app has a problem, do you care more or less?
I guess I have a lot less emotional attachment to the end product. But it was fun building it, as I didn't have to deal with all the not fun stuff like learning syntax and libraries and compatibility issues etc.
For working with data, I certainly like lists and trees with automated layout and dislike 2d space with human drag-and-drop layouts.
I assume most people are like this, and the start menu was a huge improvement. Most people would have been lost if it was just windows and icons freely floating in a 2d space.
Between stable and contract honoring entities it's also possible to trade for things that not everyone produces, or do large long term investments in things like mines or refineries outside your own territory.
reply