Systèmes de reconnaissance d'identité alternatifs (votez, s'il vous plait)

The people on duty are not anonymous. So as long as it is verified they are outside a closed assembly at the time the “curfew” occurs (the command of their chief and an online timestamped camera may help on that) they can participate in a non synchronized closed assembly, later on. The synchronization among assemblies is mainly needed in order to protect the anonymity of the citizens (otherwise we could use biometrics). And we choose anonymity and not biometrics, in order to protect the anonymity of the vote (as long as people will use the wallet they put into the ballot box, both for voting in the internet later on, and for receiving the dividend).

So we can have a non sychronized assembly , later on, for all these people on duty, and all these people on duty could also become anonymous too (unfortunately anonymous only among themselves as long as they have not the choice to participate to whatever closed assembly they want). Anyway, NOT the same individuals will be on duty whenever a “curfew” occurs, and this non repeatability minimizes the disadvantage of the relative lack of anonymity for those few who will be on duty.

This is a tiny detail and this problem will occur in the distant future when (hopefully) this type of proof of Individuality will prevail. In that future, most of the people “on duty” that will patrol outside will be robots.