Digital ID World Conference

Denver is playing host to the Digital ID World conference, which is intended to discuss and examine the future of "digital identity" - how you'll be identified, tracked, and monitored online. Several people from the weblog community are in attendance and have reports available: Denise Howell, David Weinberger, Doc Searls.

Comments

hate to reference 1984, but...

[dildatron]

I hate to reference 1984, but it seems like the whole identity tracking thing sparks a lot of fear in a lot of people. It's not so much that we are all doing bad things and just don't want to be tracked, it's that the potential for abuse is high.

And it's not just on computers, by any means. More and more I have noticed cameras on nearly every stop light, cameras in every parking lot, etc. I know what their intended purpose, but they can potentially be abused.

I think most of us are pro-privacy, and I will sacrifice a bit of safety for personal freedoms. I just know how bad people abuse good things all too well.

Anonymity on the Internet

[gpinzone]

...how you'll be identified, tracked, and monitored online.

The post by Michael doesn't necessarily imply that Digital IDs are good or bad. However, most discussions here on Slashdot tend to demonize Digital IDs as an invasion of privacy. Consumers want Digital IDs so they can be securely identified when making purchases or logging into a computer network over the unsecured Internet. Do not confuse the issue of anonymity with identification schemes. The Internet currently has no such IDs or strict authentication, yet law enforcement can still track down perpetrators of illegal activity.

What we want is the option of being completely secure or completely anonymous. Neither task is a simple one.

Re:Anonymity on the Internet

[neurostar]

What we want is the option of being completely secure or completely anonymous. Neither task is a simple one.

This is very true. Neither of them will be easy to attain. However, given the choice between the two, I would pick anonymity. I think that out of the two, it would be easier to remain anonymous than to have total security. Total security, for all practical purposes, is impossible. It is impossible to ensure that all the people who are watching us are doing the best job with the best intentions. The 'human factor' must be considered.

Even if we do get a great amount of security at the cost of our anonymity, it the 'security' would most likely end up being worse than if everyone was anonymous or even worse than it is now. This flaw in security would result from the fact that someone who wanted to commit some crime, would find it easier to collect a large amount of information about a large number of people. The huge databases required on the path to 'total security' would facillitate this possibility.

However, with anonymity comes separation. If we remain mostly anonymous, it is harder for criminals to get information on us. Law enforcement would still be able to protect us, as stated in the comment by gpinzone, because they don't need to know anything about me, for example, to catch a criminal that stole my car or something.

As an example from my personal life, I try and buy most of the things I get using cash. This is because of the simple fact that cash is anonymous. People can find out that I withdrew $40 from my bank account. But they can't find out what I spent the money on. That means I have the freedom to buy what I want without worrying about someone databasing what I buy. The database of things I buy could be used for something that is only annoying, like targeted advertising, or for something else, like planning a robbery.

To sumarize, I feel we should strive for anonymity because it is safer and it doesn't compromise the ability of Law Enforcement to deal with criminals.

neurostar

The future of Instant Messaging

[conduit4]

1100101100110: I'm grounded because my mom caught me surfing around some porn sites from her trip to Hawaii 1010110100111: LOL 1010110100111:Well, yesterday I was using my P2P program and so far today 10 record company execs have come to my house to make sure I didnt have and illegal music they owned on my computer. 1100101100110: Rough 1100101100110: the same thing happened to 0011001001100 last week.

monitored online?

[User 956]

how you'll be identified, tracked, and monitored online. Several people from the weblog community

Isn't having a weblog a way to be identified, tracked, and monitored online? Seriously, most of them consist of inane crap like "At 2:14 I ate a cheese sandwitch and watched Buffy reruns", and "I live in my parents' basement".

We need two things....

[TerryAtWork]

1 - A way to absolutely prove who we are in order to buy stuff safely.

2 - A way to absolutely hide who we are in order to score all that pr0n off the net safely....

Interac?

[CodeTRap]

Your rights online. HAH! What about your rights offline?

What I want to know is this. How much of my spending habits, (what I eat, drink, sleep on, sleep in, sleep with, all that information) how much of it does a company like Interac have? Or Visa, or MasterCard. When you make your puchases using that little pinpad, or any other form of electronic payment.. How much of that information is stored, analyzed, saved, used?

You're all afraid of losing the ability to download free mp3's.. or surfing porn anonymously.. but. What about being able to buy groceries without big bro knowing what you eat? Or what movies you watch. Or where you were? How much of that electronic trail can be used to trace your movements? Who has the right to that information? What are they going to use it for?

Do you think that your day cannot be traced by the purchases you make? Where you work? Traced with camera's throughout the city... I wonder who's made a game of watching you, just for practice.....

Re:If this is the future...

[nanojath]

Oh you're exaggerating. You only have to be identified by the one number, six hundred three score and six, and you have the option of receiving the character on either your forehead or your hand!