Credit cards and phone numbers aren't enough to steal an 'identity.'
The article samples a dissenting opinion by saying: "This is sort of what defines you as an individual and I think there's some real issues there about giving some company control of that data," said Mark Rotenberg, director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, a nonprofit policy group in Washington, D.C.
I think there are real issues about saying that what defines me as an individiual is data that I could give to Microsoft.
Lots of things are scary. Lots of things are stupid, too. But it's easy enough to cancel a credit card and/or file a claim about a purchase that I didn't make that I don't mind giving out the number.
We're living in a time when we are, as a country, trying to figure out how much of ourselves is information, how much we are willing to risk for the convenience of handling our information quickly, and how much of our information we're willing to share. A service like this is a good test, and I'm glad they're willing to do it.
Of course, I probably won't use it.
Self-interest lives at WalMart, not the internet
on
Republic.Com
·
· Score: 1
Perhaps Sunstein's main idea is much more important than his idea of Public.Net. Peer pressure is a very strong force. If people are stuck in an environment where all of their peers believe one thing, they will be extreme discouraged from developing their own ideas.
Sunstein's main idea is extreme enough to get his book published, but polemical enough that it misunderstands the conditions of creating a dynamic, a conversation, or a community.
Communication requires context. The internet offers a variety of contexts that are not only changing so fast that they are hard to keep track of, but which so far have not found a way to fit together neatly. While the search to get past the one-way-linking that the internet uses is interesting and may bring new possibilities, every search of the internet will take you through things you weren't looking for. You cannot help but have a chance to encounter what you disagree with.
Niches are the internet. It will take some pretty strong new kind of candy to hegemonize or dominate the vast variety of intermixing groups which sustain themselves online. Some people will always appear to be obstinate and closed off, but most people graze here and there, and generally find something unexpected in what they are familiar with.
Your point, in general, is good, but I think it's best to remember while in a suburban shopping mall. The internet may well be the last place that anyone is "stuck in an environment where all of their peers believe one thing." This is why the Chinese build such big firewalls.
Slashdot Mirror
Credit cards and phone numbers aren't enough to steal an 'identity.'
The article samples a dissenting opinion by saying: "This is sort of what defines you as an individual and I think there's some real issues there about giving some company control of that data," said Mark Rotenberg, director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, a nonprofit policy group in Washington, D.C.
I think there are real issues about saying that what defines me as an individiual is data that I could give to Microsoft.
Lots of things are scary. Lots of things are stupid, too. But it's easy enough to cancel a credit card and/or file a claim about a purchase that I didn't make that I don't mind giving out the number.
We're living in a time when we are, as a country, trying to figure out how much of ourselves is information, how much we are willing to risk for the convenience of handling our information quickly, and how much of our information we're willing to share. A service like this is a good test, and I'm glad they're willing to do it.
Of course, I probably won't use it.
Perhaps Sunstein's main idea is much more important than his idea of Public.Net. Peer pressure is a very strong force. If people are stuck in an environment where all of their peers believe one thing, they will be extreme discouraged from developing their own ideas.
Sunstein's main idea is extreme enough to get his book published, but polemical enough that it misunderstands the conditions of creating a dynamic, a conversation, or a community.
Communication requires context. The internet offers a variety of contexts that are not only changing so fast that they are hard to keep track of, but which so far have not found a way to fit together neatly. While the search to get past the one-way-linking that the internet uses is interesting and may bring new possibilities, every search of the internet will take you through things you weren't looking for. You cannot help but have a chance to encounter what you disagree with.
Niches are the internet. It will take some pretty strong new kind of candy to hegemonize or dominate the vast variety of intermixing groups which sustain themselves online. Some people will always appear to be obstinate and closed off, but most people graze here and there, and generally find something unexpected in what they are familiar with.
Your point, in general, is good, but I think it's best to remember while in a suburban shopping mall. The internet may well be the last place that anyone is "stuck in an environment where all of their peers believe one thing." This is why the Chinese build such big firewalls.