3 ms·

It's not crazy at all, but it seems we've reached a point in the conversation where we can't produce anything meaningful without it getting drowned out by screa

by T-R 16y ago

It's not crazy at all, but it seems we've reached a point in the conversation where we can't produce anything meaningful without it getting drowned out by screams of "Fascism" and "Plutocracy". I think that both Government and Business stand to benefit from it enough that it's possible that there weren't underhanded motivations involved, or at least that they won't come to fruition.

thwarted 16y ago
Underhanded? I agree, most likely not. Created by busybodies though? Highly likely. EDIT: And I say this because I was reading something about this (can't find the link now) where it said something like the rate of on-line retail is growing and is now a 30 billion dollar business (I might be misremembering the numbers). And we must do something about this to protect it, protect it from fraud and a bunch of other "problems" that were presented like . If things like fraud were real threats to the rate of growth and our dependence on on-line transactions, would we be seeing the rates of growth we're seeing? Wouldn't vendors be scaling back their sales (being more picky about who they sell to, or going out of business due to fraud) and consumers not choosing to buy online because things like identity theft were more prevalent. From the OP: Under the new program, consumers would sign in just once and be able to move among other websites, eliminating the inconvenience that causes consumers to drop many transactions. Are the number of transactions being dropped really a threat, especially considering the growth? I'm all for making things actually more secure, but doing so under the guise that the current status-quo, which is on a growth curve, is under attack is disingenuous. These are contrived reasons. Contrived by someone who wants to push this because they perceive a problem (legitimately or just because they like their solution) that is actually smaller than they make it out to be. Busybodies.
- T-R 16y ago
  I have to say I agree with you, there. I think there are benefits to be had, but saying "This is going to cause a huge shift in consumer use of the Internet" can only be described as overblown.
- nostrademons 16y ago
  Fraud is usually a lagging indicator of high growth. First you get the growth, then you get the fraud, then the fraud causes the growth to reverse. It's quite possible that people are seeing a rise in fraud and pre-emptively trying to address the problem rather than wait until things become completely unusable.

by T-R 16y ago

thwarted 16y ago

Underhanded? I agree, most likely not. Created by busybodies though? Highly likely. EDIT: And I say this because I was reading something about this (can't find the link now) where it said something like the rate of on-line retail is growing and is now a 30 billion dollar business (I might be misremembering the numbers). And we must do something about this to protect it, protect it from fraud and a bunch of other "problems" that were presented like . If things like fraud were real threats to the rate of growth and our dependence on on-line transactions, would we be seeing the rates of growth we're seeing? Wouldn't vendors be scaling back their sales (being more picky about who they sell to, or going out of business due to fraud) and consumers not choosing to buy online because things like identity theft were more prevalent. From the OP: Under the new program, consumers would sign in just once and be able to move among other websites, eliminating the inconvenience that causes consumers to drop many transactions. Are the number of transactions being dropped really a threat, especially considering the growth? I'm all for making things actually more secure, but doing so under the guise that the current status-quo, which is on a growth curve, is under attack is disingenuous. These are contrived reasons. Contrived by someone who wants to push this because they perceive a problem (legitimately or just because they like their solution) that is actually smaller than they make it out to be. Busybodies.

T-R 16y ago
I have to say I agree with you, there. I think there are benefits to be had, but saying "This is going to cause a huge shift in consumer use of the Internet" can only be described as overblown.
nostrademons 16y ago
Fraud is usually a lagging indicator of high growth. First you get the growth, then you get the fraud, then the fraud causes the growth to reverse. It's quite possible that people are seeing a rise in fraud and pre-emptively trying to address the problem rather than wait until things become completely unusable.