5 ms·

The silver lining is that by the time this project goes through study after study, development, testing, and finally deployment 5-10 years will have passed and

by flyt 16y ago

The silver lining is that by the time this project goes through study after study, development, testing, and finally deployment 5-10 years will have passed and the Internet will fundamentally change in ways that either makes this instantly irrelevant or impossible to enforce.

Alex3917 16y ago
We need a publicly-controlled identity infrastructure that's compatible with the Internet. The problem isn't that internet ID is somehow evil, but rather the government.
- drats 16y ago
  Remind me again of why we "need" a solution such as this? All this screeching reminds me of the people wanting a centralized solution to spam in the 1990s via government control or micropayments. We don't hear from them anymore because of spam filters and increased storage and bandwidth. My google account has double authentication now, telephone as well as a second email address, and serves as a central repository for all my other accounts across the web if I happen to forget a password. I can change providers if I want as well. Further, my VISA card is tied to my identity for purchases and donations. But anything that doesn't involve that isn't tied to my identity. So please just go shove it with your "need". It just makes me furious that this is even being proposed, it's totally unnecessary meddling and we all KNOW it will be abused.
  - Alex3917 16y ago
    "Remind me again of why we 'need' a solution such as this?" There are lots of services that people want that are impossible to build without a way to prove that someone is who they say they are. E.g. better reputation systems. "we all KNOW it will be abused." Obviously. That doesn't mean there isn't a need though.
    - malandrew 16y ago
      The private sector is already doing a much better job of building reputation systems. It's now a full-fledged area of computing work. There's even a sizable O'Reilly book on the topic.
    - drats 16y ago
      Last I checked there is an identity management authentication system you can use, for example Twitter has verified accounts (I don't know how they do it, perhaps by mail) or Bluehost asks for people to fax them a copy of an ID/Passport to get shell access (stupid, considering they have your VISA). So what you are saying is you are prepared to take the potential abuses because you want it to be more "seamless" than a fax, postcard or a $1 VISA charge. And that further these abuses are better than having a market solution where a commercial ID provider or bank does it themselves? Sounds like f--- all gain for a lot of risk. And we all know that beyond the abuses the "voluntary" nature of this will swiftly decline after it's implemented, so don't try to argue in that direction either. Just a reminder: the US government is currently illegally sifting through people's email, has wars going which are not authorized by congress, still runs a number of secret prisons across the world in which torture is conducted, is seeking people's private twitter messages in addition to their email because they have contact with Wikileaks, is groping people's genitals with high-school drop-outs in airports as well as taking naked photographs of them and has a "Homeland" tsar who is going to appear on telescreens installed in Walmarts to tell people to be alarmed and suspicous. Further, opposition movements have heated up the rhetoric of your politics to the point where there are open calls for the assassination of Julian Assange (who, like or dislike, is doing journalism) and the domestic rhetoric has been such that mentally ill people are now gunning down politicians. And you think it's advisable we install an ID system on the Internet because, in some unspecified way, it would be easier than a $1 VISA charge or a fax.... You sir, are very shill-like.
      - jedsmith 16y ago
        > Bluehost asks for people to fax them a copy of an ID/Passport to get shell access (stupid, considering they have your VISA). It's not stupid. They have A VISA. They want to know that it's your VISA, because people can (and do) use fraudulent cards for hosting. I'm surprised that they wait until you want shell access to do this. A number of hosting companies do this in different ways, usually before you're even given services. Rackspace Cloud, for example, calls you to verify your identity (last I heard, anyway).
  - j_baker 16y ago
    This could be useful for allowing various levels of government to provide more services online. For instance, I wouldn't have to provide my social security number to a third party if I wanted to pay my taxes online. Or better yet, maybe they could allow voting online like Estonia does. Imagine what that would do for voter turnout.
    - sidek 16y ago
      "CLICK HERE TO VOTE FOR CANDIDATE A AND GET A NEW TYPE OF FARMVILLE CROP"
      - j_baker 16y ago
        Fine. But you're missing my point. My point is that this would be useful for providing government services online. If you feel that online voting is a bad example then so be it.
- waterlesscloud 16y ago
  Why?
- lwhi 16y ago
  The government isn't the problem; the concept of top down control is the problem. No one group of people should ever be allowed this much power.
- brc 16y ago
  No we don't. Currently messy systems ensure that caveat emptor is alive and well. Buying, selling and all the other activities on the internet may be easier to implement from a computer point of view with a centralised ID, but it's a very good thing that people employ caution in online activities. You cannot eliminate fraud, deceit and risk. You cannot create a utopia. These things are impossible, and all the best intentions in the world usually have bad unforeseen outcomes. Natural growth of systems is the best way forwards. A company like PayPal tries verification by depositing small amounts, it works, the consumers don't mind, so it stays. Another company tries something else, consumers don't like it, it goes. At no point is a central committee involved. This is the way it should be.

by flyt 16y ago

Alex3917 16y ago

We need a publicly-controlled identity infrastructure that's compatible with the Internet. The problem isn't that internet ID is somehow evil, but rather the government.

drats 16y ago
Remind me again of why we "need" a solution such as this? All this screeching reminds me of the people wanting a centralized solution to spam in the 1990s via government control or micropayments. We don't hear from them anymore because of spam filters and increased storage and bandwidth. My google account has double authentication now, telephone as well as a second email address, and serves as a central repository for all my other accounts across the web if I happen to forget a password. I can change providers if I want as well. Further, my VISA card is tied to my identity for purchases and donations. But anything that doesn't involve that isn't tied to my identity. So please just go shove it with your "need". It just makes me furious that this is even being proposed, it's totally unnecessary meddling and we all KNOW it will be abused.
- Alex3917 16y ago
  "Remind me again of why we 'need' a solution such as this?" There are lots of services that people want that are impossible to build without a way to prove that someone is who they say they are. E.g. better reputation systems. "we all KNOW it will be abused." Obviously. That doesn't mean there isn't a need though.
  - malandrew 16y ago
    The private sector is already doing a much better job of building reputation systems. It's now a full-fledged area of computing work. There's even a sizable O'Reilly book on the topic.
  - drats 16y ago
    Last I checked there is an identity management authentication system you can use, for example Twitter has verified accounts (I don't know how they do it, perhaps by mail) or Bluehost asks for people to fax them a copy of an ID/Passport to get shell access (stupid, considering they have your VISA). So what you are saying is you are prepared to take the potential abuses because you want it to be more "seamless" than a fax, postcard or a $1 VISA charge. And that further these abuses are better than having a market solution where a commercial ID provider or bank does it themselves? Sounds like f--- all gain for a lot of risk. And we all know that beyond the abuses the "voluntary" nature of this will swiftly decline after it's implemented, so don't try to argue in that direction either. Just a reminder: the US government is currently illegally sifting through people's email, has wars going which are not authorized by congress, still runs a number of secret prisons across the world in which torture is conducted, is seeking people's private twitter messages in addition to their email because they have contact with Wikileaks, is groping people's genitals with high-school drop-outs in airports as well as taking naked photographs of them and has a "Homeland" tsar who is going to appear on telescreens installed in Walmarts to tell people to be alarmed and suspicous. Further, opposition movements have heated up the rhetoric of your politics to the point where there are open calls for the assassination of Julian Assange (who, like or dislike, is doing journalism) and the domestic rhetoric has been such that mentally ill people are now gunning down politicians. And you think it's advisable we install an ID system on the Internet because, in some unspecified way, it would be easier than a $1 VISA charge or a fax.... You sir, are very shill-like.
    - jedsmith 16y ago
      > Bluehost asks for people to fax them a copy of an ID/Passport to get shell access (stupid, considering they have your VISA). It's not stupid. They have A VISA. They want to know that it's your VISA, because people can (and do) use fraudulent cards for hosting. I'm surprised that they wait until you want shell access to do this. A number of hosting companies do this in different ways, usually before you're even given services. Rackspace Cloud, for example, calls you to verify your identity (last I heard, anyway).
- j_baker 16y ago
  This could be useful for allowing various levels of government to provide more services online. For instance, I wouldn't have to provide my social security number to a third party if I wanted to pay my taxes online. Or better yet, maybe they could allow voting online like Estonia does. Imagine what that would do for voter turnout.
  - sidek 16y ago
    "CLICK HERE TO VOTE FOR CANDIDATE A AND GET A NEW TYPE OF FARMVILLE CROP"
    - j_baker 16y ago
      Fine. But you're missing my point. My point is that this would be useful for providing government services online. If you feel that online voting is a bad example then so be it.
waterlesscloud 16y ago
Why?
lwhi 16y ago
The government isn't the problem; the concept of top down control is the problem. No one group of people should ever be allowed this much power.
brc 16y ago
No we don't. Currently messy systems ensure that caveat emptor is alive and well. Buying, selling and all the other activities on the internet may be easier to implement from a computer point of view with a centralised ID, but it's a very good thing that people employ caution in online activities. You cannot eliminate fraud, deceit and risk. You cannot create a utopia. These things are impossible, and all the best intentions in the world usually have bad unforeseen outcomes. Natural growth of systems is the best way forwards. A company like PayPal tries verification by depositing small amounts, it works, the consumers don't mind, so it stays. Another company tries something else, consumers don't like it, it goes. At no point is a central committee involved. This is the way it should be.