4 ms·

One nice thing about an ID is that I can leave it in my pocket if I don't want to identify myself. That's much harder to do with biometric identity.

sageabilly 11y ago
Again, though, that's the Pandora's box of the argument- these technologies already exist and are in the wild, so we must come up with a way to co-exist with them instead of hand wringing and fretting that the world is changing and there's nothing we can do about it. I'm absolutely on the side of wanting to come up with those as yet unknown solutions, and I abhor all of the people who say "well just don't be doing anything illegal and then it won't matter!" I'm suggesting a fundamental shift in the underlying societal zeitgeist which, I realize, is a huge stretch and a bit of a pipe dream, but I can still hope. To clarify- I'm NOT saying it shouldn't be regulated, and I'm NOT saying we need to move to some sort of post-privacy utopia, I am saying "Gee it'd be nice if we moved past the hand wringing and started coming up with ways to use this technology in beneficial ways.)
- pjc50 11y ago
  Shift to what, though? This is a bit like the vague calls to overthrow capitalism and replace it with something nicer. We're to overthrow privacy and replace it with .. what? We're really not ready for Culture-style machine-enforced morality.
  - girvo 11y ago
    Radical transparency, perhaps. Some people far smarter than myself have made decent cases for it.
    - pjc50 11y ago
      Radical transparency sounds superficially reasonable (David Brin passim), but we need a good solution to weaponised public shaming while we're at it.
- rogerbraun 11y ago
  I don't know why you think that it's impossible to regulate these technologies. There could be laws against biometric identification without consent of the identified.
  - rewqfdsa 11y ago
    My brain does biometric identification. Are you going to outlaw my brain?
    - task_queue 11y ago
      It's demonstrably incapable of nuance, you might want to get it checked out.

sageabilly 11y ago

Again, though, that's the Pandora's box of the argument- these technologies already exist and are in the wild, so we must come up with a way to co-exist with them instead of hand wringing and fretting that the world is changing and there's nothing we can do about it. I'm absolutely on the side of wanting to come up with those as yet unknown solutions, and I abhor all of the people who say "well just don't be doing anything illegal and then it won't matter!" I'm suggesting a fundamental shift in the underlying societal zeitgeist which, I realize, is a huge stretch and a bit of a pipe dream, but I can still hope. To clarify- I'm NOT saying it shouldn't be regulated, and I'm NOT saying we need to move to some sort of post-privacy utopia, I am saying "Gee it'd be nice if we moved past the hand wringing and started coming up with ways to use this technology in beneficial ways.)

pjc50 11y ago
Shift to what, though? This is a bit like the vague calls to overthrow capitalism and replace it with something nicer. We're to overthrow privacy and replace it with .. what? We're really not ready for Culture-style machine-enforced morality.
- girvo 11y ago
  Radical transparency, perhaps. Some people far smarter than myself have made decent cases for it.
  - pjc50 11y ago
    Radical transparency sounds superficially reasonable (David Brin passim), but we need a good solution to weaponised public shaming while we're at it.
rogerbraun 11y ago
I don't know why you think that it's impossible to regulate these technologies. There could be laws against biometric identification without consent of the identified.
- rewqfdsa 11y ago
  My brain does biometric identification. Are you going to outlaw my brain?
  - task_queue 11y ago
    It's demonstrably incapable of nuance, you might want to get it checked out.