Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
> Identity (let's keep this constant for argument's sake) But can we? Shouldn't any of us have, for example, the ability to choose which of our identities we use in a given context ... to be anonymous, use a pseudonym, or generally (in security terms) use some restricted "role"? > "Trusted identification franschising" (I trust so-and-so to keep this > information on their systems, happens everyday everywhere nowadays) Actually, one of the big issues is that we don't have choices here ... information is collected whether we trust or not. One of our few defenses is being able to choose what identity we present in any given context. (Look how many budgerigars get junk mail...) What does integrity have to do with identification, by the way? I mean in the classic security sense of preserving correct system functioning. Most social systems aren't surveillance oriented, they work fine without doing any identification whatsoever. Cash is anonymous, and that hasn't prevented civilization from working for the past few thousand years. - Dave
|
