Also, I know it's just words -- of course, the whole policy review is just words -- but isn't the bit about addressing "privacy and civil liberties interests" a hopeful sign here?
@Moff: I think it is a hopeful sign, but I worry that it will turn into nothing more than that. It's easy to claim that a Facebook-like system addresses privacy interests because it has privacy settings. As several people in comments have already noted, however, privacy settings don't really solve the anonymity problem.
Here's an example: What if you work as a school teacher, and that is your identity on Facebook, but you also post in a forum for gays and lesbians? If parents discovered you were an evil gay, you might lose your job. But you are allowed only one identity online. It's either post as your Facebook self in the gay forums, or nothing. So you sacrifice your ability to speak to other gay people because you need that job.
Is there some middle ground, though? One of the ideas I've been tossing around in my head is a local news site that you'd have to have a single, ID-verified account to use. If you wanted to, say, reply to a classified ad, you'd have to be signed in to your account, which would be traceable back to you, a confirmed real person, identifiable by the site admins, which would seriously cut back on spam.
And you'd use the same account for, say, commenting, but you'd have the option to comment anonymously/under a different handle. Again, the site admins could ID you if necessary, but one hopes that responsible terms of service being observed by all parties could mitigate abuse.
I think people are interested in ways to tie online identities to real-life identities for some very good reasons, although I certainly don't think such a thing should be government-mandated. But maybe the best solution is for responsible companies to find ways to alleviate the problems before too many folks start clamoring for the government to step in?
Hmm, government might be interested in e-authentication, but I think the Facebook connection is a bit of a leap of logic.
Maybe they would create a separate website that could work in conjunction with other sites like Facebook? So you could log into MySocialSecurity.com or whatever, then log onto Facebook through that site and "stamp" your Facebook profile to prove you are who you say you are. And you could similarly "stamp" your email accounts as well.
Shit would hit the fan if government went so far as to *require* that all email accounts be verified or stamped.
@Steverino Begins: Yeah I imagine it would be a site *like* Facebook, not Facebook itself. Though the government might pay Facebook to develop it based on Facebook software.
Wow, if any of you actually believe this is even implementable, that means you don't understand how the internet works. The government has been making proposals like this for years, but their proposals fall through because you CAN'T do it. Not to mention, America doesn't OWN the internet, in order for this new system to even work at all, every country in the world would have to agree to it. The only other option would be create a U.S. internal intranet separate from the internet, but since the gov. would monitor the intranet, who the hell would even use it?
@viloki9: US businesses can require people to use an authenticated ID, however. This has nothing to do with "the internet," it has to do with the ways that people verify their identites to web applications (or other applications). You can do it over any old set of tubes.
Yes, the government could use Facebook, but antitrust regulations would likely require that any number of other companies be allowed to compete as identity authentication services. (If they didn't, this entire system would be delayed a decade while it worked its way up the courts.) Other social networks like Twitter would be obvious choices, but my guess is that the leader in the field would wind up being a startup that specializes in *only* managing and verifying your identity, for the precise reasons you've outlined above.
10/05/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
WILL THE WONDERS OF THE INTERNET NEVER CEASE?
10/05/09
10/05/09
Everyone knows the real Doctor Doom only writes his name in caps locks, bold, italicized, and underlined.
10/05/09
10/06/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
YOU MS-18E!!!
10/05/09
10/06/09
05/29/09
05/29/09
Here's an example: What if you work as a school teacher, and that is your identity on Facebook, but you also post in a forum for gays and lesbians? If parents discovered you were an evil gay, you might lose your job. But you are allowed only one identity online. It's either post as your Facebook self in the gay forums, or nothing. So you sacrifice your ability to speak to other gay people because you need that job.
05/29/09
And you'd use the same account for, say, commenting, but you'd have the option to comment anonymously/under a different handle. Again, the site admins could ID you if necessary, but one hopes that responsible terms of service being observed by all parties could mitigate abuse.
I think people are interested in ways to tie online identities to real-life identities for some very good reasons, although I certainly don't think such a thing should be government-mandated. But maybe the best solution is for responsible companies to find ways to alleviate the problems before too many folks start clamoring for the government to step in?
05/29/09
Maybe they would create a separate website that could work in conjunction with other sites like Facebook? So you could log into MySocialSecurity.com or whatever, then log onto Facebook through that site and "stamp" your Facebook profile to prove you are who you say you are. And you could similarly "stamp" your email accounts as well.
Shit would hit the fan if government went so far as to *require* that all email accounts be verified or stamped.
05/29/09
05/29/09
FUCK THAT!!!
Good day to you madam.
05/29/09
05/29/09
05/29/09
05/29/09
05/29/09
05/29/09
05/29/09
[checks label on boxers]
Ah, 'sokay, I am someone called Hane.
05/29/09
[checks briefs]
Oh, I'm Victoria, and my identity is Secret. Till now.
05/29/09
05/29/09
05/29/09
05/29/09