[JohnInIndy]

Seems as though "they" want to know where you go on the internet.

Obama's Internet passport--Administration wants national ID card for online commentary

"They" say there won't be a centralized database. And why would we believe them? Well the liberals will cheer this one as always.

[jeffkrol]

Seems as though "they" want to know where you go on the internet.

Obama's Internet passport--Administration wants national ID card for online commentary

"They" say there won't be a centralized database. And why would we believe them? Well the liberals will cheer this one as always.

You do realize that is probably uber-backed by Visa, Mastercard et. al.
Blame your capitalistic handlers for this..

[Ratmagiclady]

Well the liberals will cheer this one as always.

What, you mean we 'traitorous liberals' who spoke against the civil rights abuses of the 'USA Patriot Act' and 'Total Information Awareness?'

As always?

And attention span would really do wonders, if you're really that interested in privacy.

Besides, what the heck are you worried about: the people who *do* the domestic spying are always the Ollie Norths and G. Gordon Liddys taking the opportunity to spy on peace groups and like Neil Young fans or something, it's not exactly handing a secret microphone to a dystopian parody of Ralph Nader or something.

[Parallax]

Brilliant plan. I'm sure identity thieves love the idea. It will make a lot less work for them.

[JohnInIndy]

Proven right. Again. As usual.

[Ratmagiclady]

Brilliant plan. I'm sure identity thieves love the idea. It will make a lot less work for them.

This really does bring to mind something we as a society are not accomplishing while all this polarization goes on:

We're just not looking at the question of what identity's supposed to *mean* in this Internet and digital age. I mean, *apart* from 'security' issues, we seem to be pretty much leaving it to banks/highly underregulated and unaccountable credit agencies, and advertisers and cable companies. (and maybe Facebook at this point. Let's not forget how much Lockheed Martin has their fingers in out of all this. Whoa.)

That doesn't sound like much of a plan to me.

[Nesster]

Sounds like a bad idea...
Obama's Internet ID Plan: Here's What You Need To Know

The Obama Administration has announced plans for a unique personal ID for the Internet.

Think that sounds vague? That's because it is.

In fact, it sounds terribly reminiscent of every big project that never ends (whether sponsored by the government or someone else).

Here's what we can tell about it from various reports:

It's going to be led by the Commerce Department, not the NSA or Homeland Security, which were candidates. This is good, because national ID + internet + NSA sounds pretty big brother-ish to us.
The goal is to not let you have to remember dozens of passwords for all the sites you use. How are they going to do that? Well, that's where it gets vague.
This is not at all like a National ID card! It's going to be a unique ID for every American, but it's totally different from a National ID. It's not going to compromise anonymity online. If you don't want to use it, you don't have to.
It's going to be led by the private sector, not the government. The big security/IT companies with the right Washington connections to get this gig don't reassure us any more than the government does.
The ID might take the form of a "smart card" or something else like that, that would have a code that you would enter to websites or that would authenticate you somehow, the UK's Daily Mail says. But no guarantees on that score.

Honestly, we don't know what to make of this. Creating a single sign-on for the internet has been attempted by pretty much every single big company (remember Microsoft Passport in the late 90s?), but it just doesn't work and hasn't. The only one that's close is Facebook.

Somehow we really don't see a coalition of the Commerce Department and big IT companies succeeding where Microsoft and Google at their heyday utterly failed.



Read more: Obama's Internet ID Plan: Here's What You Need To Know

[GeneV]

I don't know what to think of this proposal, because I have only been able to find opinion pieces about it, and they contain no details. I don't think anyone has actually formulated it. It appears the concept was proposed a year or so ago by the CEO of Kaspersky AV.

For most of us, internet anonymity is more of an illusion than we think.

[Ratmagiclady]

Proven right. Again. As usual.

You know, mirrors are cheaper than Internet access, if that's what you think.

And, I dunno, Nesster: it seems one of the sources of the speculation in this article is the *Daily Mail,* so I think I'll withhold indignance for the moment: if it's not *mandatory,* it's kind of hard to get all fearful of 'gummint,' but you *know* that commercial interests will start demanding it in terms of service: they're already selling people's data right and left as it is.

Maybe this is about somehow putting some kind of protection on *that.*

As free speech issues go, well, there's potential chilling effects for minorities if one's got to display some ID to discuss things. I'm fairly careful about making it too easy for random stalkers and haters, and, err, 'voluble characters' to take issue in person, but no illusions about the Internet being a secure medium or any of that, not to anyone with the skill, money, or access.

[jeffkrol]

Come on gang.. bottom line is always economic........

would confirm an individual's identity when making online credit-card purchases

[ihasa]

This plan should be opposed by liberals and conservatives alike...

[JohnInIndy]

This plan should be opposed by liberals and conservatives alike...

Why would liberals oppose it? They're the ones that want it in the first place.

would confirm an individual's identity when making online credit-card purchases

And your SSN was only for SS disbursements. Try getting a bank account without one. Unless you're illegal of course.

[Nesster]

Why would liberals oppose it? They're the ones that want it in the first place.

I'm a lib, and I don't see the point of it, and though I don't know enough about what's actually involved, what I know so far I oppose.

OTH wouldn't a law-and-order conservative be for this sort of thing, to reduce fraud and theft and safeguard corporate property?

It's all in the presentation...

[GeneV]

I'm a lib, and I don't see the point of it, and though I don't know enough about what's actually involved, what I know so far I oppose.

OTH wouldn't a law-and-order conservative be for this sort of thing, to reduce fraud and theft and safeguard corporate property?

It's all in the presentation...

The original plan appears also to have had to do with protection from malicious software. I don't think it makes any sense to talk about this being liberal or conservative, since as nearly as I can tell, the idea originated outside of the U.S.

[Nesster]

The original plan appears also to have had to do with protection from malicious software. I don't think it makes any sense to talk about this being liberal or conservative, since as nearly as I can tell, the idea originated outside of the U.S.

...yeah, its those RUSSIANS again