Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Obama administration moves forward with unique Internet ID for all Americans

engadget.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 199 posts

Re: Obama administration moves forward with unique Internet ID for all Americans

#41

Post by knowledgesale »

There are so many incentives for legislators to restrict the internet as we know it today and effectively no lobby to protect it. I am wondering if 10 years from now we are going to have much more "regulation and security" for the networks than now. Not only in the US, on the global scale. Who knows, it might be that the 90s-00s will be remembered as the only period in the human history when the truly free unregulated GLOBAL internet was possible.

This view might look naive and hype-provoking and indeed the internet proved to be very robust on the big scale so far. However I have read recently about the very limited visa regulations for travelling around the most of the world in the 19th century. kind of puts things into perspective.

Re: Obama administration moves forward with unique Internet ID for all Americans

#42

Post by jacoblyles »

davidcuddeback wrote: post #9

This sounds very Orwellian, but I doubt much will become of this. Based on the statement the article attributes to Locke, it sounds like they're selling it to us as a single sign-on provider. Somehow, I doubt this will become as popular as current single sign-on providers such as Facebook or Google without legislation.

Couldn't they bully the ISPs to force everybody to use it? Seems like we should worry when they set up the groundwork for something like that, and not after the fact.

Re: Obama administration moves forward with unique Internet ID for all Americans

#43

Post by binaryfinery »

You don't have to have ID either. But if you get into a bar, and the bar didn't card you, then the bar owner can go to jail. This is the law.

1. Create national ID: its optional. Yay freedom!

2. Pass law stating that if a national ID is not used as verification by a private entity, then said entity faces criminal charges, or its management is liable to its shareholders etc. Oh.

Get a fucking clue. This is a national ID.

Re: Obama administration moves forward with unique Internet ID for all Americans

#44

Post by Luff »

StavrosK wrote: post #3

Is this done anywhere else in the world? It is the scariest of the scary Big Brother measures I've seen recently...

Sweden has something similar, called E-legitimation. Issued by banks, mostly used for accessing government services, like applying for student loans, paying taxes, etc.

If it's only intended to be used in this kind of way, no problem. If not...

Re: Obama administration moves forward with unique Internet ID for all Americans

#45

Post by sbov »

Alex3917 wrote: post #38
anonymous246 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A better REPUTATION system (??!!??!!) is the best you could come up with? I cannot think of a less important application of a national ID card. And even in this area, Amazon/Newegg have solved the pretty nicely with the "verified purchaser" tag. How is the national ID card system better? For Serious Stuff (TM) like opening a stock trading account, laws have already been passed to make an all-electronic signup as bind…

"We criticize China when it does something like this, but when America does it's all fine." I'm not saying we should build this, just that in an ideal society it would make sense because there are real benefits.

In an ideal society, where there is no fraud or stolen identities, what are the benefits in building this?

Re: Obama administration moves forward with unique Internet ID for all Americans

#46

Post by reader5000 »

sliverstorm wrote: post #40
bigsassy wrote: post #5

This article is pretty light on details. Here's a quote from the White House Cybersecurity Coordinator Howard Schmidt: Schmidt stressed today that anonymity and pseudonymity will remain possible on the Internet. "I don't have to get a credential, if I don't want to," he said. There's no chance that "a centralized database will emerge," and "we need the private sector to lead the implementation of this," he said. Read…

I don't have to get (one) Cool. They've got the OK from me. It could turn out to be neat, and so long as it's optional I'm not worried.

It'll be optional in the way driver's licenses are. If you want access to any internet service with value (e.g. google, etc.) you will need one. I can see it going that way.

Re: Obama administration moves forward with unique Internet ID for all Americans

#47

Post by drinian »

StavrosK wrote: post #3

Is this done anywhere else in the world? It is the scariest of the scary Big Brother measures I've seen recently...

Most South Korean discussion sites and forums more or less require you to supply your national ID number before you can register.

Until recently, a lot of SK banks also used ActiveX plugins for "security" instead of SSL, making it basically impossible to use anything other than Internet Explorer. I get the impression this is changing.

Re: Obama administration moves forward with unique Internet ID for all Americans

#48

Post by CWuestefeld »

sliverstorm wrote: post #40
bigsassy wrote: post #5

This article is pretty light on details. Here's a quote from the White House Cybersecurity Coordinator Howard Schmidt: Schmidt stressed today that anonymity and pseudonymity will remain possible on the Internet. "I don't have to get a credential, if I don't want to," he said. There's no chance that "a centralized database will emerge," and "we need the private sector to lead the implementation of this," he said. Read…

I don't have to get (one) Cool. They've got the OK from me. It could turn out to be neat, and so long as it's optional I'm not worried.

so long as it's optional I'm not worried.

I've got a bridge to sell you, too.

Social Security Numbers, we were promised, would not be used as personal identifiers. See, e.g., http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C02EFD71039F...

FOR many years, Social Security cards carried an admonition that they were to be used "for Social Security and tax purposes -- not for identification."

You've got my personal guarantee that if an optional Internet ID is created today, it will be required before long. This is how the system works. Witness the gradual ratcheting up of (ridiculous) security measures in airports if you're skeptical.

Re: Obama administration moves forward with unique Internet ID for all Americans

#49

Post by redial »

bigsassy wrote: post #5

This article is pretty light on details. Here's a quote from the White House Cybersecurity Coordinator Howard Schmidt: Schmidt stressed today that anonymity and pseudonymity will remain possible on the Internet. "I don't have to get a credential, if I don't want to," he said. There's no chance that "a centralized database will emerge," and "we need the private sector to lead the implementation of this," he said. Read…

What about facebook? they are as close as it gets to a centralized database. It's opt-in and tons of sites already support the 'facebook id'.

Re: Obama administration moves forward with unique Internet ID for all Americans

#50

Post by CWuestefeld »

Alex3917 wrote: post #19
drats wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 fo…

"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.

Just because we need something is no reason to believe that the government ought to do it.

Indeed, if something's that important, then I think that the government's track record ought to immediately disqualify them from consideration.

Post reply on HN