I have a strong positive predisposition to rational contrarians, and generally like those who use a combination of fact and story to challenge the current status quo. So, I was very much taken with Alec Muffet’s most recent post regarding how we handle the concept of "identity" as is spans both the offline and online worlds. Alec self-describes his work thusly:
"This is not a white paper. This is an opinion-piece, possibly a
polemic. In it I expound what I believe rather than making an argument
for you to believe it too."
I’ll do the 100-word version here, but you really, really need to read the original source piece, entitled "Hankering for a World Without ‘Identity’ or ‘Federation.’"
Alec makes the following key points:
- We need to be able to control our own identity and related authority, and not be compelled through legal or market means to outsource those tasks to a third party
- There may be other means than the "certificate authorized by a higher power" (e.g. a driver’s license) to verify one’s ability to do something — we may be able to prove our capabilities at "time of need" (think about CAPTCHAs or field-sobriety tests)
- One alternative to "credentialling" is relationship-building. If you have a trusted relationship over time, you don’t need any "credentials" issued by a third party…the relationship itself is the credential
- If someone has the tools to manage his or her relationships and those tools are under an individual’s control, we may have the basis for what is a new and, perhaps, better way to solve this problem
While there is quite a bit of valid side-bar conversation regarding whether Alec perhaps erroneously lumps some current technical identity efforts with historical lead zeppelins such as Microsoft Passport, the whole piece is worth a thoughtful read, as it challenges some very fundamental human/Western processes on how, and perhaps more importantly when, we prove someone has the credentials they require.
photo credit: CaptPiper
Rather than blog about some of thos key points, im just going to address each one here:
We need to be able to control our own identity and related authority, and not be compelled through legal or market means to outsource those tasks to a third party.
Arne’t some of the larger SN’s really 3 parties that compell us to give up our indentity or some parts of it? Though we THINK we are controlling it? How can you control it if you have to login somewhere to access it? I agree though, that there is no way, right now, where this is possible. If anything, the more we become used to controlling our own content, the more our content will be controlling us and the more desirable it will be for 3rd parties to own it.
There may be other means than the “certificate authorized by a higher power” (e.g. a driver’s license) to verify one’s ability to do something — we may be able to prove our capabilities at “time of need” (think about CAPTCHAs or field-sobriety tests) I always thought that school of hardknocks or the person that generally paid their dues but doesn’t have the “cert” was sufficient. But as long as their is some type of corporate hiearchy, this will never, never go away.
One alternative to “credentialling” is relationship-building. If you have a trusted relationship over time, you don’t need any “credentials” issued by a third party…the relationship itself is the credential
Then you’re saying that the comment. “trust me I know that person” is just as good as the person who has a resume and awards out the ass…The only problem with that is, sometimes the comfort level is in place and the work or expectations may be compromised or relaxed. Of course I’d rather work with someone I have a relationship with, but sometimes people don’t have a choice because they are no in a position to determine of make the ultimate decision.
If someone has the tools to manage his or her relationships and those tools are under an individual’s control, we may have the basis for what is a new and, perhaps, better way to solve this problem.
But who controls the tools? Who owns the tools? Do we really need “tools” to manage relationships? Perhaps complex relationships…