However, it turns out that the transmitter in your sneaker can be read up to 60 feet away. And because it broadcasts a unique ID, you can be tracked by it. In the demonstration, the researchers built a surveillance device (at a cost of about $250) and interfaced their surveillance system with Google Maps. Details are in the paper. Very scary.
Big Ideas
Cool new wiki feature
I went through TechCrunch today as I do on a weekly basis to check out what is new in web2 land. Lots of kids building interesting things but I kind of think mmmm…to a lot of them. Also lots of acquisition rumors. By the end of it I wondered why me? Why this industry almost completely devoid of meaning in a particular way.
The one cool ting that I did find was a new feature called “UnPlug” for SocialText Wiki’s so you can get a section of a wiki you want to edit on your computer and work on it ofline (say on a plane ride) and then when you plug back in it is uploaded. VERY COOL.
Kids and Identity – National Registry
The Feds have some plan to photograph every kid in the United States a company called Lifetouch is doing it/going to do it. It is all based on the premise that kids go missing and they need good photos for the rescue efforts. Parents are issued a card for each of their children that they can let law enforcement access if they give permission. From the Article:
What is Lifetouch? The privately held company photographs over 24 million North American schoolchildren each fall, making it the market leader. It also takes pictures of millions of other people through J.C. Penney, Target and Flash Digital Portraits studios.
Lifetouch would enlist partner schools that would allow it to distribute to each student a set of wallet cards that include a unique retrieval code and crisis hot-line number for the center.
Lifetouch would provide round-the-clock staff for the center’s hot line. If a child went missing, parents could call the hot line with the code.
The center would authenticate the case and the parents’ consent with law enforcement and then contact Lifetouch with the image-retrieval code.
Lifetouch would immediately transmit to the center the image of the child, faster than many parents could get a high-quality, usable image to the center.
The center could then broadcast the image through Amber alerts, its Web site, posters and mail inserts.
“Getting the picture is extremely valuable” to the search process, Bob O’Brien, senior director of the Missing Children Division at the center, told me. He explained that one in six recovered children is found as a result of a poster, “and many parents are challenged finding a quality picture of their kids to use for the poster.”
Since the launch, Lifetouch has spent more than $2 million to keep the program running and has assisted in more than 400 searches. Lifetouch images directly led to the recovery of seven children, O’Brien said.
I am really not sure how I feel about this. It feels a bit to big brothery to me.
An argument for i-names & XRI
I found this while using Snap too. I have to say it is way more entertaining then Google. As you toggle down the suggested site. I will be back to try it out more regularly.
From Fishbowl on Oct 25th 2005….
“I’ve noticed that whenever I have a photo on Flickr that I want to embed in my blog, I make a local copy and link to that. Flickr may well out-last the Fishbowl, but at least the continuing availability of my webserver is something that I have a say in.” — Me, a few minutes ago.
I registered the pastiche.org domain back in 1997. Since then I’ve been through a half dozen or more ISPs and hosting services, but I’ve done so secure in the knowledge that so long as I keep paying my domain renewal fees, my email address, website and whatever other Internet perks I feel like having will follow me wherever I go.
(There are disadvantages, of course. Even for a non-entity such as myself, eight years of being careless with the one email address leads to a lot of spam.)
I had this conversation with a friend, and they told me not to worry: Gmail is likely to survive longer than I’m going to need an email address anyway. But that’s not the point. In five years, Gmail is going to be what Hotmail is today, and there will be another service that’s cooler and more capable that people will rather be keeping their email in.
“Letting somebody else own your name means that they own your destiny on the Internet…. As soon as you realize you’re serious about blogging, move it away from a domain name that’s controlled by somebody else. The longer you delay, the more pain you’ll feel when you finally make the move.” — Jakob Nielsen’s Weblog Usability mistakes, #10.
Recently, Australian politician Malcolm Turnbull proposed that the government give each citizen a lifetime email address. There were obvious flaws: the proposed address scheme — first name, surname, date of birth — consists of two pieces of data that can change, and one that people often want to conceal. Regardless, the underlying concept of a permanent ‘digital identity’ is an important one. After all, cool URIs don’t change.
If there’s a Web 3.0, it’s not going to be about giving you cool sites to put your stuff on “out there”, but about giving you the tools to build that cool stuff on top of your own persistent, personal space on the net… in a way that when the services change, the technology advances and the trends turn, the stuff stays where it is.
Snapping around the web to find Identity Theory
I went to TechCrunch today as I am apt to do on a weekly basis.
The top post was on the Million Dollar homepage. When you scrolled over it this box came up saying one could use Snap to search the web with pictures. So I tried it. typing in ‘identity’ to the search box. Identity Theory was the first site that camp up. It has several navigation links
- interviews
- fiction
- nonfiction
- music
- social justice
- film
- books
- visuals
- verse
- blogs
maybe if they meet us they might add a category for ‘digital’
Identity ironies…
I was born 1 hour north of the US boarder in Vancouver, Canada. Brian Hamlin my lovely husband a native Californian.
I came to the United States in 1995 on a student visa meaning I have had over 10 years of first hand ‘user-experience’ with this identity stuff in relationship to government.
I have had a temporary permanent status for 2 years now (think about that oxymoron for a bit). It expires Dec 16. I put in my application to have this temporaryness removed in early November.
Last week I got a note in the mail that my ‘temporary status’ had been extended a year and looked up how much time it would take for them to actually process my application (6 months) and that I would have another notice in the mail shortly telling me when to go in to get my biometrics taken.
The notice came on Monday in the mail and had my biometric taking appointment time as 9AM on 12/05/2006 – that would be the Tuesday Morning of the IIW. Needless to say I sent it back and asked it to be rescheduled.
Here is the text of the notice:
To process your application the U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Service (USCIS) must capture your biometrics. PLEASE APPEAR AT THE BELOW APPLICATION SUPPORT CENTER AT TEH DATE AND TIME SPECIFIED. IF YOU FAIL TO APPEAR AS SCHEDULED, YOUR APPLICATION WILL BE CONSIDERED ABANDONED.
Application support center: USCIS Oakland, 2040 Telegraph Avenue, Oakland, CA, 94612.
PLEASE READ THIS ENTIRE NOTICE CAREFULLY
DATE ADN TIME OF APPOINTMENT
12/05/2006
9:00AM
WHEN YOU GO TO THE APPLICATION CENTER TO HAVE YOUR BIOMETRICS TAKEN, YOU MUST BRING:
1. THIS APPOINTMENT NOICE and
2. PHOTO IDENTIFICATION. Naturalization applicants must bring their Alien Registration Card. All other applicants must bring a passport, driver’s license, national ID, military ID, or State-issued photo ID. If you appear without proper identification, your biometrics may not be taken.
CELL PHONES, CAMERAS, OR OTHER RECORDING DEVICES ARE NOT PERMITTED.
REQUEST FOR RESCHEDULING
Pleas resdhedule my appointment for the next available: ( ) Wednesday afternoon ( ) Saturday Afternoon.
Yet another BaseCamp Account
I got the e-mail inviting me to yet another BaseCamp (this time to organize a panel I am on at SXSW) I groned.
This is the second time today I have had the “Yet Another BaseCamp Account” issue arose. Earlier I got a note from a Basecamp that I am in for a paper I am collaborating on about Golf and Social Networks. I didn’t even remember that project had a Basecamp let alone what my login was (the owner of the Basecamp sends you your login they assign) or my password (again they assign it).
I hope the folks at 37Signals and their Zen approach to programming simplicity are paying attention to OpenID. They have a philosphy that software should ‘do less.’ To build on that I think people using software tools shouldn’t keep assigning me more handles that I forget and can’t keep track of.
One solution might be a system were those who including me in a project basecamp send me a unique link (via e-mail) and then I click on the link and it asks me to either login via my OpenID or to choose a user name and password.
With a unified UUID across all my basecamp accounts would be great. Then it might be possible for me to have a coherent picture of my Basecamp activity across all my projects. Socialtext recently has supported individuals with participation on multiple wiki’s being able to see into the activity on all the wikis they participate in via a dashboard. Very cool.
Finally the iPhone is coming
I have been waiting and waiting for 2 years. I kept with my gheto phone Nokia just because it worked and I have the flat fee pay by the month plan so I can manage my celphone costs.
The word on the street is the iPhone is coming this winter. I am sooooooooooo excited. I trust them to do UI right. (I also trust Nokia BTW).
Identity Man?
I am not sure what Craig Burton intends by pointing to this video and saying it is ‘identity man’ charging towards the identity big bang. perhaps he can explain more.
Play Clueful or Blame Bingo
Users matter. They matter a lot when it comes to user-centric identity. I think we as a community have a lot to work on in the UX (user-experience) department to figure out how to make all these protocols actually work for people (clearly the underlying architecture is there to do some cool stuff – what the ‘stuff’ is and how it actually works is the territory we are getting into.)
Cathy Sierra has this post “oops…we forgot about the users.” up on actually listening to users. We can play
Concerning acts of legislation
I just read a link to this on Slashdot. I am quite concerned about what it says.
In a stealth maneuver, President Bush has signed into law a provision which, according to Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), will actually encourage the President to declare federal martial law (1). It does so by revising the Insurrection Act, a set of laws that limits the President’s ability to deploy troops within the United States. The Insurrection Act (10 U.S.C.331 -335) has historically, along with the Posse Comitatus Act (18 U.S.C.1385), helped to enforce strict prohibitions on military involvement in domestic law enforcement. With one cloaked swipe of his pen, Bush is seeking to undo those prohibitions.
Public Law 109-364, or the “John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007” (H.R.5122) (2), which was signed by the commander in chief on October 17th, 2006, in a private Oval Office ceremony, allows the President to declare a “public emergency” and station troops anywhere in America and take control of state-based National Guard units without the consent of the governor or local authorities, in order to “suppress public disorder.”
President Bush seized this unprecedented power on the very same day that he signed the equally odious Military Commissions Act of 2006. In a sense, the two laws complement one another. One allows for torture and detention abroad, while the other seeks to enforce acquiescence at home, preparing to order the military onto the streets of America. Remember, the term for putting an area under military law enforcement control is precise; the term is “martial law.”
Section 1076 of the massive Authorization Act, which grants the Pentagon another $500-plus-billion for its ill-advised adventures, is entitled, “Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies.” Section 333, “Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law” states that “the President may employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States, the President determines that domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of (“refuse” or “fail” in) maintaining public order, “in order to suppress, in any State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy.”
For the current President, “enforcement of the laws to restore public order” means to commandeer guardsmen from any state, over the objections of local governmental, military and local police entities; ship them off to another state; conscript them in a law enforcement mode; and set them loose against “disorderly” citizenry – protesters, possibly, or those who object to forced vaccinations and quarantines in the event of a bio-terror event.
The law also facilitates militarized police round-ups and detention of protesters, so called “illegal aliens,” “potential terrorists” and other “undesirables” for detention in facilities already contracted for and under construction by Halliburton. That’s right. Under the cover of a trumped-up “immigration emergency” and the frenzied militarization of the southern border, detention camps are being constructed right under our noses, camps designed for anyone who resists the foreign and domestic agenda of the Bush administration.
What is a Barrier to Entry – OpenID
This comment was posted by Vivek Puri at the bottom of Ramana’s post (quoted above).
OpenID is great idea, but adds another layer of complexity for early adopters. This might not go down well with the startups who can end up loosing important initial users. Also bigger companies like Google will offer Single Sign-on only for their own apps which becomes another point of disconnect. In my case I use Writely for document editing, Editgrid for spreadsheet, and del.icio.us for bookmarks which is a pain to manage.
As for offline usage, that is a very much required feature. Especially Writely should be able to implement that part easily since they have already cracked the algorithm for multi-user data edit and sync. Groove networks does offer that feature but is not for individual.
I guess there is some miscommunication in what OpenID is and how it actually lowers the barrier to entry to try new Office 2.0 applications.
This is how I see it.
I have my blog URL that is openID enabled or I have an i-name. I now can go to any one of the new groovy Office 2.0 applications and instead of getting yet another login and password. I just use my OpenID. I don’t have to put it into that spreadsheet of all my names and passwords or just use the same one I use everywhere that is totally insecure. Instead I bring my identity to the site. I save time. If I am an early adopter type I will likely get an OpenID relatively quickly and it will be a handy fast way for me to try these things out. Of course Office 2.0 applications should not force people to have OpenID’s those who want yet another user name and password can have one.
I know personally I avoide signing up for anything new that requires yet another login. I would be more inclined to tryout an Office 2.0 application that has OpenID as a login option.
I think all these office 2.0 copmanies can collectively compete with the big silo’s by offering SSO amongst themselves.
Office 2.0 – There is a real market!
Ramana Rao was on the closing panel at Office 2.0 and put forward this question:
I asked a few vendors if they would support OpenID for login if say 25 other Office 2.0 vendors would, and I generally got a pause, and then what appeared to be qualified nodding. Well, frankly if this simple matter can’t be resolved among the open world slice-o-function vendors, or the suite newcomers, then it’s hard to imagine the harder problems of fragility being addressed either.
More Slashdot Stories of interest.
So it seems slashdot is full of interesting identity related stories this week.
We have the ‘spying into laptops when you cross the boarder’ story from the NYTimes. (any container is searchable this means your hard disk on your lap top [I suppose avoiding this search is one of the advantages to storing information in the cloud]) It also speaks to the need for technology folks to get more involved in shaping the law.
You can blog in China with a pseudonym but only if you register using your ‘real name’
How we organize ourselves to do work together – are worker owned co-ops an alternative to the corporate form for successful open source development.
Ponderings on the Metaverse as the next big thing. It is an area that I think we in the identity community need to become more literate in because some of the legal, social and economic issues they are tackling are the same ones we are.
Election Mashups on google Earth.
Regaining one’s voice after loosing it the story of Scott Adams, Dilbert’s Writer.
Identity Commons, Aldo interviews Eugene and I
About two weeks ago Aldo interviewed Eugene and I about Identity Commons. It was just posted this morning. So enjoy.
Identity stories from Slashdot
Yesturday was a rich day for identity related stories.
Feds Start Small on Smart IDs talks about the start of the roll out of
The use of personal identity verification, or PIV, cards for verifying the identities of all federal workers and contractors was mandated by Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12. The unfunded HSPD-12 mandate specified that agencies must adopt a common identification credential for access to government facilities and computer systems.
Friday’s deadline and an earlier one calling on agencies to develop procedures for verifying the identities and backgrounds of all workers by last October were both considered exceptionally aggressive because of funding issues and the technology and process changes required.
Does anyone know what the procedure they actually developed is?
The register reported that to buy a beer in the UK you will have to give your finger print. The rational is to reduce ‘drinking related crime’. It sounds freakishly Orwellian.
Beer fingerprints to go UK-wide:
The government is funding the roll out of fingerprint security at the doors of pubs and clubs in major English cities.
Funding is being offered to councils that want to have their pubs keep a regional black list of known trouble makers.
The council had assumed it was its duty under the Crime and Disorder Act (1998) to reduce drunken disorder by fingerprinting drinkers in the town centre.
Some licensees were not happy to have their punters fingerprinted, but are all now apparently behind the idea. Not only does the council let them open later if they join the scheme, but the system costs them only £1.50 a day to run.
Oh, and they are also coerced into taking the fingerprint system. New licences stipulate that a landlord who doesn’t install fingerprint security and fails to show a “considerable” reduction in alcohol-related violence, will be put on report by the police and have their licences revoked.
Offenders can be banned from one pub or all of them for a specified time – usually a period of months – by a committee of landlords and police called Pub Watch. Their offences are recorded against their names in the fingerprint system. Bradburn noted the system had a “psychological effect” on offenders.
The Home Office distanced itself from the plans. It said it provided funding to Safer, Stronger Communities through the Department for Communities and Local Government’s Local Area Agreements. How they spent the money was a local decision, said a HO spokeswoman.
OpenID on the 'edge of greatness"
Here are some of the great quotes about OpenID this week –
Tom in Austin says:
I’m a big fan of OpenID and I think it’s on the edge of greatness.
Norman Walsh:
Next time you build a web application that needs a login, consider OpenID.
btbytes:
Perhaps in future, sign-up fatigue will keep people away from signing up to new services. Providing OpenID option is very welcome.
Amblin:
You can now sign in with an OpenID when you leave comments on the blog. Why did I added this? To do my little part to try and break some of the ID silos.
Social network suicide a possible response to these Yahoo! plans.
Thomas Hawk writes “One of the most interesting things to come out of Yahoo’s earnings call with analysts yesterday was a statement by Yahoo’s COO, Daniel L. Rosenweig on Yahoo’s plans to ‘monetize’ their various social network properties. Flickr was mentioned five times on the conference call and their de.lic.io.us property was as well, after neither were mentioned in last quarter’s call. Rosenweig characterized these services as being largely unmonetized and talked about leveraging these “assets” and targeting and profiling a large growing registered audience base. It will be interesting to see how some of Yahoo’s popular web properties change through the monetization process.”
GREAT! to me this means we are going to mess up your services and fill them with advertisements. I like them because they don’t have ads. I don’t want to be ‘monetized’ as an ‘asset.’ I want to share and connect with my friends. I want to live in community and share with others. I don’t use any other Yahoo properties (because they are full of annoying adds) and really only use flickr and del.icio.us ones because I used them when they were independent. I pay for my flickr account. I will commit social network suicide if they mess them up. I bet you a lot of other people will to. We are getting to an age where we can build the open social network tool set based on open principles, open tagging. Then someone else can build tools to search across them and aggregate them. We don’t need their silo’s for our online lives.
Identity Commons Wiki upgrade
The Identity Commons wiki was upgraded to moinmoin 1.5.5a and it looks beautiful. We also have our first Stewards Council meeting today. Things are looking good.
Momentum has a section on Digital ID
My friend Allison Fine finally got her book published – Momentum: Igniting Social Change in the Connected Age. On her blog she writes about engaging with the digital world. Her perspective is great because she is relatively normal. Living outside New York with her husband and three sons. She understands the power of the web to transform things but also isn’t technical enough to deal with all the usable stuff that some how we here in the Valley think is usable.
I got to talk with her while she was writing her book and she included a section on Digital Identity along with giving me the closing quote of the book.
Here is the Digital Identity section:
I must preface this by saying that when I was talking to her about 9 months ago it was not clear that OpenID was coalescing the way it has. I am going to work with Allison to see if we can get an update on her blog saying that YADIS is really receded into the background and OpenID is where it is at.
The Internet has grown up in such a topsy-turvy manner that there have not been any standards for protecting the identity of users. Even though we may try to opt out of potential spam, almost every Internet user has made the mistake and logged into the wrong site, one that didn’t care about privacy. The result was a flood of e-mails opening up an astonishing world of genitalia enlargements and enhancements. You may have devised your own pass codes but the companies you logged into own them, and by logging into their systems you have given them the right to use that information for their own purposes even if they do not sell it to others.
According to a paper released in 2005 by Microsoft, “Online identity theft, fraud, and privacy concerns are on the rise, stemming from increasingly sophisticated practices such as ‘phishing.’ The multiplicity of accounts and passwords that users must keep track of and the variety of methods of authenticating to sites result not only in user-frustration, known as “password fatigue,” but also insecure practices such as reusing the same account names and passwords at many sites.” (the term phishing refers to the practice by scam artists of sending out official-looking messages in an attempt to trick people into giving them their pass codes and other digital-identity information.)
My digital identity is the information that others know about me through my online interactions. I keep a folder on my computer that contains the different pass codes and registrations I have online. It is an ever-growing list that includes news sites, travel services such as Amtrak and airlines, memberships for activist groups and products and services such as recipes and Amazon.com. All these sites have at least my e-mail address. And these are the logins and information that I know about. Who knows what permissions I have given to companies by clicking on various end-user licensing agreements for various software and websites! Susan Crawford , an expert on digital law and privacy, has written, “Some part of identity is controlled by the individual, but most of the identity is crated by the world in which that individual operates. We can think of identity as a streaming picture of a life within a particular context. Each of us has multiple identities. The sites we click on, whether a link on an e-mail or a page on a website, are carefully registered, analyzed, and sometimes even sold by companies trying to capitalize on and profit from where our eyes have gone.
Attention Trust, an activist organization in San Francisco Bay Area was created to counter this trend. Attention Trust advocates that any site we, as customers and citizens are looking at is our ‘attention,’ and that this attention is both valuable and private. The organization is pressing for increased disclosure by trackers of data they are collecting and how they are using these data. Attention Trust wants to shift the ownership of our attention away from companies towards individuals.
Worrying about spam and feeling the need to constantly invent and reinvent pass codes and new online identities are taxing our imaginations and patience. In the absence of face-to-face contact, you cannot know who you are interacting with online and what their intentions are. A push back on digital identity has begun. For instance, decoupling cell-phone numbers from cell phones was a victory for individual users over the telephone companies.
But, what would happen if we flipped the digital identity equation and required service providers to ask permission to user our identity only in certain preferred ways? This is where Identity Commons, YADIS (Yet Another Digital Identity System), and similar efforts come in. Digital Identity efforts, sometimes called user-centric efforts, are building rules, tools and frameworks for open, trusting online networks. The internet has developed in stages. The first stage, when the internet was still a project of the Defense Department, established an open electronic network relaying information quickly and safely between scientists. The second stage when the World Wide Web was introduced in the early 1990’s opened the Internet up to users who were not techies – both individuals and businesses, both legitimate and nefarious.
The next stage of Internet development is combining the best of the first two stages: the open trusting connections formed in the first stage and the usability and scale of the second. Digital identity is a critical aspect of this third stage of development. The responsibility for creating new identities to access information or sites now resides entirely with the user or customer. But now efforts are being made to develop software tools, including new universally unique identifiers (UUIDs) that can be used instead of e-mail addresses. UUIDs are like Social Security numbers; users can choose whether to share them with others. These new systems allow you, the owner of the identity, to create a profile of yourself once, and allow to use parts of it on request. So, for example, I might give the New York Times permission to use my e-mail address but for one year and for updates only. I might also choose to give the Red Cross my e-mail and home address and my telephone number so that they can alert me to emergency situations and let me know how I can help locally.
The next generation of digital-identity systems returns control of information to individuals and away from companies and spamers. New digital-identity systems represent a gigantic shift from the way the internet currently works. It reverses the polarity from crating numerous identities that go into sites never to be seen again (And potentially sold or shared unwittingly with others) to sites’ coming to you and asking permission to use parts of your identity that you control. The new way is back to the future, back to the way the original architects of cyberspace envisioned relationships being formed and information being shared online.
The Book Closing:
As long as we have social problems to solve, we need to keep searching for a better way. This need has been urgent for some time, and with each passing day of government inaction it becomes more so. As we have seen in Momentum, such broad, positive and sustainable change is possible in the Connected Age.
Kaliya Hamlin, an activist, advocate and blogger perhaps put it best when she said, “Social change is happening. People are exchanging ideas, learning from one another and learning to trust one another in new and different ways, particularly….strangers. This process will lead to new and different ways of tackling existing problems — we don’t have to come up with solutions, we just have to get out of the way of passionate people and good ideas will emerge.’
Paul how does SAML help exactly?
I thought you could clarify how you think SAML will help with this.
While multiple screen names can be tracked at home, the company is working on a tool to associate different screen names across school and home to notify parents.
Isn’t the whole point of the Laws of Identity that people should not have there identifiers aggregated across contexts without their knowledge.
