WRITTEN ON January 29th, 2007 BY William Heath AND STORED IN Identity
Is it because:
- they claim to be too busy, like Tom Harris MP
- he has a ponytail and people don’t take him seriously? Or
- his No2ID campaign is fighting a lost battle against a policy to which our democratically elected representatives have committed us?
People should take him seriously because he’s proving a formidably effective campaigner.
People should also recognise the serious and positive side to No2ID. Of course any such a campaign needs a simple message and strong logo. Raw passion and a wicked sense of humour are the fringe benefits that compensate NGO campaigners for not getting plush civil service offices and pensions.
But the reality of No2ID is more nuanced than the logo. One can dislike the idea of ID cards but no-one is seriously against the notion of identity. And no-one is more strongly in favour of good online authentication than the awkward squad. Phil is a great deal more articulate and expert on the technical and social issues The System will face than many people yet realise. I think he’s better on those aspects than any proponent I’ve yet met of The Scheme.
That’s why people should make time for him in their diaries. He may not want you to do what you’re doing, but there are few people who could be as helpful in showing you how to do it better.
>>[i]“…no-one is seriously against the notion of identity. And no-one is more strongly in favour of good online authentication…[/i]<<
My view is that the whole debate about [b]personal[/b] identity is a distraction from problems which really need solving:
In my life, my actual identity is very seldom in doubt and very seldom important:
On the rare occasions when I do have to convince someone about my real identity – normally because of some stupid “tick-box” government regulation – I already have perfectly adequate tools.
I have no need of the government’s crazy, dangerous, ruinously expensive ID scheme – or of the extra prisons which will be needed to hold “defaulters.”
————
However last week, someone twice phoned from Newcastle. They were probably a silly government official, but they refused to say who they were or what they wanted until I identified myself: Needless to say, I warned them, gave them a final chance and then rang off. (Oh dear, will my “prize” now go to someone else?)
The “identity” tool that I do need, is something which verifies that an “official” (or web-site) is genuine and really is authorised to carry-out a particular transaction with me.
This goes to the heart of most scams, cons, distraction burglaries, and “phishing” exploits.
——–
Society faces a more difficult problem; also not solved by the government’s ID scheme:
Knowing someone’s name helps very little in predicting whether they will actually carry-out evil, terrorist or criminal actions:
Watching every move of 60+ million people in the hopes of catching 4 train bombers is just silly.
It’s a hi-tech. modern equivalent of phrenology.