If they want to enjoy private communications online, then
they should build their own private network. Why do we believe
that public infrastructure should be treated any differently
than the public square?
As for persecution, I understand the concerns. There are
ways to communicate about sensitive issues that don't involve
social networking sites. Hiding behind a pseudonym will do
nothing to advance the cause for which one should fear the risks
of exposure. Plenty of revolutions were started without the
help of anonymous tweets. They figured out a way to get it
done, because the cause was worth the risk. Our Identity
ecosystem doesn't need the complexity and issues that come with
this anymore than someone who is willing to die for their cause
needs a mask to hide behind while online.
Nick
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Stephen
Wilson
<swilson@lockstep.com.au>
wrote:
Nicholas,
I wonder if you are a middle class, middle aged white
guy who has been lucky enough to have never experienced
persecution, or had good grounds to fear it? The
implicit sentiment that "if you've got nothing to hide,
you've got nothing to worry about" is too often the
position of the privileged. Can you not imagine that
expressing one's political or religious views (for
example) brings personal risks to many of the
dispossessed or disadvantaged in the world. Why should
people have to go hide offline to enjoy privacy of their
communications?
Steve.
Stephen Wilson
Managing Director
Lockstep Group
Phone +61 (0)414 488
851
http://lockstep.com.au <http://www.lockstep.com.au>
Lockstep Consulting provides independent specialist
advice and analysis
on digital identity and privacy. Lockstep Technologies
develops unique
new smart ID solutions that enhance privacy and prevent
identity theft.