Nobody knows you're a dog on the Web--or a mechanic, athlete,
hacker, marketing whiz, zealot, or SQL programmer. That is, unless
you tell them. In which case, they may or may not believe you, and
they have few options for verifying your credentials anyway.
It's hard enough to know who's who in the physical world, where
you can look into a person's eyes and, if necessary, ask to see a
driver's license. The Web's built-in anonymity makes identification
harder, authentication a science, and accountability nearly
impossible.
Does it matter? Wikipedia thrives as an encyclopedia by the
people. Digg volunteers determine what's news. Some Facebook users
trust one another enough to share phone numbers. Even China backed
away from plans to force bloggers to use their real names.
Make no mistake, though; online identities matter, and they'll
matter even more as the number of blogs, wikis, and social networks
grows, making it increasingly difficult to sort out the Web's wheat
from the chaff of misinformation, factual errors, and malware. What
we need--bloggers, businesspeople, technology professionals--are
better ways to let others know who we are, verifying what we tell
them and showing that we've got the cred to back it up.
Such a system would let online shoppers know more about sellers,
and content consumers know more about content creators. As more
organizations adapt Web 2.0 technologies and principles to conduct
business, digital identities will help their employees establish
their own credentials while telling them more about their
customers.
"The idea of a transferable, semantic reputation is identity
nirvana," says Fred Stutzman, co-founder of ClaimID, one of the
many startups trying to help Web users create more complete and
flexible online profiles.
Web identity systems exist in many forms, from Microsoft's
Windows CardSpace identity manager to LinkedIn's way of letting
users recommend one another based on previous experiences. But
they're mostly narrow in scope and not foolproof. "When are we
going to have certs that are better than self-assertions that I am
a great guy, I am who I say I am, and I say you can trust me?" asks
analyst Michael Cherry, with Directions On Microsoft.
Wikipedia, the community-generated online encyclopedia, has had
its reputation damaged by "experts" who didn't live up to their
billing and by postings that proved to be inaccurate. In one
notorious example, journalist John Seigenthaler Sr.'s Wikipedia
profile was vandalized with misinformation that suggested he was
involved in the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
Processes in place at Wikipedia are meant to prevent such
gaffes. At their discretion, site administrators can protect
articles from changes or even ban users. But that works only when
the admins themselves are trustworthy: One administrator who went
by the pseudonym Essjay claimed to be a tenured professor in
religion but turned out to be a 24-year-old community college
dropout.
2 3 4 5