Bitcoin's proponents love to talk about anonymity. The more you dig, however, the more you discover that anonymous transactions are far from Bitcoin's greatest strength. There are certainly steps you can take to protect your Bitcoin identity, but it's hardly anonymous out of the box.
Given that the anonymity feature is widely promoted, it is somewhat ironic that Bitcoin is far more useful as a tool to absolutely verify someone's identity.
When I first learned of Bitcoin, my initial purchases were done via the Bitcoin-OTC channel on IRC. Though I feel fairly comfortable around a computer, the process of establishing my identity for the sake of building a reputation was cumbersome, to say the least. What it is, however, is a public/private key arrangement, similar to what you have with Bitcoin. The fact that you hold the password to the private key is what ensures you are who you say you are.
So, that's all well and good for tying a virtual identity to a public key, but how do we bridge the gap to the real world?
As a member of the Reddit community, I find it hilarious to watch the different ways that people prove their identities in "Ask Me Anything" (AmA) submissions. More often than not, it's a picture of themselves holding a piece of paper that says "Reddit." Honestly, isn't it a little embarrassing that in the 21st century, we prove our identities by taking a picture of ourselves holding a sign?
For those with well-established Twitter or public Facebook accounts, the process can be slightly less archaic, and can involve tweeting or mentioning in your Facebook status that you've posted an AmA submission on Reddit. We can be fairly certain that the only people who have access to those accounts are the people they purportedly represent - though it's definitely not fool proof. Twitter even has their own internal verification system to verify the accounts of public figures.
So, why don't we put this issue to bed, once and for all, and use Bitcoin to make it happen?
What I'm proposing is an online database, either maintained by the government or a trusted organization, that has the following information available to the public:
- Name, City and Country of Residence, Bitcoin Address, and a Photo.
The information could be collected when we register for an election or renew any form of government identification card that we already use. It would only have to be done once, and several tasks would suddenly become easier for everyone.
With our crytographically provable identities, any form of contract signing (bye-bye fax machine), voter registration, or online interaction could be verified as being legitimately tied to us. Smaller clubs or organizations, like university councils, condo owner organizations, etc., where anonymity of the vote isn't important, could easily conduct online voting and have instant counting.
Best of all, I could do an AmA on Reddit and you would know it's legit, Twitter or Facebook account be damned!
The examples I'm suggesting are surely only the tip of the iceberg, but they're enough to give you an idea of how Bitcoin can make our lives significantly easier beyond its application as a wealth-transferring mechanism. I'm definitely curious to hear what other ideas you can come up with.
Actually in some countries there are already electronic passports, which contain a key pair, that has been signed by a trusted authority at the time, the passport has been issued.
ReplyDeleteWhat I'm proposing is an online database, either maintained by the government
ReplyDeleteOops.
In Britain, campaigners just finished destroying the governments attempts to create a government database for the purposes of verifying identity.
People were for the idea initially, but in the end the polls showed a massive drop in approval as the understanding of what government controlled ID systems mean to liberty. This massive waking up was achieved in part by the viral spread of a secret briefing paper (the 'Frances Stonor Saunders' document) that spelled out what the true nature of government controlled ID systems are.
The government is not needed to 'secure identity'.
Bitcoin, being a completely digital system of receipts can be augmented by voluntary digital signatures for each client. These would form the basis of a PGP style 'web of trust'; a decentralised, fool proof method of of absolute, state free identity verification, so that a buyer and seller can verify their identities to each other with absolute certainty, instantly, over the Internet.
The government is not needed, either to create and manage the style and supply of money, or to manage identity. When the government gets involved in either of theses areas, tyranny is always the result. We can see absolute proof of this in the insane restrictions on cash transactions that are breaking out all over Europe, where you are also compelled to carry state issued ID to get anything done. They destroyed the value of their fiat currencies through their economic illiteracy, and now they want to compound their crime by forcing everyone into their cashless society. I think we have all had enough of the State, don't you?
Whenever you hear the word 'government' in this context alarm bells should go off. Bitcoin proves once again that we do not need the State to manage affairs for us. All we need is one man with a vision.
It is a sad day when we hear the word government and immediately think "tyranny," but it's reality.
ReplyDeleteI would definitely like to hear more about how some of the problems I discussed in my post could be addressed using this "web of trust." How do you tie personal information to the transaction? How do I know I'm dealing with "Jim Jones from Kansas?" Maybe you could provide an example, like signing a mortgage when the paperwork is on the other side of the country.
Hopefully, the ideas of money, government, private property will be irrelevant to the functioning of society and the ability to provide for the basic needs of all people.
ReplyDeleteTake the government out of the equation and it might be something I could support.
ReplyDeleteBTW, excellent blog you have here! Keep up the good work!
I'm in complete agreement with Irdial. Government is not necessary.
ReplyDeleteThe OpenPGP standard already has all that is needed; it's biggest problem is getting people over the hurdle of getting them to use it.
Having said that government is not necessary though doesn't mean there isn't a place for them. It would be perfectly possible to have the passport office in the UK publish their own public key; and then do all the checks they do right now, but at the end sign my public key. That would get us a very large, very reliable web of trust very quickly.
Government would like to tax all transactions for each address.
ReplyDelete