You know who you are. So does the IRS, the DMV, and every Website you’ve ever made up a login and a password for — so it could “know” you.
But none of those entities really knows you. What they know is what the techies call a namespace. What they have isn’t your identity, but an identifier. What they call your identity is an administrative construction. It’s something that had to be made up so that bureaucracies and technical systems could do what they do.
Who you are isn’t just how you appear in the namespaces of administrative entities. Who you are isn’t even the name your parents gave you. It’s your single, unitary and sovereign self, which remains fixed at the source, no matter what you’re called.
While the names that matter most to you are the ones you were given at birth, and the ones you choose to be called by, neither is fixed. You can change your names without changing who you are.
Walt Whitman, the great author of Song of Myself, did not call himself Walter.
Yes, some names come about socially, but the choice to use them for ourselves is personal. Take my own example. The name my parents gave me was David. Many friends and relatives still call me David or Dave. Many more, however, call me Doc. That name is what remains of Doctor Dave, which is what I was called on the radio and in a humor column in North Carolina in the late ’70s. (That image above was how I appeared in the column. I was around 30 then. I actually look like that now.)
The nickname Doc came along after I started a company with two other guys, one of whom was named David. He and the other guy (the late great Ray Simone, who also drew the Doctor Dave image) called me Doctor Dave around the office, and with clients and suppliers. After awhile three syllables seemed too many, and they all just called me Doc.
But the nickname then was still context-dependent. People who knew me through business called me Doc. Everybody else called me David or Dave.
Then our company opened an office in Silicon Valley and I went out there prospecting, in the Fall of ’85. I knew almost nobody there, other than a few business contacts who called me Doc. But I wasn’t sure about keeping Doc as a nickname, since in a way I was starting over in a new palce. So, when I went to the Comdex conference in October of that year in Las Vegas, I had two badges made. One said David Searls and the other said Doc Searls. I was there four days and alternated between the two badges. Afterwards everybody remembered Doc and nobody remembered David. So I decided not to dump the nickname, and it stuck.
My point is that I still had control over what I chose to be called. I had sovereign source authority over that.
The problem I’m trying to surface here is that we need full respect for sovereign source identities, and identifiers, before we can solve the problem of highly fractured and incompatible administrative identifiers — a problem that has only become worse with the growth of the Web, where by design we are always the submissive and dependent party: calves to administrative cows.
You are a social ID-slave by default today.
I want a Human ID; a personal data construct with sovereign source authority.
Society uses a social construct to give me an Administrative ID.
The difference is origin.
I do not participate in Society primarily as an AdminID.
I am a Human ID by sovereign source authority, backed by American Rights that I know how to wield administratively and matriculate accordingly.
Structure yields results. Therefore, if we get the origin of ID correct, we can get the data administration framework oriented right.
A Human ID -led Society with embedded structural Rights and empowerments is the socio-economic game changer.
That is my NSTIC proposal. That’s my open proposal: a new data administration framework for identity.
Deployed across Society by opt-in opportunity structure.
Deployable across a global ecosystem by data design.
I see an ID as a door. The existence of the door is a social construct… a decision…
But once that decision is made, it is Human executed in every regard.
ID-slavery is what we have by administrative structure today. Our managerial intent in servicing it is flawed by design.
A Human ID comes with #vrm baked in. Such is the bi-directional transactional authority, multi-role nature of it.
And most important… we all approach the door on equal Terms… one door…infinite possibilities.
Self-driven socio-economic structure.
Call it whatever you want…it starts with your identity being structured right.
VRM for me grew out of two things:
- The unfinished work of Cluetrain. The ‘one clue to get’ there said “our reach exceeds your grasp.” But it didn’t, and it still doesn’t. Much of the grasp is administrative, and it has to do with defining, for us, who we are. That’s a bug, not a feature.
- The unfinished work of the digital identity development community, which I believe will remain unfinished as long as we try to solve one symptom with another one. The symptom we’re trying to solve is regarding administrative IDs as independent variables, rather than as dependent ones. Until we recognize that the only true independent variable is the soul of the independent self, we’ll continue to seek administrative solutions to the problem of administrative identity slavery.
Have you ever noticed that when somebody says “That’s a good question?” it’s usually because they don’t yet have an answer? That applies here. To the question of how we make sovereign-source identity the independent variable, I don’t have an answer. But I do want to work on it.
I’ll be doing that tomorrow at a meeting on identity in Silicon Valley. On May 1-3 in Mountain View we’ll be holding the Internet Identity Workshop again. It’s our fourteenth, and it’s a terrific unconference. If you care about this stuff, you should come. Your sovereign self would like that.