(M) to the (A) to the (S) to the (K)
Put the mask upon the face just to make the next day,
Feds be hawkin me
Jokers be stalking me,
I walk the streets and camouflage my identity.
-- The Fugees
Something about cell warfare scares me. It threatens the nationalist in me, it threatens my understanding of the rule of law. It reeks to high heaven of perfidy. But there's also something rather inevitable about it. There is something very appealing about network relationships replacing hierarchical relationships. I've always been fascinated by Stephenson's concept of phyles. At times like this I wish I knew a little bit more history. I want to know which way this can go.
The newest idea I have seen that appeals to a tight cellular network within the loose hierarchical framework is the LLP. The pioneers of this concept are The Burton Group, which maintains a blog on Identity.
The basic idea is that an LLP would be a legally sanctioned and recognized virtual person in which you could "invest" some of your financial or identity resources, while holding the rest of your resources back so that they're not exposed to online risk. Once you created an LLP, you'd have the legal right to use it as an online "alter ego", even in commercial transactions. You can't really do this today; if you use an identity other than your own in a transaction, it's usually called "fraud" (but not always; people in the witness protection program, for example, are given government-sanctioned alter egos which they can use to avoid various privacy and safety risks).
Now in practice, I do this kind of stuff all the time. For a simple example, whenever I go to Starbucks and they ask me my name, I say 'Max' because there are too many Michaels. (Michael was the most popular male name when I was born in the early 60s). In the days when I used to attend strip clubs in the Derrty South, I used another name, for obvious reasons. I have sophisticated reasons as well. Obviously Cobb and Boohab are me but not me, and I have invented other personnae for various online discussions. I think that a fluid kind of identity is second nature to many different people for different reasons. I went into one set of reasons way back when:
for example, in my grand theoretical thinking of things, the existence of virtual communicative spaces offers one the opportunity to make one's identity completely opaque or even false. i could very well be a very clever new zealander pregnant with twins despite all the things i say here. the opportunity exists to navigate in virtual worlds and take on multiple personalities, identities etc. the question which strikes me is, why? i believe people will experiment and communicate here in ways they wouldn't (in reality). but to what extent does the virtual experience change you (in reality)? so if you do it here, and become confident enough than you may ultimately do it there. you are exposed to the ideas and people's generally honest opinions (or genuine fantasies) and so that experience becomes real.
still with me?
but despite all the opportunity for identity swapping (and believe me there are people in cyberspace right now pretending that they are x-rated green eyed squirrels) most people stay with their own identities. so the folks who want to be adventurers are adventuring already. (i often take on the identity of a overly generous cheeto eating sumo wrestler but that's another story). since this is a communicative medium i believe people assume the identity which provides them with the kinds of interactions and experiences they think that identity will get them. this is very fluid and very interesting when it comes to black folk (who always seem to fascinate me).
as an aside what i have not seen so much in this forum as i have in private black forums is what i call the 'black persistent object'. that is someone who self-identifies as the 'nigger' who mucks up the works no matter what they are. i am not saying this is good or bad but if you would reflect on that idea for a moment. because this is something i desperately want to see. (in samuel r. delany's third of the neveryon series he writes of a black 13 year old hanging out in ny's port authority bus terminal saying 'hey white man, are you afraid of me? i'm not going to hurt you. hey where are you going? do you think i'm going to rob you? i'm not going to rob you..' - this is a variation on what i am saying. the existence of the 'black persistent object' calls into question and disturbs 'progress' or 'disinterest'. for cyberspace the question is how do you 'be black' in a way that is different? should one even *try* to change. there are only one or two people in scaa who have ever seen me. i have never said if i am a light skinned brother or dark. what does skin color mean when i write about it in text? what does black identity mean in computer mediated communications? howard rheingold has no clue, but still read his books - he's the man. now that i look back, why did i call the 'black persistent object' a nigger? it could very well be any other african-american archetype, but i think you catch my drift. i guess that's the catchy one.
I've always talked about 'identity gloves' as something you put on to grab something that you want, but don't want to really touch you. Identity gloves are like sex with a condom - it's not really touching, it's a safety mechanism accepted by both parties so that you can limit your liability. What if you could do that legally with a whole new self? This is how the LLP opens up a world of possibilities. It's a shell corporation for the person.
Fascinating. Dangerous.
Recent Comments