Digital Identity

I've been reading some of the discussion on digital identity (see, e.g., AKMA), but I have to confess that I tend to get a little lost in the discussion. It's a high-context conversation, and I'm not exactly up-to-date on all of that context. Far from it. The context includes the entire multifaceted question of what the internet is, so it's hard to get my brain around all of the interrelated ideas at one time.

AKMA says that the desirable end for a mass audience of internet users (not commercial interests) is "accountable, persistent, reliable online identity," with some accommodation for anonymity. When commerce gets involved, I'd take the requirements a step further; commercial interests want almost always to be able to attach an online identity with a real, flesh and blood human. Anyone involved in commercial transactions online needs to establish that connection with an urgency that increases according to the value and risk of the transaction. If the transaction goes sour, one can (usually) find the flesh-and-blood person and haul him or her into court. You can't do that with an online identity that exists only detached from any corporeal equivalent.

The question is how to have it both ways -- to make business and other identity-important transactions on the internet relatively low-risk prospects (perfection may not be necessary) while not requiring a one-for-one correspondence between online and offline personalities. It may mean that one can have only one online personality for business purposes. Is that unacceptable? Are there other ways we can balance the various risks?

I'll keep watching the discussions to see what I learn. Meanwhile, I hope that I find some good background material so that I can get a better understanding of where the online conversation on the identity topic has come from and where it is going.