Authorisation vs. Consent An Article by Terence Eden shkspr.mobi I recently read this interesting, and distressing, story of a man who was drugged and robbed. A form of crime which has been going on for centuries. But the 21st Century twist is that the thieves forced him to transfer large sums of money via his phone's banking apps. While under the influence, the victim used his usernames, passwords, PINs, and biometrics to send money to the criminal's accounts. Is there a "technological" way to stop this? His banks initially refused to refund the stolen money. Only once the press stepped in did they relent. One bank, Revolut, said: This was an unusual case where the payments were authorised by the customer but, as is now clear, without his consent. Upstream Color crime
Rethinking Twitter Verification An Article by Terence Eden shkspr.mobi The main problem, I think, is that no one knows what "Verified" means. If I were in charge (which I'm not) there would be various types of ticks. 🤖 is a bot 🆔 proved their legal identity 🏭 is run by a brand ⚖ is run by a government department 👮 Official law enforcement 😎 Celebrity And so on. iconographyidentity
The inventive process was often a nonverbal one Through the ages, the professional users of tools by and large have not needed to, been able to, or wanted to talk to outsiders about their implements. They did not need to because tools themselves are used to make other tools, and thus users could very often fashion a new tool with their old ones. If they did need to communicate the design for a new tool to someone outside their trade, they could do so without having to reveal the tool's intended use...Besides, the inventive process of conceiving a new tool was often a nonverbal one. Finally, craftsmen were unwilling to share information about their specialized tools because to do so would have been to give up their competitive edge and their value to those outside the craft. Henry Petroski, The Evolution of Useful Things Focal awareness tools