tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10238534.post4642447088349201111..comments2023-11-05T04:35:19.263-05:00Comments on Faceless Bureaucrat: Unique Identity: the American SolutionBill Harshawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02094598931693185805noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10238534.post-82660681797588259082017-01-27T16:52:32.463-05:002017-01-27T16:52:32.463-05:00I see I wasn't very clear.:-( Yes, SSN became ...I see I wasn't very clear.:-( Yes, SSN became a de facto unique identifier as computerization spread beyond SSA/IRS to everyone, and before the rise of email. It was easier for system designers to ask for the SSN and use that as the key for records than to assign a customer ID and require the customer to use it. And that ease of use overrode the legal provisions on not using it outside the SSA/IRS system.<br /><br />In the early days of the Internet AOL or whoever would ask for a user name and validate whether it was unique, but now most apps have evolved to just using the email address to uniquely identifying the user. (plus password).Bill Harshawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02094598931693185805noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10238534.post-78789038991500881532017-01-24T09:46:41.445-05:002017-01-24T09:46:41.445-05:00OK I see what you are saying.
I will use your rea...OK I see what you are saying.<br /><br />I will use your reasoning with the IRS the next time I file my taxes, telling them they don't need my SS#. Or the next time I get a bank loan. Or when I apply for health insurance. Or when I change jobs. How about when you applied for retirement? Did you tell them it was not needed?<br /><br />My point is that this number is being used as a unique identifier already by many operations, particularly the government.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10238534.post-74438799562497295052017-01-20T15:37:13.315-05:002017-01-20T15:37:13.315-05:00The law specifically said the SS# wasn't suppo...The law specifically said the SS# wasn't supposed to be a unique identifier. Subsequent laws (like around 1990) prohibited agencies from sharing information across department lines, except with involved process. My impression is that's become mostly a dead letter.<br /><br />Because the SS# was deployed in various silos, it doesn't work like a unique identifier. Look at the problems in sharing data among SSA, IRS, and the agencies, especially for the dead. IMHO the closest thing we have to a unique identifier now is the email address, which is often used by websites to store user data. By definition it's unique. But email address lacks the other key attribute, which the SS# does better: ensuring a person/entity has only one SS#. (Generally speaking there's no advantage and considerable disadvantage to a person having multiple SS#s.) That seems to be what Estonia and other countries are doing. Bill Harshawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02094598931693185805noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10238534.post-68159782226687691702017-01-18T09:06:32.859-05:002017-01-18T09:06:32.859-05:00Ummmmmm...the U.S. doesn't? What about our SS...Ummmmmm...the U.S. doesn't? What about our SS#?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com