Identity in the Digital Age
Identity is a shifting construct. For centuries it had been associated with our physical appearances, captured through portraiture paintings and photography as a way to preserve the ephemerality of our mortal existence. With the emergence of digital media, we have shifted from the predominant third-person narrative to a first-person one—where everyone has become a “curator” in shaping their ideal self on online social platforms. As Hannah Arendt claims, “No human life, not even the life of the hermit in nature’s wilderness, is possible without a world which directly or indirectly testifies to the presence of other human beings” [1], increasingly our presence has ceased to be meaningful without the acknowledgement of others.
In times of the pandemic, our efforts in the reproduction of our material existence has also been amplified as we lose our physical presence and connections with the real world. Our eagerness to conform and to be acknowledged has led to an increasingly superficial world—where face-to-face interactions are reduced to mere presence reflected in digital media. Not only are we subjected to the aesthetics judgement from other fellow humans, artificial intelligence is also judging the way we look as beauty filters and modification apps “redesign” our appearances. For those who wish to reinvent themselves, they are offered a second chance to recreate their looks, identity, and narratives in virtual worlds. Are we losing ourselves behind the mirage of digital alternatives? Or, is technology enhancing our sense of self in the digital realm?
Kim Albrecht, “Watching Machines Loving Grace”, 2021, a project that visualises the media negativity of algorithmic visual sense-making within the Harvard Art Museums collection. Image courtesy of the artist and Harvard Art Museums.
The apparent freedom and agency we have on social media masks the underlying algorithmic control by these platforms. The way we project ourselves in the digital world mirrors back at us, creating silos and polarities, removing us from a balanced view in the already corroborated media landscape. As technology becomes increasingly integrated in our everyday lives, the constant flow of images, texts, and audio-visual content on the internet culminates in Big Data as we leave traces of digital footprints in the virtual realm. Through the use of artificial intelligence, tech giants are predicting our consumption patterns, recommending our favourite tunes, interpreting our emotional states, and modifying our behaviour through highly emergent social cues. Not only is our personal data being leveraged for commercial advantages, the use of Big Data also threatens our personal identity, freedom of choice, and undermines our intellectual decision making processes.
The constant surveillance and self-surveillance on social media creates an ongoing cycle of identity negotiations where we dodge between different personas to keep up with our digital presence. Social credit surveillance systems are also expanding as we live in the increasingly merged dualities of the physical and the digital. As pointed out by Hito Steyerl, our identity has dissolved into a series of “genetic codes, informational codes, and pictorial codes” that have entered the battlefield of capitalism, biases, and discriminations.
Our personal identities and sense of selves have become increasingly intertwined with the complexity of privacy, censorship and disinformation. With the emergence of blockchain initiatives, the trend of pseudonymity has also become increasingly prevalent. While blockchain technology offers the promise of owning our digital data and identities, how does the interplay of pseudonymity and real identities contribute to our existence in the digital realm?
Petra Szemán, Monomyth: gaiden/ Departure (still), 2018, single-channel video, 12 min 14 sec. Image courtesy of the artist.
Pseudonymity and Identities
The evolution of the Internet has transformed the way we perceive ourselves, express our views, and acquire information, yet the convenience of centralised platforms is also subjecting our data to corruption, censorship, and surveillance. The emergence of blockchain technology has encouraged a reflection on the nature of identity, pseudonymity, and the shifting power dynamics from authoritarianism to decentralisation.
In 2008, a whitepaper was published under the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto, proposing a “peer-to-peer electronic cash system”—Bitcoin. Its immutability is revolutionary for data integrity as its decentralised infrastructure means that no single entity will have exclusive ownership of data [2]. Denoting the libertarian view of the Cypherpunks where the internet was “a space for freedom, autonomy, connection and the untrammelled sharing of knowledge,” cryptocurrency enables pseudonymity in protection of privacy against surveillance [3].
Nakamoto’s use of pseudonym has set the tone in the crypto world, with many followed suit in hopes to protect their private life that they can enjoy the freedom of living out their most authentic selves. As pointed out by engineer Kee Hinckley, “Here lies the huge irony in this discussion. Persistent pseudonyms aren’t ways to hide who you are. They provide a way to be who you are. You can finally talk about what you really believe; your real politics, your real problems, your real sexuality, your real family, your real self.” Away from the constant gaze and judgement of others, non-identity, or alternate identity, seems to offer a renewed freedom of expression that is seemingly impossible in our physical world of prejudice and societal norms.
Robert Alice, Block 21 (42.36433° N, -71.26189° E) (from “Portraits of a Mind”), 2019, 24 carat gold leaf, suspended pigment and acrylic on canvas laid down on panel, and non-fungible token; 128.5 cm (diameter). Image courtesy of the artist and Christie’s.
Robert Alice, Block 21 (42.36433° N, -71.26189° E) (from “Portraits of a Mind”) (detail), 2019, 24 carat gold leaf, suspended pigment and acrylic on canvas laid down on panel, and non-fungible token; 128.5 cm (diameter). Image courtesy of the artist and Christie’s.
In Robert Alice’s “Portraits of a Mind", the project examines ideas of identity, privacy, and decentralisation through the conceptualisation of Nakamoto. Adopting a socio-historical narrative, it consists of 40 paintings, each inscribed with different sections of the Bitcoin code base. The paintings are fragments of Nakamoto’s portrait and are decentralised to owners in different parts of the world. Embedded in each code base is also a geo-coordinate that indicates a location of significance in the history of Bitcoin, with reference to concepts such as cryptography, privacy, and libertarianism that are central to the development of this cryptocurrency. Block 1 refers to Mount Qingyuan, where the statue of Laozi, the Chinese philosopher who founded libertarianism, was created during the Song Dynasty. Block 38 refers to the location of the first Bitcoin transaction. While the identity of Nakamoto may be an exploration of perpetuity, the physical connotation of the project holds immense symbolic power that captures the essence of Bitcoin, and through the works of Alice, we see the aspect of Nakamoto that he wants to present to the world.
While all blockchain transactions are publicly available to every node of the network, the highly transparent nature of blockchain is mitigated by the virtues of pseudonymity. Unlike anonymity, where it is impossible to connect to any specific identities, pseudonyms are used to disguise real identities. Therefore, just as in the physical world, complete privacy and anonymity can never be guaranteed. Yet, cryptographic techniques have presented ways in which we can secure privacy with only a fraction of required transparency. More importantly, it is the agency and the shift of responsibility to individual users that must be highlighted here as we are offered the opportunity to take control of our own data [4].
Moving away from the post-truth world of vanity and misinformation, we find ourselves in a new reality of pseudonymity, immutability, and truth. Taking cue from Arendt’s concept of freedom and plurality, in the decentralised era we are offered the opportunity to take initiative and take a step forward from our private lives to co-create a public space where freedom can thrive. Rising above the homogeneity of mass society, we are no longer obliged to conform but are offered the agency to take part in the protection of our identity and privacy. While acknowledging the complexity of institutional adoption and regulations of the states, the development of Web 3.0 and cryptocurrency offers an opportunity for us to redefine our own identity where visions of equality, distinctions, and privacy are upheld.
[1] Arendt, 1958, The Human Condition, University of Chicago Press, Chicago
[2] Tucker, 2019, Blockchain: The Insights You Need from Harvard Business Review, Harvard Business Review, Boston
[3] Volpicelli, 2021, Cryptocurrency (WIRED Guides): How Digital Money Could Transform Finance, Penguin Random House, London
[4] De Filippi, 2016, The Interplay between Decentralisation and Privacy: The Case of Blockchain Technologies, Journal of Peer Production, Issue 7
The article frist appeared on Cobo Social on 11 April 2022.
