Abbrivating Bend Over, Here It Comes Again, it reflects the human response to change - bend like a tree in a storm, and when it pass stand straight up again.
The same kind of response is now seen among a number of politicians and political analysts that they see a great threat in selling the "core payment and authentication" company NETS (owning DanID and Dankortet) to private equity-funds.
But why didn't these people shout when KMD was sold and when Datacentralen was sold ? These now private companies owns much more privacy sensitive information that Nets?
Is it because they fear that a core infrastructure will be "owned" by a private company ? Or ? I mean, the whole tele-infrastructure is owned by private companies the majority of these are foreign, so why is it this not a problem?
In Denmark SF, DF and EL are against a sale of Nets. They promote that the Government should be owning this infrastructure as otherwise our privcy and the cost of using the payment card (Dankortet) will increase.
But politicians can set the frame conditions that ensures that the DK infrastructure is top-notch and offensive. And personally I don't think that my privacy is more challenged by using a Danish Owned Dankort than using a VISA Dankort where transactions are routed through the VISA payment system.
And with NemID (the Danish authentication service) this is going to be retendered on a regular basis - why it really doesn't matter who owns the infrastructure - what matters are:
* how reliable is the service ?
* how cost efficient is it ?
* how is privacy protected ?
In a short while there will be another retender of NemID - and before that we need to have a debate on the future digital authentication that could reaffirm the DK global leadership position on digital authentication.
So I don' fear a sale of Nets - it is straight forward ...
Ingen kommentarer:
Send en kommentar