Re: Updated Verifiable Claims Use Cases document

On 6/23/16 2:57 PM, Eric Korb wrote:
> See inline response
> On Jun 22, 2016 1:40 PM, "Steven Rowat" <steven_rowat@sunshine.net
> <mailto:steven_rowat@sunshine.net>> wrote:
>> Yes, this is the core of the issue, but I think your example doesn't
> adequately represent pseudonymous use-cases, even in the past. In
> commercial publishing, pseudonyms have been important and have had
> major social effects; there are many  historic authors (journalists,
> whistleblowers, fiction authors, musicians) that have used their
> publisher as the person who could open a bank account for them when
> they were using a pseudonym. This allows them to say things that
> aren't linked to their private, local, legal identity.
>>
>> And this capability allows them to tell the truth to society as a
> whole, when otherwise they couldn't (or wouldn't, because of the
> danger to themselves or their immediate family or friends).
>>
>> I see this as an interesting possible use-case for the VC working
> group: to try to figure out if it is technically possible for authors
> of all kinds to issue various credentials about the underlying
> 'entity' (their legal self), while retaining this historic capability
> of the author to be pseudonymous and be paid -- whether they are
> 'self' publishing online or not.
>>
>> Steven

> I believe the use of a DID would satisfy this Use Case.
>
> Eric
>

That sounds promising.

Could you expand on how this would work a little more? I assume DID 
means 'data identifier'. You can assume I know nothing else about how 
it would work apart from that fact. ;-)

Steven

Received on Friday, 24 June 2016 01:48:55 UTC