Re: Payments activity - any point to our time and effort?

On 4 March 2016 at 21:00, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote:

>
> On 4 Mar 2016, at 19:55, Shane McCarron <shane@spec-ops.io> wrote:
>
> Credentials / Verifiable Claims don't really need an user agent support at
> all.  Define a protocol, message format, and some rules and you are off to
> the races.  But if you want it on every desktop and in every phone... well,
> you should find a way to engage the people who make desktops and phones.
>
>
> Ok, but with WebCrypto API you can already store and do crypto on any
> device and store keys locally.
> You can use Http Signatures to store credentials locally, or potentially
> on your personal SoLiD server,
> (SoLiD=LDP+WebAccessControl+...) so that you can allow apps from different
> origins to share those credentials.
>
> It does not give you the full security of browser you would get with
> certificate management, but well if enough
> people use it and governments start finding it useful, they can start
> passing laws to get the browser
> vendors to integrate it.
>

Henry is right here.  I think people that are serious about web payments
should take a good look at Solid.  If you havent already, now is a good
time as a reorganization of the spec was published today:

https://github.com/solid/solid-spec

What Solid (social linked data) allows is an open framework on the web to
allow any kind of messaging (over HTTP) or any kind of use case.  While
payments might be one use case, so might social.  So while we have on the
web today specialists in social networks, specialists in payments,
specialists in markets etc.  Solid allows the tying of all parts together
based in an unrestricted way.

Over time you'll start to see applications that demo what can be done,
which hopefully will be eye opening and feed the imagination of a web
platform where all data forms are first class citizens, with payments just
being one of them.


>
> Henry
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:12 PM, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
> wrote:
>
>> How much does one actually need the browser vendors for this?
>> Can one not get a lot of this working with JS, sending credentials signed
>> by some entity?
>> At least to start off with?
>>
>> Henry
>>
>>
>> On 4 Mar 2016, at 14:30, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> I've been reading this:
>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-payments-wg/2016Feb/0527.html
>>
>> Is our work valuable at all or is this some sick joke that looks like
>> Wall Street Execs vs. the concept of law and such things for the billions
>> of other humans around the planet...?
>>
>> After reading this, I have severe concerns about the viability of
>> building anything meaningful here.
>>
>> I think that should be made clear. W3C was established due to issues that
>> emerged sometime ago. New issues threaten humanity as is influenced
>> specifically by web standards. Their are a number of very troubling
>> problems here, and I fully support Manu, who's work has brought all this
>> together and to suggest otherwise is an act of horrific behaviour I very
>> much doubt they'd want subject to accountability, as such,
>>
>> What are we doing here?
>>
>> Timh.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Shane McCarron
> Projects Manager, Spec-Ops
>
>
>