Re: (digital) Identity concepts - defining a 'human rights framework' how?

Hi Timothy,

Thanks for reminding us of this. It's incredibly important and pretty much
missing in all of the tech venues where I participate including, w3c, UN,
IEEE, OpenID, and Kantara.

I approach this question by promoting self-sovereign support technology
(including personal AI and self-sovereign ID) and the standards that would
drive symmetry between institutional and personal tech. Aside from the
public blockchain forums, I see no support for this kind of work.

Adrian

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 4:54 PM Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
wrote:

> the future of human rights as it is made available by way of the choices
> made to form means of legal rights by way of digital identity, identity
> instruments, attribution and accessibility to identity related data facets;
> will be a modifier for the future of our planet.
>
> It's entirely weird to be speaking on those terms; yet, it is truth.
>
> W3C is not the appropriate vehicle to be talking about 'philosophy' or
> social attributes pertaining to the discussions needed to figure out
> specifications.  I find it arguable to find any existing organisation
> properly equipped to do so; other than perhaps some sort of extension to
> the UN or as some have called to create, a UN v2.
>
> This is an open-question.  If a structure were created where the various
> existing groups committed to work together in the interests of the
> betterment of humanity and the natural world; how would it be done and whom
> would be involved.  Which organisations, to which charter, how would the
> works outflow to work-items taken-up by other more specialised
> organisations (such as W3C), et.al.
>
> It is my consideration; that since the advent of 'web 2.0' we have not
> done enough, and whilst some have dedicated so much time to this important
> cause; we simply do not have a structural solution define that may provide
> the means to succeed; given the complex circumstances pertaining to the
> need, and cause.
>
> As the data stored in databases becomes more trusted than any spoken word;
> in a field of science and technology that provides fluid access without
> necessarily supporting provenance, version control and other important
> considerations; the decisions made (not simply for credentials but far more
> broadly) will impact the world in ways far beyond that of traditional
> Internet Protocol / WWW stakeholders.
>
> So, i thought the question should be raised.  IMHO, we could forge a
> cooperative framework between a multitude of existing groups; to
> cooperatively collaborate and use technology that enabled mass engagement
> (using credentials, noting, i do not think blockchain works are required to
> do so).
>
> yet every year we do not deliver a solution commercial operates continue
> to create more entrenched means in which to commoditise humans by way of
> data.  I'm not sure this form of sole-method for modern communications is
> necessarily ethical; indeed, it should be a choice.
>
> Amongst the most difficult challenges is that of allowing a person to make
> decisions about the data about them as part of their wishes in relation to
> their death; and how that data may be available to others for more than a
> month; indeed ideally, more than one hundred years.  It's a far more
> complex issue than i'd imagined; and it really demonstrates the benefits of
> those shoe-boxes in which our elders stored photos that tell us about our
> history today; over the mediums in which we use today, where no photos in
> shoe-boxes are created anymore.
>
> something worth thinking about.  interested in solutions.
>
> Timothy Holborn.
>
-- 

Adrian Gropper MD

PROTECT YOUR FUTURE - RESTORE Health Privacy!
HELP us fight for the right to control personal health data.