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

HI Tim,
They are all big issues.

I invite you to join us at IIW (internet Identity workshop) where we have been holding a container for both technology and philosophy conversations in this realm for 12 years. Our 25th workshop is October 17-19.
Http://www.internetidentityworkshop.com

Yes it costs money. If any one on this list feels called to join us / actively participate but not able to afford it please contact me directly. Kaliya (at) identitywoman.net

Also with respect to some of the themes you bring up. I don't think the UN or any "Statist" organization is a good forum for this.
Watching the current international dialogue and the frame that states have about ID and citizens is concerning. We do not derive our Identity's and dignity as people from states.

I could say more. I'm out away for the weekend. Maybe I will contribute more to the converation next week. 

- Kaliya 



Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 8, 2017, at 6:03 PM, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Sun, 9 Jul 2017 at 06:31 Adrian Gropper <agropper@healthurl.com> wrote:
>> 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 was thinking recently about the CDN issues (net neutrality) where services might make mature offerings available FOC (from a data billing point of view) in a manner that simply didn't exist when these services were starting-up with the support of early adopters.  Perhaps part of the solution is to have data-cost indices in the stock-market; denoting the difference between the cost of a MB/GB from a mature CDN provider (ie; Akamai, Google, YouTube) vs. the public web. We could use it to help consumers figure out how good their internet plan is; whilst more broadly having a market method for evaluating the health of the net in a manner similar to that of tracking the cost of a barrel of oil.
> 
> Overtime, identity was a term used in relation to persons and other living beings.  now it means to the commercial property commoditised by an international company that is used by and required by a human upon terms controlled by the commercial operator of that identity.   These identity providers in-turn require interoperability with other identity providers for insurance purposes and those required by government. 
> 
> not much of the web supports individuals.  i don't think an individual can easily go purchase a block of IPv6, nor set-up their own identity eco-system, nor buy a bag of floppies to back-up their data in some way that's useable in their machine; or other peoples machines...    the new concept for 'identity' supported by the majority of W3C members is well....   
> 
> something they've all been involved in making, whether its because that's they way they wanted it; or because that's something they didn't think was important enough to do something meaningful about.
> 
>> 
>> 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.
>> 
> i don't like the idea 'self-sovereign', i don't see it in any books of law, nor other precedent apparatus that can be scalably used throughout the world in relation to the means in which their cultures have developed.  If anything it also kinda supports the means in which to redefine traditional 'identity' by way of forging a new term that operators will likely elect not to use in any case. 
> 
> This intepretation of the term 'self-sovereign' does not mean that i think the intention of the people who created it was bad, wrongful, et.al.  
> 
> I've suggested a better investigation into the concept of 'personhood'.  TimBL Spoke of 'Magna Carta' for the web, which i promoted for sometime; without consideration (earlier than now) for the circumstance that i later found succinctly put: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HJRkwBOkdw 
> 
> Herein also; in civil society questions are being asked: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYclXJTRzqU  - yet we are in the hotbed of how these sorts of considerations made by many are made available...
> 
> doing something meaningful about it, is meaningful to me.  so i'm doing my best.  i'm sure others are also, but i am concerned we do not have enough going on at present to effectively influence change we need, rather than providing an innovation hot-bed for the 'status-quo' to use as a threat analysis and figure out how to reinforce their infrastructure as to change the definition and means of humanity forever. 
> 
> I wrote: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YXh-X7eXd9Uh5zkJv0Rjop8DcVqqEbd-E_eOnw4fMZ4/edit?usp=sharing in an attempt to get the concept of identity tooling, into 1 page. 
> 
>> Adrian
>> 
> 
> tim.
>  
>>> 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.