Re: "Identity"

As noted; i will review, some i have already read but the new stuff ( and a
general refresher) will be good to review.

W3C produced Technical Standards for the Web.  The web has developed alot
since W3C was started; but regardless of our now rich-heritage and the
influence on a ubiquitous international landscape of WWW through the
development of RDBMS Powered SILOs; for some reason, this identity stuff is
'TBA' from an open-standards point of view; or moreover,

in a manner that provides service to the living things on this planet, such
as people, in a manner that could be deemed to be a 'fair' alternative to
the sophisticated systems built to entrench the importance of artificial
software driven things, like companies and their products.

I raw copied old docs:  http://webcivics.org/contact.html dating back to
2000 (iBank, Basedrive) where i first came across this 'identity problem'
and the difficulties that exist in making any attempt to solve it in a
manner that's what i call 'human centric', that it, where a companies
directors have no responsibility to maintain the human rights of their
customers or other living things it interacts with as resources; that the
conditions in which they exist, within our modern societies - should ensure
the claims made to 'the people' that we care about things like 'rule of
law' should be true; declared not to be true, declared to be something we
as a society (led by particular individuals) want to make true; or
something that is part of fantasy.

We are building computing systems that will be able to tell us one way or
another.  Sure, one answer is to trust the 'things' built, and operated by
few humans on the planet.  Indeed so many have decided they'll make a world
where anyone can work anywhere; that they're now often found in California.

i can go on about this for far too long. in the intersts of being
productive. i'll review and revert.  Whilst i agree W3C is a standards
based place...

It's not like the needs of commercial customers will not be consolidated
and put forward as part of these 'open standards' works.  Whether it be the
example of a public toilet or other civics information:
- https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/1624
- https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/1337

Or the concept that the core-ontology used with credentials supports the
means for it to be declared what the 'rights' are in relation to that
instrument:
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webpayments/2014Jul/0043.html

It seems we need more help getting these sorts of things done than has been
available for....   well, the entire history of the web.

Tim.H.

On Thu, 1 Jun 2017 at 16:05 Christopher Allen <ChristopherA@blockstream.com>
wrote:

> I recommend people interested in this topic take a look at the white paper
> that Joe Andrieu led on the topic “Identity Crisis: Clearer Identity
> through Correlation”.
> https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/ID2020DesignWorkshop/blob/master/final-documents/identity-crisis.pdf
>
>
> "We propose using “correlation” instead of “identity” when discussing
> concrete identities in identity systems. It isn’t a word-for-word
> replacement, but using it will improve the conversation. We argue that
> “correlation” provides a more concise and clear understanding of how
> identity is created and applied in both digital and real-world systems, and
> that using it as an alternative to “identity” will improve communication
> and understanding.”
>
>
> I found the concept moved my thoughts in some significant ways. As a
> long-time digital privacy advocate (almost 30 years!) I’ve always fought
> for anti-correlation. But Joe’s articulation of the concept of “Correlation
> as Identity” has made me realize that without correlation then identity
> systems are useless. So correlation must be a spectrum, undesirable at
> either extreme, but needing some balance, albeit on the human and humane
> side of equation.
>
> — Christopher Allen
>
>