W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > June 2017

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

From: Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2017 12:17:46 +0000
Message-ID: <CAM1Sok2axxAvE4cbicK9GKo_DBqzNbBXU6tFHuoGoOeMz7HwEA@mail.gmail.com>
To: W3C Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>
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.
Received on Thursday, 8 June 2017 12:18:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 11 July 2018 21:19:38 UTC