Re: Proposal for UNHCR demo

You Might find https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QW-tJflFoE4 interesting.

On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 at 11:32 Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 at 11:20 Joe Andrieu <joe@joeandrieu.com> wrote:
>
> What gave you the idea that Joram's life is unimportant?
>
>
> I don't know Joram, but i've cared for people with diabetes ensuring they
> get sugar as soon as humanly possible so the fluid in their eyes isn't
> affected by a 'low' and they're able to see for the rest of the day.  I can
> go into other diabetes related use-cases, but overall i was concerned about
> the clinical accuracy of the statements made with regard to his medical
> circumstance (and with family who was involved with fostering pathology
> service ubiquity, was affected by it.).
>
>
>
> More to the point, what language in the model do you feel trivializes the
> refugee experience at any step?
>
>
> see:
>
> https://digital.library.adelaide.edu.au/dspace/bitstream/2440/44200/1/hdl_44200.pdf
>
> http://unhcr.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/11June2013_ManusMonitoringVisit.pdf
> http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2015/s4403464.htm
>
> As noted; clinical clarification on the implications of diabetes if
> treated in the manner outlined by your document (upon the time i reviewed
> it) would assist in better responding to your question.
>
>
> The whole point of the medical emergency is that, in fact, Joram's life
> depends on adequate care and these needs must not be trivialized.
>
> If it feels real, then we are succeeding. If it feels like trivialization,
> I'd like to address it.
>
>
> I am not a medical professional and as such i think it would be wrong for
> me to outline the clinical implications of the process outlined using the
> concept of diabetes as a influencing factor to the production and later
> sale of credentialing related products (and indeed identity ecosystems).
>
>
>
> That said, removing the real-world life threatening aspects of the
> engagement model isn't an option. The point is to be clear that lives
> literally hang in the balance as we design these systems.
>
>
> I have not suggested at all that you remove the 'life threatening'
> aspects:
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-credentials/2017Mar/0011.html
>
>
>
> We'd love to have conversations with individuals actually working with
> refugees in these situations and we have reached out to several for input.
> If you know people who could provide feedback, I'd appreciate an
> introduction.
>
>
> yes i do.  and i have some experts speaking (ie:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_MacLeod ) in addition to Pia Waugh
> (currently working with AusTrac
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Transaction_Reports_and_Analysis_Centre
> ) and nigel phair (http://www.canberra.edu.au/cis/aboutcis/people/ ) at
> the event i flagged with the group some months ago now,
> http://www.trustfactory.org/ (please feel welcomed to come along - it's
> being delivered as part of the broader event surrounding www2017 in Perth )
> also have expertise in related areas.
>
> I think more importantly than the 'stage time' is the opportunity to have
> a good chat about important issues as a result of having brought these
> people together on a basis of shared values.
>
> Others (who cannot make it) such as
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Burnside i will ask to provide some
> feedback ASAP (likely after the event).
>
>
>
> Also, to clarify, the Joram 1.0.0 paper is an output of the Rebooting Web
> of Trust III design workshop, which I suggested as a potential input to the
> Verifiable Claims use case document. It is, in effect, what I think you
> mean be a complex user story.
>
> I'm sure the group would entertain any contributions you might have.
>
>
> so long as i'm entertaining ;)
>
>
>
> -j
>
> Tim.H.
>
>
> Sent on my Samsung Galaxy S7 edge.
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
> Date: 3/13/17 4:52 PM (GMT-08:00)
> To: Joe Andrieu <joe@joeandrieu.com>, Credentials Community Group <
> public-credentials@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: Proposal for UNHCR demo
>
> IMHO - put in big red writing somewhere that the diabetes thing needs to
> be scrapped.  The story looked like it may be based on a true story, and
> therein (with what medical information i know about) i was questioning
> myself - which takes away from the purpose of the doc.
>
> I like the underlying intent; yet, i would not want to trivialise the
> issues experienced by those with a serious medical condition by suggesting
> an understanding of their lives is not important.
>
> How about we start by defining a few complex user-stories?
>
> I'll see if i can find some help around the issues experienced in
> accelerating / improving the circumstances of refugees quickly and
> effectively.
>
> Therefore; ideas,
>
> - Refugee processing
> - Human Trafficking
> - Modern Slavery (inc. those involving sex services)
> - Police Records Systems (asymmetric institutional systems may have
> erroneous information causing public harm to both law-enforcement operators
> and citizens)
> - Fake News (classification of news, ability to identify one line of text
> that is a false-fact in an otherwise good piece of journalism, et.al.)
>
> Another i've started looking at is 'web side worlds' which pertains to
> Augmented Reality and related new device / application type markets
>
> We could therein flesh-out the semantic nature of multi-faceted use-cases
> pertaining to the design-implications of these systems (and are likely to
> also better clarify the nature of the underlying identity problems that to
> some-degree, i think, are out of scope).
>
> We could look to establish stakeholder engagement on each of the complex
> areas and identify groups in civil society who are willing to work with us
> to address complex societal issues through a narrative that helps convene
> more stakeholders in addressing societal needs and implicit ecosystems
> therein.
>
> On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 at 10:34 Joe Andrieu <joe@joeandrieu.com> wrote:
>
> It is fictional, but we agree. We initially had an infection that needed
> penicillin, but switched to diabetes because we wanted a longer period of
> ongoing medical support in a life or death situation. We're open to
> suggestions for making that more realistic.
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017, at 04:31 PM, Timothy Holborn wrote:
>
> Is this based on a true story?   My experience of people with diabetes
> (certainly type 1) is that insulin dependence is not an optional, they'd
> simply feel better type of situation. life of death from my experience, and
> if the patient becomes insulin dependent in type 2 - i'd imagine it's very
> much the same...
>
> On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 at 04:22 Joe Andrieu <joe@joeandrieu.com> wrote:
>
>
> Manu,
>
> Here are my thoughts after our call last week about the RWoT demo.
>
> The Joram 1.0.0 Engagement Model
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GLejHAyOGcFZMDH23VpBK5as_474gt1tdYZIWkHm7c0/edit?usp=sharing,
> currently in draft, is an attempt to describe the human interactions when a
> Syrian refugee works his way through Greece, with an eye to descripting
> requirements for a self-sovereign identity system. It is an early step to
> formally understand how to support UN SDG 16.9. For simplicity, I'll refer
> to this as the UNHCR use case.
>
> Perhaps the key challenge in this use case is the lack of technology owned
> or controlled by the typical refugee. In the engagement model, we assume
> that the stewards--not the refugee--have access to a physical device
> connected to the Internet, which is capable of properly accessing a
> yet-to-be-defined Distributed Data Store. Conceptually, this is just a
> smart phone.
>
> The big question for us: can this engagement model be realized with
> verifiable claims? What would VC need to support it?
>
> The immediate question is: can we modify or configure Digital Bazaar's
> digital wallet to provide a UNHCR experiential demo at Rebooting Web of
> Trust IV in Paris?
>
> To demonstrate Joram in a credible way, I think there are two keys we'd
> need to demonstrate:
>
> 1. The use of a QR coded bracelet and pin as the refugee's identification
> and authentication mechanism, enabling the refugee to selectively share
> specific proofs/attributes with stewards.
>
> 2. The storing of the digital trail of non-repudiable observations,
> accessible via the authentication and selection mechanism in #2.
>
> And specifically, for the wallet you showed us in our call, I think we'll
> need:
>
> 3. A change in the mental model of the wallet-device relationship. The
> current wallet software assumes the controller of the device is the
> controller of the wallet. In the UNHCR case, the device is controlled by
> the steward, so linking to a wallet--which is controlled by the
> refugee--should not form a long term permission for control over the
> wallet, but rather provide a mechanism for the transfer of specific
> attributes to the steward's system.
>
> The strawman we've been working with includes a few core assumptions:
> 1. Steward software adheres to a recognized standard authentication
> ceremony. This ceremony includes having the subject (1) unlock the dataset
> with a pin, (2) manage selective disclosure of the dataset, and (3) record
> the access in the data store with a photo of the refugee. In other words,
> we are trusting the software to act to a standard and for stewards to use
> non-compromised devices.
>
> 2. We're ok with access to the underlying datastore being
> provisioned/permissioned based on UN criteria, and are comfortable with the
> UN managing consensus and permissioning of steward organizations. We don't
> need to resolve the question of how to implement the engagement model in an
> open public ledger, because we see significant benefit in the UN's role
> establishing rules of governance and monitoring participants for bad
> behavior.
>
> 3. Our mental model for the datastore is not cards in the sense of
> Information Cards or loyalty cards, but rather an accumulated context of
> non-repudiable observations, which can be selectively presented by the
> subject. The key to us is that any participant can write an observation
> about a subject, and the subject controls which attributes are shared with
> which recipients.
>
> While we are pushing towards a user-driven or self-sovereign approach, our
> particular scenario is fine with the role the UN--as a collective
> collaborative governing body--establishing who can read/write to the data
> store and how bad actors are policed and the resulting dataset is
> granularly composable by distinct sharing ceremonies.
>
> Proposal for the demo:
> 1. Issue participants a bracelet with a unique QR code
> 2. Associate a photo with that QR code
> 3. Associate a user-selected PIN with that QR code
> 4. Create several interactions where the bracelet + PIN + a photo check
> (performed by the steward) authenticate the participant for access to
> services. Ideas for interactions:
>     a. entrance to the event
>     b. getting food
>     c. giving a talk
>     d. drink tickets
> 5. As a bit of theater:
>      a. an intake scenario of Joram at the beach, taken to UN intake
> officer, linking the participants experience to Joram
>      b. at the end, "accuse" a participant of a transgression, for which
> the history of interactions provides evidence refuting their guilt.
>
> I'm not sure how much of that is feasible given the timeframe, but if we
> can make a good pass at something like this, it would provide a catalyst
> for discussion of best practices when the subject and/or controller of a
> claim lacks the technology to manage their own keys, but does have the
> moral and legal authority to manage consent and disclosure.
>
> -j
>
> --
> Joe Andrieu, PMP
> joe@joeandrieu.com
> +1(805)705-8651 <+1%20805-705-8651>
> http://blog.joeandrieu.com
>
>
> --
> Joe Andrieu, PMP
> joe@joeandrieu.com
> +1(805)705-8651 <+1%20805-705-8651>
> http://blog.joeandrieu.com
>
>