W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > December 2018

Re: Ideas about DID explanation

From: Daniel Hardman <daniel.hardman@evernym.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2018 19:32:21 -0700
Message-ID: <CAFBYrUrasK+dA=3NvnF6XSTwA5aQeWFOAfxRYJvWEJ3a-OFdww@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tom Jones <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com>
Cc: Adrian Gropper <agropper@healthurl.com>, David Chadwick <D.W.Chadwick@kent.ac.uk>, W3C Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>
>
> The entire concept of block chain is the creation of technically
> non-redpudiable transactions to avoid double spending. Any structure that
> would add ambiguity to the the clear purpose of the block chain should
> (IMHO) be avoided.
>

Fine. But not all DID methods are rooted on blockchains. And even when they
are, how material got onto the blockchain in the first place, and how it is
returned from the blockchain (with or without a state proof that
demonstrates that a malicious intermediary couldn't be lying to me about
what the blockchain says), and how the blockchain is governed by its code
and/or community through forks and legal challenges, all color issues of
repudiation. I agree with Adrian that there's a complex interplay between
the tech and the courts, and that the outcome won't be something we can
describe in one tidy phrase.
Received on Thursday, 27 December 2018 02:32:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 27 December 2018 02:32:56 UTC