- From: Steven Rowat <steven_rowat@sunshine.net>
- Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 18:48:15 -0700
- To: Eric Korb <eric.korb@truecred.com>
- Cc: Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>
On 6/23/16 2:57 PM, Eric Korb wrote: > See inline response > On Jun 22, 2016 1:40 PM, "Steven Rowat" <steven_rowat@sunshine.net > <mailto:steven_rowat@sunshine.net>> wrote: >> Yes, this is the core of the issue, but I think your example doesn't > adequately represent pseudonymous use-cases, even in the past. In > commercial publishing, pseudonyms have been important and have had > major social effects; there are many historic authors (journalists, > whistleblowers, fiction authors, musicians) that have used their > publisher as the person who could open a bank account for them when > they were using a pseudonym. This allows them to say things that > aren't linked to their private, local, legal identity. >> >> And this capability allows them to tell the truth to society as a > whole, when otherwise they couldn't (or wouldn't, because of the > danger to themselves or their immediate family or friends). >> >> I see this as an interesting possible use-case for the VC working > group: to try to figure out if it is technically possible for authors > of all kinds to issue various credentials about the underlying > 'entity' (their legal self), while retaining this historic capability > of the author to be pseudonymous and be paid -- whether they are > 'self' publishing online or not. >> >> Steven > I believe the use of a DID would satisfy this Use Case. > > Eric > That sounds promising. Could you expand on how this would work a little more? I assume DID means 'data identifier'. You can assume I know nothing else about how it would work apart from that fact. ;-) Steven
Received on Friday, 24 June 2016 01:48:55 UTC