Re: [AGENDA] W3C Credentials CG Call Tue, August 7th, 12 noon ET, 9 AM PT

Hi Christopher, Linus, All



Thanks for sharing papers and slides. I will share my thoughts on the topic of Unique Personhood before the meeting (for my own clarity and in case it may interest others). 



The Unique Personhood discussion can be divided into 2 parts: 1) Why it is needed? 2) How to get it?



The first part is more or less simple - we need Unique Personhood to have unique "Real Name" digital identities, to have accountable pseudonymous identities, to make possible the fair direct distribution of money, to enable democratic digital governance, voting. 



The second part - "How to get it?" is not that simple. In essence, it is about tying physical world to a digital one (to be more precise tying living human individuals to digital identities). This means we need Oracles – the things that look into physical world and tell digital one what is happening there. In case of Unique Personhood/Identity, it means that we need Oracles of Humans – someone or something that can look into a physical world, see a human there, confirm that they exists and link it to a digital identity (pseudonymous or not). 



Now when we have the concept of Oracles of Humans we can ask questions about them? 

Who? Who/what these Oracles of Humans might be? 

How? How they will establish Unique Personhood?

Why? Why they do it (what is the end goal of their activity)? What are their incentives (monetary wise)? What are their costs (time, energy, financial)? Why should we trust them? How are they audited? How are they accountable (do they have "skin in the game")? 

Idea of Proof of Personhood via Pseudonymous Parties suggests the below general answers to these questions:

Who? – Organizers of Pseudonymous Parties 

How? – By performing Pseudonymous Parties. 

Why? – PoPCoin? (I have not seen a clear answer to this in the papers and slides - see more questions below)



To understand the viability of this idea I'd like to clarify the below questions and issues (pardon the brief language - this is for clarity and to save time):



- who are organizers? - anyone ("common-good" Wikipedia-crowd? or crypto-speculators-crowd?), academia (PGP-crowd?), goverment representatives? How many organizers are needed for wide adoption?

- monetary and non-monetary incentives for organizers?

- corrupt organizers - who and how will check organizers? Benefits vs costs to cheat for organizers? 

- cost to organize Pseudonymous Party - per participant, part organizers?; Who will bear the cost?

- incentives of participants? (Why should people participate in PoP?)

      -- if people incentivized to participate to mint coins based on Unique Personhood, what value (in USD) will people receive for participation?

      -- if value of incentive to participate is small what incentive will be to participate for "richer" people? Is there other reasons to participate besides monetary incentive? 

      -- if main incentive to participate is monetary, the participants may face social stigma as only "poorer people" would be motivated to participate. In light of this is there "plausible deniability"  reason to participate in pseudonymous party?

- if non-monetary incentive (for organizers and participants) to enalbe accountable pseudonyms - Was this problem not solved already by reputation accumulation at a service level (for example, as you get reputation more functionality opens to you on StackOverflow, OR you do not trust recently created Twitter account with 3 followers, but you trust Twitter account (with accumulated reputation) many followers, many "valuable" tweets etc)?



Issues:

- local parties made by different communities/organizers >> different trustworthiness to different communities >> different value of local currencies/PoPCoins >> how to merge currencies from different parties?

- if we make video file of Pseudonymous Party we will not have anonymity due to face recognition, if we allow masks during Pseudonymous Parties we will open opportunity for fraud by corrupt organizers. How to fix?

- trade of PoPTokens? Any fix? (The only fix I see - tokens should be very short lived (1 day, 5 minutes) >> not possible with physical parties.)





Thanks,

Bohdan





---- On Mon, 06 Aug 2018 18:26:17 +0300 Gasser Linus <linus.gasser@epfl.ch> wrote ----




Hi Christopher,



I finally updated and slimmed down my presentation for PoP-parties. I attached the PDF to this mail:









The slides 21 and after are just there in case of questions. I plan to talk for 10-15 minutes, and then we have time for discussion. Is this OK like that?



Linus





On 5 Aug 2018, at 01:10, Christopher Allen <ChristopherA@lifewithalacrity.com> wrote:



TL;DR: Report from DWeb Summit; Proof of Personhood Discussion



NEXT MEETING:



Tuesday, August 7th, 2018

Time: 12pm Boston, 9am Pacific, 16:00 GMT

Text Chat: http://irc.w3.org/?channels=ccg

         irc://irc.w3.org:6665/#ccg

Voice: See updated instructions: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/w3c-ccg.github.io/blob/master/connecting.md

  VoIP: sip:ccg@96.89.14.196

  US phone: tel:+1.540.274.1034;6306

  EU phone: tel:+33.9.74.59.31.06;6306

We prefer people to dial in via SIP when possible.



Duration: 60 minutes



Minutes from last call: https://w3c-ccg.github.io/meetings/2018-07-24/



PROPOSED AGENDA:

IP Note: Anyone can participate in these calls. However, if you have not agreed to the groups IP policy, we cannot consider substantive contributions. (1 minute)


Queuing in IRC (2 minute)


We use IRC to queue speakers during the call as well as to take minutes


q+ to add yourself to queue (with optional reminder, e.g., “q+ DID spec needs better SEO”


If you’re not on IRC, simply ask to be put on the queue.


Please be brief so the rest of the queue get a chance to chime in. You can always q+ again.


Connections Check & Scribe Selection (3 minutes)


Scribe List: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LkqZ10z7FeV3EgMIQEJ9achEYMzy1d_2S90Q_lQ0y8M/edit?usp=sharing)


Agenda Review (2 minutes)


Introductions & Reintroductions (4 minutes) (see scribe doc for reintroduce column)


Announcements & Reminders (5 minutes)
https://w3c-ccg.github.io/announcements/

MYDATA 2018 — August 29-31 Helsinki, Finland


#RebootingWebOfTrust VII — September 26-28th, Toronto (NOTE change from 24th)


TPAC — October 23rd-26th, Lyon, France https://www.w3.org/2018/10/TPAC/


IIW — October 23rd-25th, Mountain View
http://iiw.idcommons.net

Progress on Current Action Items (5 min)
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/community/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22action+item%22

Status of Work Items (5 min)
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/community/blob/master/work_items.md

DWeb Summit Report Out (5 min)
A number our members demonstrated apps at the DWeb Summit last week https://decentralizedweb.net/ — any lessons or action items?

Proof of Personhood (25 min)


Discussion with Brian Ford and team about “Proof of Personhood”

https://www.zerobyte.io/publications/2017-BKJGGF-pop.pdf


http://ww.bford.info/log/2007/0327-PseudonymParties.pdf


Potential related materials:

https://pdos.csail.mit.edu/papers/accountable-pseudonyms-socialnets08.pdf


https://artis.eco/en/faq



Next week: Review of https://jolocom.com/ approach to decentralized digital identity, including their DID and VC implementation


— W3C-CCG Co-Chairs: Christopher Allen, Kim Hamilton Duffy & Joe Andrieu