Re: Call for Focal DID Use Cases

On June 5, 2018 10:47:38 am PDT, "Samantha Mathews" 
<samantha@venn.agency> wrote:

> While I respect the work and effort of all of you to resist a 
> surveillance state, you’re too late and now you’re a part of the 
> problem.

That which is being done by this group is inevitable. How the work of 
this group will be leveraged commercially and by governments cannot be 
controlled or influenced by this group.

The only thing this group can do is to ensure that the technology *can 
be leveraged* by centralizing forces *as well as* decentralizing 
forces. The way I see it that is precisely the responsibility that this 
group finds itself with at this time.

The rest is up to market forces of opportunity.

Christoph


> Privacy comes after, and never before, the act of exposure. Had we 
> been having this conversation 10 years ago before our personal data 
> was sold to third parties, before sensors lined city streets and 
> movement signatures were discovered through a multitude of mediums 
> then I might agree with you. But This is not the case. Acting as 
> though it is will spiral and split us further. It has to stop and 
> I’m not going to stop until every single smart person in this group 
> agrees with me or gives me a valid reason for  telling citizens they 
> should be asking for privacy and not access to insight and a right to 
> use their data for self betterment and commercialization.
>> On Jun 5, 2018, at 10:10 AM, Steven Rowat <steven_rowat@sunshine.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2018-06-05 8:58 AM, Samantha Mathews wrote:
>>> Been enjoying reading through everyone’s user stories and use 
>>> cases. I’m struggling a bit to understand what group is working 
>>> on a solution for the individual to be in control of their own 
>>> data. ... ...snip...
>>> What could possibly be more pressing? I’m furious that terms like 
>>> Self Sovereign Identity have become your protocols and jargon. 
>>> ...snip...
>>> Is there a larger more collaborative  group besides the W3C that 
>>> deals with these overarching human crisis or are the silos created 
>>> by these very specific groups all there is?
>>
>> Hi Samantha,
>> Welcome.
>> I share your concerns, but I've been lurking here, and occasionally 
>> contributing to the discussion, since before DID, and before 
>> Verifiable Claims -- when this was "Web Payments", well over a 
>> decade.
>>
>> During that time, there have been massive changes in focus, but 
>> especially in the last three months the changes have been explosive.
>>
>> My belief is that DID is bigger than expected; it can do everything. 
>> It may be bigger than the W3C. It may need its own guiding 
>> standardizing body; one controlled by "one person, one vote", not by 
>> "one corporate/bureaucrative paid member, one vote", like the W3C.
>>
>> Yes, as you say, recently -- the last year or two -- I've seen the 
>> VC/DID central work drift towards corporate/government use-cases. 
>> But that doesn't mean that DID and VC are limited to those cases. 
>> It's been set up to deal with everything; it's been a long hard 
>> fight. I believe those capabilities have survived in the protocol so 
>> far.
>>
>> But somebody has to write the code for the private use cases. My 
>> hunch is that people are already doing that. Perhaps that's not true.
>>
>> In fact another thing, which your post has prompted me to put here, 
>> appeared recently: Microsoft is buying GitHub, where the DID/VC work 
>> (and thousands of other 'open source' projects) are being developed. 
>> Only in the last year or so has the DID/VC work been moved to GitHub.
>>
>> https://phys.org/news/2018-06-microsoft-billion-github.html
>>
>> Perhaps some other list members can clarify this more. My belief is 
>> that it doesn't matter; that the truly private-data DID systems can 
>> still be made now, and that won't change.
>>
>> But whether W3C is the best place to standardize and ensure that 
>> capability isn't subtly removed is still moot, I think.
>>
>> Steven Rowat
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 5 June 2018 18:27:42 UTC