DIDs and University Use Cases (was Re: Seeking to update Decentralized Identity related slides)

Good idea Snorre; this is how we usually do it. (just subject rename)

David: you've considered the issuer side; now think about the recipient
side.

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 10:36 AM Snorre Lothar von Gohren Edwin <
snorre@diwala.io> wrote:

> Can someone explain to me what the procedure of taking this to another
> thread is?
> I would like to answer David, but to not clutter up the current reason.
> It might be a good discussion to exactly why DIDs are needed in this use
> case.
> It was once again just an answer directly to me so I would like to create
> a new thread or discussion arena on it.
> Transparency for the win 🎉
>
> "No – just trying to understand.
>
> I would think there are a lot of ways to fix this including:
>
> 1)     A webpage with a digital pub key for the university that can be
> used to look up a transcript (password given to user)
>
> 2)     Digital signature over the transcript
>
> A quick note – it appears the university of Illinois is doing 2), sent at
> the request of the student to the place they have asked.
>
>
>
> DiDs don’t seem to be required. (U of I isn’t using them).
>
>
>
> Why does the admin have to take 6 months every time they get the piece of
> paper with the shiny stickers? I assume that fraud is a real problem in
> this country, and phones don’t work for some reason (call the university
> and ask if the GPA/ major, and a few other things on the doc are correct),
> but this still seems really excessive.
>
>
>
> I do know of cases where people got a job saying they had a degree they
> did not have – but I just assumed that HR didn’t do due diligence."
>
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 7:00 PM Snorre Lothar von Gohren Edwin <
> snorre@diwala.io> wrote:
>
>> Are you deliberately just responding to me David? Let me know and I will
>> stop reply to all. But i think this is important information for everybody,
>> based on the discussion.
>>
>> "So if they have computers, why does it take 6 months to respond to a
>> request for a transcript?
>>
>> Do they have computers, but no printers?"
>>
>>
>> So the procedure in that country is that it is not allowed to just print
>> a transcript. That is because they want high trust. There have been many
>> fraud attempts, and this is the schools reputation.
>>
>> What takes time is the administrative to acctually go through the process
>> of getting that special piece of paper with the watermarks, and shiny
>> stickers, because that created trust.
>>
>> So, since all have mobiles, and there are computers, how can you verify
>> something that creates trust, without having to go via the physical world?
>>
>> I think this sounds like a case for DID and VC`s?
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 6:44 PM Snorre Lothar von Gohren Edwin <
>> snorre@diwala.io> wrote:
>>
>>> I would like to include in the collaborative discussion this answer:
>>>
>>> "So if it takes 6 months to get a transcript, I think there is a
>>> different and very big problem to work on.  And DiDs probably won’t help in
>>> this case (How long do you think it would take to get computers set up in
>>> this school?)"
>>>
>>> My response to this is that, yes there are different root problems that
>>> need to be worked on, but assuming they dont have computers, is ignorant.
>>> They are mobile first country, they use less cash than whats going on in
>>> the USA.
>>> They are ready for a leapfrog of trusted tech to be able to build up
>>> their infrastructure in a more digital way.
>>> We are currently working in that country and see a massive readiness to
>>> adopt this technology.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 6:07 PM Kevin O'Brien <kevin@kiva.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Having previously worked for a large university system, specifically on
>>>> their transcript system, I can say that at least California state schools
>>>> have no real interest in running their own transcript services. We also
>>>> certainly didn't make money off of the transcripts.
>>>>
>>>> So, I think the transcript example is appropriate, although how much of
>>>> a problem it is a fair question worth asking. As well, convincing said
>>>> schools to do things in a new way would be a difficult challenge to
>>>> overcome and the value proposition at the current point in time would be
>>>> unlikely to be valuable enough to try such an endeavor. But through the
>>>> work of folks like people such as yourselves I imagine it will get there
>>>> some day :)
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 8:55 AM, Kim Hamilton Duffy <
>>>> kim@learningmachine.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> David Challener: those are common misconceptions. Re administrative
>>>>> paperwork fees — that is negligible and just meant to cover the costs.
>>>>>
>>>>> As to angry alumni, I’ll skip to the punchline. Learning Machine has
>>>>> university customers who think of these as features that delight their
>>>>> alumni.
>>>>>
>>>>> P.s. it’s the education clearing houses that won’t like it
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 7:57 AM Snorre Lothar von Gohren Edwin <
>>>>> snorre@diwala.io> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> If you look at the world in whole, there is a problem.
>>>>>> In Kamapala, Uganda some schools take 6 months to get transcripts to
>>>>>> the user.
>>>>>> What about Syria, what if the school is acctually bombed and you
>>>>>> can't get a new transcript. Then a digital version of it with signatures
>>>>>> from an earlier existed school is very powerfull, with the possibility to
>>>>>> add news about what happened to the school.
>>>>>> Is all these crazy techniques of watermark and other fancy paper
>>>>>> uniquness the way we want to continue?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 4:25 PM Challener, David C. <
>>>>>> David.Challener@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don’t like this use case because I don’t think it is really viable.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The university will not want to be disintermediated from its alumni.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The university will not want to make its alumni angry.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The university will not want to give up the money they make when
>>>>>>> they give out transcripts.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I just checked the U. of Ill. Technique and it is really easy to get
>>>>>>> a transcript, so it isn’t clear there is a problem that needs to be solved
>>>>>>> here anyway.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *From:* Kim Hamilton Duffy <kim@learningmachine.com>
>>>>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 07, 2018 1:36 AM
>>>>>>> *To:* Moses Ma <moses.ma@futurelabconsulting.com>
>>>>>>> *Cc:* Stephen Curran <swcurran@cloudcompass.ca>; Markus Sabadello <
>>>>>>> markus@danubetech.com>; Public-Credentials <
>>>>>>> public-credentials@w3.org>
>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: Seeking to update Decentralized Identity related
>>>>>>> slides
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> About the DID value proposition, I think it is an easier sell in the
>>>>>>> edu space because people accept certain things as axiomatic and this line
>>>>>>> of reasoning (almost) always conveys it:
>>>>>>> 1. You earned the degree, credential, etc. It should be shareable
>>>>>>> and verifiable for your lifetime. There are some special cases (fraud,
>>>>>>> mistakes) that require revocation, and some training requires
>>>>>>> expiration/renewal, but in general people are primed to expect lifelong
>>>>>>> ownership.
>>>>>>> 2. The common verification processes have clear inefficiencies, and
>>>>>>> ...(varying description for lay audiences) ... cryptographic techniques help
>>>>>>> 3. If you buy into #2, long term key management is clearly a
>>>>>>> pressing problem
>>>>>>> 4. DIDs -> key lifecycle is a first class citizen
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Some of our working examples (drivers licenses, claims associated
>>>>>>> with a social security numbers) don’t prime people with this frame of mind.
>>>>>>> To Moses’s point, if we lead with examples like ID cards, our typical
>>>>>>> business audiences think everything is fine except for when (seemingly
>>>>>>> rare) bad incidents happen, e.g. equifax, personal identity theft. This
>>>>>>> “when bad things happen” angle is often perceived as creating problems that
>>>>>>> don’t exist, that apply to other people, or generally something that can be
>>>>>>> put off. I’d imagine that getting audience-specific metrics is the only
>>>>>>> convincing way forward.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 10:01 AM Moses Ma <
>>>>>>> moses.ma@futurelabconsulting.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Stephen et al,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I’m an “innovation coach” and what I usually tell my clients or
>>>>>>> audience is that the key to radical innovation is to look for something
>>>>>>> that everyone sees as working just fine... but is actually broken. There is
>>>>>>> no better  example of this phenomena than Internet identity, which is truly
>>>>>>> broken, but everyone (but us DID revolutionaries) sees as situation normal.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This corresponds with my slide titled “The Internet is Broken (and
>>>>>>> it’s not Kim Kardashian’s fault)”
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The slides that follow propose that this is actually one of the the
>>>>>>> greatest opportunity spaces in decades for blue ocean innovation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That usually gets the attention of enterprise customers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Moses
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Moses Ma | FutureLab Consulting Inc*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> moses@ngenven.com |moses.ma@futurelabconsulting.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *v* +1.415.952.7888 <(415)%20952-7888> | *m*+1.415.568.1068
>>>>>>> <(415)%20568-1068> | *skype* mosesma
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *blog & social media: *my blog at psychologytoday.com
>>>>>>> <http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-tao-innovation> | linkedin
>>>>>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/mosesma> | facebook
>>>>>>> <http://www.facebook.com/moses.t.ma> | twitter
>>>>>>> <http://twitter.com/mosesma>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2018 at 9:42 AM, <Stephen Curran
>>>>>>> <swcurran@cloudcompass.ca>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For an audience relatively new to the space, or for a less technical
>>>>>>> audience, I start with the business/online existence problems people face
>>>>>>> to ground the discussion. I did the Hyperledger Indy chapter for an edX
>>>>>>> course and tried to start with DIDs and then to VCs and found it very
>>>>>>> difficult to get to the "why this matters" point. Once I changed to start
>>>>>>> with the business problem and how the use of DIDs and especially VCs
>>>>>>> addressed the problems (and more), the understanding and importance was
>>>>>>> grasped. At least I think it was :-).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Stephen Curran*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cloud Compass Computing, Inc (C3I)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> P: Cell: 250-857-1096
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> W: http://cloudcompass.ca
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Nov 5 2018, at 10:46 pm, Markus Sabadello <markus@danubetech.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On the technology/architecture side, when I do talks I usually start
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> with DIDs, and then mention VCs after that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I find DIDs and why they are needed as a basis for everything else
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> rather easy to explain. But I also feel that explaining SSI = DIDs +
>>>>>>> VCs
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> is a very simplified summary of what we're doing, and much more work
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> will be needed on data models, protocols, etc. We're only at the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> beginning of building that architecture consisting not only of DIDs +
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> VCs, but also DID Auth, agents, hubs, personal clouds, petnames,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> capabilities, key management, ZKPs, and more.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "DIDs Unique Selling Proposition" looks like an interesting CCG
>>>>>>> agenda item.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks for sharing your slides, that's great and I also plan to
>>>>>>> re-use
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> some of them in upcoming events!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Did they record your talk in Zurich?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Markus
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 11/6/18 12:54 AM, Christopher Allen wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thank you everyone for sharing your slides! Very helpful, though
>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> were many good ideas elsewhere I was unable to puzzle how to fit in.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Next time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I did succeed in updating a lot of the terminology for my talk
>>>>>>> tonight
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> in Zurich to the latest language & integrated at least a few of the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> better approaches from others that I felt were more effective than my
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> own. Also, many thanks to Joe & Markus who reviewed over the weekend
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> an early draft.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> New to this talk is I explicitly separate the Ideology from the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Architecture, and each could potentially stand alone. I agree with
>>>>>>> Joe
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> that using the term “movement” rather than ideology is likely better,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> but I didn’t change it as the title of talk was already advertised
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (and I think I’d need new images).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I received a lot of positive feedback here in Switzerland on the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ideology part of the talk, but it still needs work. In particular I
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> felt Kaliya’s social context recursive triad definition of identity
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> leads better into DIDs than Joe’s functional identity definition. I
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> like aspects of both but wasn’t able to integrate them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Architecture section is weaker. I tried to explain why we focused
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> on DIDs first, but it wasn’t as easy a coherent story to tell. Best
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I’ve done to date, but feel I lost even some of my tech audience
>>>>>>> there.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The story connection from DID Docs to VCs was particularly weak. Some
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> tell the story VC first/DIDs second, and I can see why, but right now
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the DID story is more important. We know decentralized is important
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> but we are not yet effective is saying why yet.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A lot of stuff is missing in section on future work: not sure how to
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> present things like pair-wise DIDs & selective disclosure when only
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> one party plans to implement it. I work hard in my talks to be as
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> impartial/agnostic to blockchains and avoid single vendor specific
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> solutions as I can.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My final slides from last night are at:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/15M0tdSS1dRMVdJdVgBlFap8JwiuFdvocZ0AAu7c1eBk
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I welcome comments, improvements, re-usage, etc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> — Christopher Allen
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kim Hamilton Duffy
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> CTO & Principal Architect Learning Machine
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Co-chair W3C Credentials Community Group
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> kim@learningmachine.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Snorre Lothar von Gohren Edwin*
>>>>>> Co-Founder & CTO, Diwala
>>>>>> +47 411 611  <+47%20404%2061%20926>94
>>>>>> www.diwala.io
>>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Kim Hamilton Duffy
>>>>> CTO & Principal Architect Learning Machine
>>>>> Co-chair W3C Credentials Community Group
>>>>>
>>>>> kim@learningmachine.com
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>> *Snorre Lothar von Gohren Edwin*
>>> Co-Founder & CTO, Diwala
>>> +47 411 611  <+47%20404%2061%20926>94
>>> www.diwala.io
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> *Snorre Lothar von Gohren Edwin*
>> Co-Founder & CTO, Diwala
>> +47 411 611  <+47%20404%2061%20926>94
>> www.diwala.io
>>
>
>
> --
>
>
> *Snorre Lothar von Gohren Edwin*
> Co-Founder & CTO, Diwala
> +47 411 611  <+47%20404%2061%20926>94
> www.diwala.io
>
-- 
Kim Hamilton Duffy
CTO & Principal Architect Learning Machine
Co-chair W3C Credentials Community Group

kim@learningmachine.com