Re: Trust in Issuers

On 5/8/19 12:05 AM, Carlos Bruguera wrote:
> The important is that the model /allows/ full decentralization and 
> self-sovereignty, but it cannot be enforced IMO. Just enabling the 
> possibility, though, is pretty powerful.

Enthusiastic +1 to this. Yes, we can nitpick at what "full
decentralization" means and what "self-sovereignty" means in the
sentence above, but I think that misses the overarching point.

The point is that we currently lack alternatives and the most basic
thing that we should do to change the status quo is produce viable
alternatives (DIDs, VCs, "portable" storage that we control). This
method of thinking has been deeply influential in how, at least my,
contributions to the specifications have been written.

> I always like to quote Mr. Buckminster Fuller on this, because I 
> think he's pretty spot on with regard to how disruption works:
> 
> /“You never change things by fighting the existing reality... To 
> change something, build a new model that makes the existing model 
> obsolete.” /

One of my favourites as well... sounds like you and I have some
previously undiscovered philosophical roots in common, Carlos! Thrilled
that you're contributing to the conversation around all of this. :)

-- manu

PS: I'm also a huge fan of the "adjacent possible"[1] as a way of
thinking of how we build the future we want via this group.

[1]https://medium.com/@SeloSlav/what-is-the-adjacent-possible-17680e4d1198

-- 
Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: Veres One Decentralized Identifier Blockchain Launches
https://tinyurl.com/veres-one-launches

Received on Wednesday, 8 May 2019 16:14:58 UTC