Re: Ideals meet Implementations - Blockchains, NFTs, Decentralization, Oh My!

I think refering to one’s spouse as a delegate is going a bit far in most cases.

Similarly the Articles 17 (right to own property) and 18 (right to freedom of thought and belief) from the list do not appear to be directly related to a right to delegate either.

David Ward
581-702-8397 tel<>

This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose and is protected by law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.

From: Adrian Gropper <>
Date: Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 2:42 PM
To: Mike Prorock <>
Cc: Bob Wyman <>, W3C Credentials CG <>
Subject: Re: Ideals meet Implementations - Blockchains, NFTs, Decentralization, Oh My!
Resent-From: <>
Resent-Date: Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 2:40 PM

[EXTERNAL EMAIL] Be cautious when clicking links or opening attachments.
I'm not sure what you mean by "direct links" but perhaps the best way I can explain the human rights angle is to refer to Article 16<> that states:
Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry...

Marriage, in our context, is a legally and socially recognized right to choose a delegate (spouse), share only some of our policies with that delegate, and have that delegate recognized as acting on our behalf.

- Adrian

On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 5:06 PM Mike Prorock <<>> wrote:
In that linked post you state:
With respect to the UDHRs, I would point to
12 (privacy and confidentiality), 13 (anonymity), 14 (limit the reach of
DHS and other state actors), 17 (the right to associate with and delegate
to others), 18 (associate with and delegate to communities one chooses), 20
(association, again), 21 (secret elections), 22 (anonymity), 23 (trade
unions as delegates), 24 (burden of managing decisions in an asymmetric
power relationship with the state or with dominant private platforms), 29
(duties to and scope of the community).

I think Bob may have been asking for some direct links, as I am explicitly asking for now.  Basically [citation needed]

Mike Prorock
CTO, Founder<>

On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 4:16 PM Adrian Gropper <<>> wrote:
Yes, Bob. Here are some references to UDHR<>


On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 3:56 PM Bob Wyman <<>> wrote:
You wrote: "Burdening the user to both store and control their credential using a "holder" principle is a violation of a person's right to delegate."

Could you please explain what you mean by the "right to delegate?" Is this "right" either enumerated within or implied by some existing constitution or international document such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? While I certainly agree that there are many things that users should be able to delegate, I'm not sure how one would argue for an entitlement to delegate which is so fundamental that one would call it a "right."

bob wyman

On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 2:29 PM Adrian Gropper <<>> wrote:

Here's the beginning and the conclusion that relates to W3C SSI work:

If we do want to change our relationship to technology, I think we’d have to do it intentionally. My basic thoughts are roughly:

  1.  We should accept the premise that people will not run their own servers by designing systems that can distribute trust without having to distribute infrastructure. This means architecture that anticipates and accepts the inevitable outcome of relatively centralized client/server relationships, but uses cryptography (rather than infrastructure) to distribute trust. One of the surprising things to me about web3, despite being built on “crypto,” is how little cryptography seems to be involved!
This is also the point I've been trying to make from a human rights perspective: Burdening the user to both store and control their credential using a "holder" principle is a violation of a person's right to delegate.

It could also be counter-productive to adoption of our work, including "crypto", on standardized digital credentials. One of the places I experience this personally is when the vast majority of government agencies insist on me providing them with "Release Forms" and do not accept the documents themselves. I agree that most private verifiers do accept the documents but even they are likely to balk at redacted "presentations".

- Adrian

On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 1:34 PM Philipp Schmidt <<>> wrote:
Moxie’s piece is excellent. I also found the comparison to web 1.0 and 2.0 in Tim O’Reilly’s article useful:<>

I would like to read more thoughtful and well argued pro-web3 articles, appreciate links from this community!


On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 1:28 PM Phillip Long <<>> wrote:
Anil: Moxie is the founder of Whisper Systems, acquired back in Twitter in 2011. Later he developed Signal (the secure messaging app), etc. A similar critique of web3 was published recently by Jeff Galloway (a polarizing voice for many to be sure) at<>


Adaptive Learning Library Consultant
org: EdPlus/ASU<>

On Jan 18, 2022, at 12:06 PM, John, Anil <<>> wrote:

Given the continuous discussions around centralization/de-centralization in our community, I found this essay by Moxie Marlinspike …

My first impressions of web3<!!BClRuOV5cvtbuNI!TWHO5okUoNLRfejX8R4fouQNtXHpePRJgCEMSTTdyJyd1YeYLaovlTtxC0oRLOgLPpNr%24__%3B!!IKRxdwAv5BmarQ!IrG5_q6AE6qea1FemPCOy_y8YEw9na8etw2kGHXAB8UhTKiwV9Y0BRQlLhFxxsU%24&>

… to have aspects that have relevance to the DID/VC work.

If you don’t know who Moxie Marlinspike is, recommend doing a bit of due diligence to find out.

Best Regards,


Anil John
Technical Director, Silicon Valley Innovation Program
Science and Technology Directorate
US Department of Homeland Security
Washington, DC, USA

Email Response Time – 24 Hours


Received on Tuesday, 18 January 2022 22:55:03 UTC