W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > June 2022

centralization dangers, difficult conversation (was: Re: Extending the co-chair election - NEW DEADLINE: 6/21/22 EOD)

From: Brent Shambaugh <brent.shambaugh@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2022 21:40:10 -0500
Message-ID: <CACvcBVptD0OiD8K5Tv-hLiXnCq3CK9Cz_X1V5R0e5p3dOjFHSw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Harrison <harrison@spokeo.com>
Cc: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>
I've thought about describing the verifiable credentials/decentralized
identity space to a podcaster that I listen to. They have a pretty large
audience, and I was surprised that they both gave out and responded to
their e-mail. There is always the danger of, and I think it may have
happened w/ID2020, of lack of civility.
Generally though, it may be good if there is discussion, as well as
awareness, to discourage misuse. I imagine misuse could tarnish the VC/DID
space so maybe I should talk to this podcaster and only talk about things I
observe publicly.

I do not want to say much more as I think there was a charter that was
passed awhile back about staying in scope.

-Brent Shambaugh

GitHub: https://github.com/bshambaugh
Website: http://bshambaugh.org/
LinkedIN: https://www.linkedin.com/in/brent-shambaugh-9b91259
Skype: brent.shambaugh
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Brent_Shambaugh
WebID: http://bshambaugh.org/foaf.rdf#me


On Sat, Jun 18, 2022 at 3:37 PM Harrison <harrison@spokeo.com> wrote:

> Thanks, Mike, Kim, Brent, Wayne, and Manu, for your kind words and
> support.
>
> Thanks, Manu, for your questions because I sincerely enjoy your email
> threads over the years.  Below are my responses:
>
> 1. What is the top short-term priority for the CCG over
>>    the next two years? What must be done?
>>
>
> I don't know yet, but I will answer it in 3 - 4 months after I assume
> the co-chair role.  I generally like to do my homework and study history
> before recommending any course of action.  I prefer "evolution" over
> "pivot" because I have deep respect for how we got here together.
>
> As an aside, I do hope to invite more people from different industries
> (ex: the data industry) and disciplines (ex: data integration and AI/ML) to
> join this group.  My impression (correct me if I am wrong) is that VC
> stemmed from information security and IAM spaces.  While VC is making
> inroads into Web3, it is still relatively unknown to other tech communities
> and the general public.  Embracing diverse viewpoints can help drive
> VC/SSI's adoption.  For example, I think data integration experts can help
> advance the Verifiable Presentation part of VC (e.g. how to aggregate and
> merge different credentials into a presentation document), and companies
> serving verifiers/searchers (which consist of the majority of
> identity-related markets by revenue today) can help commercially drive VC's
> adoption.
>
>
> 2. What difficult conversations do you believe the group
>>    has been avoiding, but must have?
>>
>
> I found the threads around "Centralization Dangers" and "Wallet Protocol
> Analysis" in March to be very good and informative, so @Manu Sporny
> <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, please continue to share your thoughts.  I
> think we need to keep building a "psychologically safe environment" where
> people feel comfortable contributing their honest opinions.  As a Google
> study has shown, psychological safety (not the number of Master's degrees)
> is the key to building a high-performing team.
>
>
> 3. What is the biggest threat to society that DIDs/VCs
>>    will unleash (or cause it to fail) and how might we
>>    start working to prevent that from happening?
>>
>
> I believe in the "Middle Way", and I think we should avoid extremism or
> maximalism because good solutions need proper contexts.  I think VC will be
> the predominant identity model in the future, but I don't think it will be
> the panacea for everything.  For example, in anti-money laundering and
> criminal investigations, I don't think a holder-centric model will work
> because the data subject (assuming the data subject is the holder) will try
> to hide or fake their true identities.  Just like distributed ledger
> technologies has not (and will not) kill existing database technologies
> (e.g. SQL, NoSQL, Columnar, Graph databases), we should keep an open mind
> about everything and study the problem before dictating the solution.
>
>
>
>> 4. How will you prevent us from turning into a cringe-y
>>    cult that drinks its own Koolaid? Metaphorically
>>    speaking of course. :P
>>
>
> I think "Openness to Experience <https://hexaco.org/scaledescriptions>"
> (using HEXACO personality trait terminology) is the attitude we need to
> avoid becoming a cult.  Truth is inherently high-dimensionals (e.g. beyond
> x, y, z, and time), so we should avoid fixating on one or two facets when
> the truth can manifest itself in multiple perspectives.
>
>
> Please feel free to agree or disagree on any of my comments above, and
> please feel free to ask more questions.
>
> Sincerely,
> Harrison
>
>
>
>
>> -- manu
>>
>> --
>> Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/
>> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
>> News: Digital Bazaar Announces New Case Studies (2021)
>> https://www.digitalbazaar.com/
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> *Harrison Tang*
> CEO
>  LinkedIn  <https://www.linkedin.com/in/theceodad/> •   Instagram
> <https://www.instagram.com/spokeo/> •   Facebook
> <https://www.facebook.com/TheCEODad>
>
Received on Sunday, 19 June 2022 02:40:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Sunday, 19 June 2022 02:40:39 UTC