Re: Utah State-Endorsed Digital Identity (SEDI) legislation

On Sun, Feb 15, 2026 at 2:03 PM Kyle Den Hartog <kyle@pryvit.tech> wrote:
> Everyone here seems to be arguing for points about how trust isn’t improved and this slows down EU adoption. I agree both of those are true but I see slow adoption as a feature not a bug.

Hmm, no... at least, I'm not making any predictions about speed of adoption.

I'm saying that the EU is accidentally concentrating power among Big
Tech companies and governments (by making the regulations difficult to
achieve). This will leave their citizens little choice over digital
wallets and other digital credential management software. It will also
harm small organizations from receiving stronger / more
privacy-preserving credentials for business cases that would benefit
from them. In other words, the opposite of what they're attempting to
achieve.

> Instead I argue Jevons paradox should be solved at the browser layer not the wallet layer because of this.

It sounds like you're arguing for browser vendors to be mandated to
implement "Trusted Verifier Lists" by the EU. This isn't an optional
thing in the EU, IIUC.

I'm fine with my browser warning me when I'm going to a website with a
broken/invalid TLS certificate. I am not ok with my browser preventing
me from engaging in a private transaction that I want to engage in.

Are you suggesting that browsers should not allow private
transactions? Or are you saying that browsers should warn before
engaging in a private transaction with an unknown party? If so, where
should they get their signals? For example, do verifiers, such as all
the underfunded public schools in my district, now have to pay to be
put on some list somewhere for every type of credential they could ask
for so that I can prove that I'm the parent of my kids, or live in the
school district?

-- manu

-- 
Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
https://www.digitalbazaar.com/

Received on Sunday, 15 February 2026 19:31:47 UTC