Re: [AGENDA] W3C Credentials CG Call Tue, August 7th, 12 noon ET, 9 AM PT

Hi Bohdan,

Thank you very much for the mail. Here some replies:

> Now when we have the concept of Oracles of Humans we can ask questions about them?
> Who? Who/what these Oracles of Humans might be?
> How? How they will establish Unique Personhood?
> Why? Why they do it (what is the end goal of their activity)? What are their incentives (monetary wise)? What are their costs (time, energy, financial)? Why should we trust them? How are they audited? How are they accountable (do they have "skin in the game")?
> Idea of Proof of Personhood via Pseudonymous Parties suggests the below general answers to these questions:
> Who? – Organizers of Pseudonymous Parties
> How? – By performing Pseudonymous Parties.
> Why? – PoPCoin? (I have not seen a clear answer to this in the papers and slides - see more questions below)
Incentives: getting PoP-coins that can be traded and used in services like paying, tweeting (pay for others to read your rambling), mining in blockchains and getting mining rewards
Cost: renting a room
Trust: any trust system, as long as you trust one organiser, you’re OK
Audited: observers during the party film the whole setup and will put their videos online

> - who are organizers? - anyone ("common-good" Wikipedia-crowd? or crypto-speculators-crowd?), academia (PGP-crowd?), goverment representatives? How many organizers are needed for wide adoption?

We think of starting with one group of organisers that are the core, trusted organisers, and then starting to onboard other organisers by checking their videos from the parties they organised.

> - monetary and non-monetary incentives for organizers?
> - corrupt organizers - who and how will check organizers? Benefits vs costs to cheat for organizers?

Check through videos, and the fact that all organisers need to agree on the list of attendees.

> - cost to organize Pseudonymous Party - per participant, part organizers?; Who will bear the cost?

For participants, it’s the travel to get to the next party, for the organisers, it is getting a room ready.

> - incentives of participants? (Why should people participate in PoP?)
>       -- if people incentivized to participate to mint coins based on Unique Personhood, what value (in USD) will people receive for participation?

Value will be defined by the market.

>       -- if value of incentive to participate is small what incentive will be to participate for "richer" people? Is there other reasons to participate besides monetary incentive?

Services like pop-enabled twitter, voting or other services where anonymous proof of individuality is needed.

>       -- if main incentive to participate is monetary, the participants may face social stigma as only "poorer people" would be motivated to participate. In light of this is there "plausible deniability"  reason to participate in pseudonymous party?

Every participant has the possibility to dress up and mask himself. The control if somebody already had his public key scanned or not is done by scanning people’s public key as they go out and by not allowing anybody back in.

> - if non-monetary incentive (for organizers and participants) to enalbe accountable pseudonyms - Was this problem not solved already by reputation accumulation at a service level (for example, as you get reputation more functionality opens to you on StackOverflow, OR you do not trust recently created Twitter account with 3 followers, but you trust Twitter account (with accumulated reputation) many followers, many "valuable" tweets etc)?

Reputation accumulation can also be sybil-attacked by people who set up a lot of accounts and the cross-vote for their accounts to be ‘good’.

> Issues:
> - local parties made by different communities/organizers >> different trustworthiness to different communities >> different value of local currencies/PoPCoins >> how to merge currencies from different parties?
> - if we make video file of Pseudonymous Party we will not have anonymity due to face recognition, if we allow masks during Pseudonymous Parties we will open opportunity for fraud by corrupt organizers. How to fix?

As describe above: people are allowed to dress up, mask, …, and they are controlled by not letting anybody back in once their public key has been scanned.

> - trade of PoPTokens? Any fix? (The only fix I see - tokens should be very short lived (1 day, 5 minutes) >> not possible with physical parties.)

A pop-token by itself is the private key of the attendee. So if an attendee wants to trade his token, he gives away any incentive he might have from his token.
However, a pop-token can sign a message and create a tag that stays the same within a given context:

Vote (context A):
Alice signs her vote and produces tag(Alice, context A)
Bob signs his vote and produces tag(Bob, context A)
Alice signs again her vote and produces tag(Alice, context A), which is recognised by the voting service to have already voted

Editing (context B)
Alice edits something and signs her edit and produces a tag (Alice, contextB), which is different from tag(Alice, context B), and cannot be tracked

Does that explain some of your questions?

Linus

> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Bohdan
> 
> 
> ---- On Mon, 06 Aug 2018 18:26:17 +0300 Gasser Linus <linus.gasser@epfl.ch> wrote ----
> 
> Hi Christopher,
> 
> I finally updated and slimmed down my presentation for PoP-parties. I attached the PDF to this mail:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The slides 21 and after are just there in case of questions. I plan to talk for 10-15 minutes, and then we have time for discussion. Is this OK like that?
> 
> Linus
> 
> 
> On 5 Aug 2018, at 01:10, Christopher Allen <ChristopherA@lifewithalacrity.com <mailto:ChristopherA@lifewithalacrity.com>> wrote:
> 
> TL;DR: Report from DWeb Summit; Proof of Personhood Discussion
> 
> NEXT MEETING:
> 
> Tuesday, August 7th, 2018
> Time: 12pm Boston, 9am Pacific, 16:00 GMT
> Text Chat: http://irc.w3.org/?channels=ccg <http://irc.w3.org/?channels=ccg>
>          irc://irc.w3.org:6665/#ccg <http://irc.w3.org:6665/#ccg>
> Voice: See updated instructions: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/w3c-ccg.github.io/blob/master/connecting.md <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/w3c-ccg.github.io/blob/master/connecting.md>
>   VoIP: sip:ccg@96.89.14.196 <http://mailto:sip%3Accg@96.89.14.196/>
>   US phone: tel:+1.540.274.1034;6306 <>
>   EU phone: tel:+33.9.74.59.31.06;6306 <>
> We prefer people to dial in via SIP when possible.
> 
> Duration: 60 minutes
> 
> Minutes from last call: https://w3c-ccg.github.io/meetings/2018-07-24/ <https://w3c-ccg.github.io/meetings/2018-07-24/>
> 
> PROPOSED AGENDA:
> IP Note: Anyone can participate in these calls. However, if you have not agreed to the groups IP policy, we cannot consider substantive contributions. (1 minute)
> Queuing in IRC (2 minute)
> We use IRC to queue speakers during the call as well as to take minutes
> q+ to add yourself to queue (with optional reminder, e.g., “q+ DID spec needs better SEO”
> If you’re not on IRC, simply ask to be put on the queue.
> Please be brief so the rest of the queue get a chance to chime in. You can always q+ again.
> Connections Check & Scribe Selection (3 minutes)
> Scribe List: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LkqZ10z7FeV3EgMIQEJ9achEYMzy1d_2S90Q_lQ0y8M/edit?usp=sharing <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LkqZ10z7FeV3EgMIQEJ9achEYMzy1d_2S90Q_lQ0y8M/edit?usp=sharing>)
> Agenda Review (2 minutes)
> Introductions & Reintroductions (4 minutes) (see scribe doc for reintroduce column)
> Announcements & Reminders (5 minutes)
> https://w3c-ccg.github.io/announcements/ <https://w3c-ccg.github.io/announcements/>
> MYDATA 2018 — August 29-31 Helsinki, Finland
> #RebootingWebOfTrust VII — September 26-28th, Toronto (NOTE change from 24th)
> TPAC — October 23rd-26th, Lyon, France https://www.w3.org/2018/10/TPAC/ <https://www.w3.org/2018/10/TPAC/>
> IIW — October 23rd-25th, Mountain View
> http://iiw.idcommons.net <http://iiw.idcommons.net/>
> Progress on Current Action Items (5 min)
> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/community/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22action+item%22 <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/community/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22action+item%22>
> Status of Work Items (5 min)
> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/community/blob/master/work_items.md <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/community/blob/master/work_items.md>
> DWeb Summit Report Out (5 min)
> A number our members demonstrated apps at the DWeb Summit last week https://decentralizedweb.net/ <https://decentralizedweb.net/> — any lessons or action items?
> Proof of Personhood (25 min)
> Discussion with Brian Ford and team about “Proof of Personhood”
> https://www.zerobyte.io/publications/2017-BKJGGF-pop.pdf <https://www.zerobyte.io/publications/2017-BKJGGF-pop.pdf>
> http://ww.bford.info/log/2007/0327-PseudonymParties.pdf <http://ww.bford.info/log/2007/0327-PseudonymParties.pdf>
> Potential related materials:
> https://pdos.csail.mit.edu/papers/accountable-pseudonyms-socialnets08.pdf <https://pdos.csail.mit.edu/papers/accountable-pseudonyms-socialnets08.pdf>
> https://artis.eco/en/faq <https://artis.eco/en/faq>
> 
> Next week: Review of https://jolocom.com/ <https://jolocom.com/> approach to decentralized digital identity, including their DID and VC implementation
> 
> — W3C-CCG Co-Chairs: Christopher Allen, Kim Hamilton Duffy & Joe Andrieu
> 
> 
>