Re: Verifiable Claims Charter Proposal prepped for W3M

On October 3, 2016 01:39:25 am PDT, "Timothy Holborn" <timothy.holborn@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 3 Oct 2016 at 06:28 Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 10/01/2016 07:49 AM, Timothy Holborn wrote:
>> > Human Centric is a very good means to differentiate from service
>> > centric IMHO. ie: organic living beings vs. the tools created by such
>> > parties.
> 
> The term 'sovereign' relates in-turn to 'rule of law'
> http://www.dictionary.com/browse/sovereign
> 
>> * Self sovereign is starting to catch on at places like the United
>>  Nations and Future of Identity conferences. The same isn't true for
>>  Human-centric. The tide is going in the direction of self-sovereign,
>>  so changing direction at this point would have us swimming against
>>  the tide.
> 
> well if someone can define for me the idea that a person is a law unto
> themselves, then i'll consider the concept 'self-sovereign'.


"Self-sovereignty" has become a big part of my work over the past number of years and I am starting to see it as an essential foundational building block.

IMO you must first allow every possible entity in your model the possibility to be self sovereign first. To me this means give the entity the power to model its environment and control it from its own point of view. Its a technical concept that allows you to reflect aspects of one entity in another.

IMO this is a technical foundation from which you can model everything and has nothing to do with humans in any special way.

To me, "Human-centric" means a bunch of messy restrictions changing over time on top of a fundamental self-sovereign (any and all entities can have control) technical/mathematical/crypto model.

Designing a technical system around a human center is like taking photos while jumping on a pogostick. On the other hand, designing a human centric system from an any-centric technical base model is like taking the photos with a Panono [1] and picking the ones you want based on criteria other than sharpness.

It is then, as always, up to governments and law to adopt it as they see fit. If you are trying to advance human welfare using solutions that force the categorization of human animated entities (human centric) and bind this into a technically enforced model you will never reach success as everything human is temporary and biased. Some would argue you would aid enslavement by providing only a single path.

IMO the only way forward is to design any-centric systems, thus be center agnostic, and allow new centers to establish that we cannot yet conceive of but will be better than what exists today.

Christoph

[1] - https://www.panono.com/product