Identity is insecure, labor-intensive, and local.https://twitter.com/weltergeist/status/1034184853741166592 …
-
No. The identity biz is like micropayments, a bunch of lemmings year after year pursuing the same failed projects and unachievable goals of the prior ones, never learning from the failures, never pursuing the alternative Bitcoin did of not requiring identity in the first place.
First-come first-serve names have a ton of problems (as we are seeing with http://bitcoin.com etc.), making them insecure for many purposes, but they can be sufficient for social networks, and secured by blockchain title (something more lightweight might also be sufficient)
![Giacomo Zucco [I identify as a -e^iπ vampire]](https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1172971162919415813/Pn8O2gkx_normal.jpg)
-
-
Maybe. But what I just described is a pseudonym, subject to Sybil attacks, it's way overselling it to call it an "identity".
-
Tweet unavailable
-
DIDs are not subject to this issue, as they are not intended to be friendly identifiers that are visually/inherently associated with any meat space person, org, entity, or noun: https://w3c-ccg.github.io/did-spec/
-
We, and other groups working in the community, believe that DIDs are a critical foundation for digital, self-owned identity. Unlike other constructs, DIDs acquire and maintain status through globally available, voluntarily signed (and revoked) relationship and factual assertions.
-
Tweet unavailable
-
Yes, we believe any noun can be represented by a DID, and that nouns gain provenance/standing based on verifiable relationships with other nouns the relying party (or broader network) has vetted, verified, and associated.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.