Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Is “acceptably non-dystopian” self-sovereign identity even possible?

blog.mollywhite.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 295 posts

Re: Is “acceptably non-dystopian” self-sovereign identity even possible?

#261

Post by rcoder »

renewiltord wrote: post #61
nonrandomstring wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything you say is very reasonable until: > No one is being forced to adopt a system just because it is now possible to do it on a blockchain, and we do not need to destroy the current systems if they work well - or at least if they work better than any alternative. There will be even plenty of cases where the status quo is totally fine. which is probably true in reality, but still something I'd like to challenge.…

That's just students repeating cliches. Most kids are trying to write what they think the grading authority will reward. One can live a pure cash no internet life even in SF.

I’m not sure how one would secure stable housing or employment without a bank account, email address, etc., but if you mean “physically survive on scavenged and gifted food and water, and sleep outdoors or in temporary shelter,” then…sure, I guess?

Re: Is “acceptably non-dystopian” self-sovereign identity even possible?

#262

Post by theptip »

I find it fascinating to watch as the crypto community gradually recapitulates the evolution of the existing financial regulation/structure.

In this case, negative attestations are reimplementing liens / UCC filings (for business loans) and credit reports (for individuals). But without any plausible consumer rights recourse, of course. (Like for example your right to have errors on your credit report fixed.)

It will be interesting to see if they can use zk-SNARKs to come up with a scheme that’s substantially better here.

Another corollary of this observation is that crypto will recapitulate the evolution of privacy legislation too. As the OP notes these systems are going to struggle to comply with deletion requests under GDPR. And while many would buy the premise that financial regulations are not helpful to the public (I don’t personally buy that), I think privacy legislation is much more popular and clearly a case of hard-won consumer protection.

Re: Is “acceptably non-dystopian” self-sovereign identity even possible?

#263

Post by fartcannon »

dividedbyzero wrote: post #248
fartcannon wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The strawman here is dividebyzeros fictional people who are too dumb to use bitcoin but somehow smart enough to navigate the financial system. Crytpo bros are a PR boogeyman.

The vast majority of people are well able to have a bank account and pay for things within the existing banking system without getting fleeced (or at least only to a small degree). If you want to solve trust at scale, that'll all have to become some sort of distributed ledger or the like. Scaling this tech to the point where it can do that will pretty much certainly not make it any simpler, so you'll get intermediari…

A distributed ledger.. Like bitcoin? It's already solved! Sorry, Im struggling to understand your point. If you want people not to get fleeced, education is the key. Explain the value of bitcoin to them. Explain why it was created.

And the financial system is obscure already and actively fleeces people all the time. Bitcoin was a direct response to the 2008 financial crisis (read: fleecing). Theyd destroyed lives and got bailed out.

Re: Is “acceptably non-dystopian” self-sovereign identity even possible?

#264

Post by renewiltord »

rcoder wrote: post #261
renewiltord wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's just students repeating cliches. Most kids are trying to write what they think the grading authority will reward. One can live a pure cash no internet life even in SF.

I’m not sure how one would secure stable housing or employment without a bank account, email address, etc., but if you mean “physically survive on scavenged and gifted food and water, and sleep outdoors or in temporary shelter,” then…sure, I guess?

Currently live in stable housing via Venmo but cash in an envelope would do the trick. Don't need email.

Re: Is “acceptably non-dystopian” self-sovereign identity even possible?

#265

Post by headsoup »

fartcannon wrote: post #263
dividedbyzero wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The vast majority of people are well able to have a bank account and pay for things within the existing banking system without getting fleeced (or at least only to a small degree). If you want to solve trust at scale, that'll all have to become some sort of distributed ledger or the like. Scaling this tech to the point where it can do that will pretty much certainly not make it any simpler, so you'll get intermediari…

A distributed ledger.. Like bitcoin? It's already solved! Sorry, Im struggling to understand your point. If you want people not to get fleeced, education is the key. Explain the value of bitcoin to them. Explain why it was created. And the financial system is obscure already and actively fleeces people all the time. Bitcoin was a direct response to the 2008 financial crisis (read: fleecing). Theyd destroyed lives and…

This is a redundant argument as it applies just as well to the current financial markets: education is key.

But it's not reality, and Bitcoin opened up to fleecing at massive scale as its growth increased and middlemen services popped up to manage the 'complexity.'

Not that I'm saying the current financial system is good or not corrupted, it certainly is. Bitcoin is not the answer people think it is though.

Re: Is “acceptably non-dystopian” self-sovereign identity even possible?

#266

Post by dmitriid »

hGkXBvR wrote: post #235
dmitriid wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The whole post has a general tone of hand-waving away any decentralized idea as dystopian or a privacy nightmare, without taking any look at the current dystopian landscape of Google and Apple account based identity. If the article was about the dystopian landscape of Google/Apple, then it would've talked about that. As it is, the article talks about the current state of solutions/proposals in the crypto world. > T…

The implication of zero knowledge proofs is that no private data need be shared. The “zk-something” you and Molly both brush over translates literally to “verifying knowledge without any private information having to be shared or checked.”

Is that zk thing required by the soulbound tokens?

Ah. No. All Vitalik is saying is that you could use it, but it's not a requirement. So it's on the person/organization who's attaching that irrevocable token to not expose that information.

So yes. He is brushing this issue aside, and so do you.

Re: Is “acceptably non-dystopian” self-sovereign identity even possible?

#267

Post by rglullis »

giantrobot wrote: post #257
rglullis wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "lottery" is just a method to have the aligned incentives and secure the network. Without the miners, there would be no Blockchain. Every user of the blockchain benefits from the work from the miners. So if you have a problem with miners, you have a problem with all those that depend on them. But if you want to complain about the consumption patterns of this group, you open yourself for criticism for your consump…

> As long as you are actually paying for the electricity and energy you are consuming. For starters the price of electricity is not at all capturing all the negative externalities of generating that electricity. A miner paying a utility bill is not paying the entire cost of the energy used for mining. Second, the vast majority of "work" performed by Proof of Work schemes is literally thrown away. It has absolutely ze…

The migration to PoS is well under way. The whole path to ETH2.0 was full of setbacks and delays, but it was never vaporware as the critics would like to think.

Just this week the largest test network completed the migration successfully, despite the miners making efforts to destabilize it.

> majority of coins

You mean BTC. Well, the best way to get rid of BTC will not be by yelling at people about the energy "waste" (which again, it is not "wasted" if it fulfill its purpose securing the network, but you are free to disagree), it will be by supporting a better alternative compelling most people to migrate.

Re: Is “acceptably non-dystopian” self-sovereign identity even possible?

#268

Post by rglullis »

ookdatnog wrote: post #259
rglullis wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "how many people who had no access to trustworthy financial institutions in the past, are now actively using blockchain-based alternatives for financial services?" This is the falling for the same all-or-nothing trap that I pointed out in the very first comment. We are never going to go from "unbanked" to "banked exclusively thanks to the blockchain". What is going to happen (and is happening) is that these project…

This is besides my point. Again, I'm not asking for what these projects can mean for people in theory . We've been doing blockchain for almost 15 years, we're pumping megatons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year to feed proof of work algorithms, by now we should have something concrete to show for it. What do we have to show for it? I'm asking for concrete data, or even just some anecdotes. You list some projects a…

What do you want? For developers to go forcing others to adopt their solution? And do it against the interests of the current elites, and God forbid if VCs get involved because then obviously you are a greedy bastard who just want to exploit a fad?

Do me a favor: go check my project (https://hub20.io/about). If minimally supported, it could very well become THE system to "bank the unbanked". Afterwards go check the "Contribute" link. See how many people are supporting my work.

Re: Is “acceptably non-dystopian” self-sovereign identity even possible?

#269

Post by davidgerard »

tatertots1234 wrote: post #102
davidgerard wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"can" is doing all the work there. If it isn't please show me a SSI system that uses zksnarks in production.

Are you objecting to the cryptography and theory of ZK-SNARKs or the fact that not enough production grade applications are using this new tech to your expectations? Proving systems like Groth16 and TurboPLONK have only recently gotten to a point where they can be run in a web browser, and circuit development has come a long way with Circom 2 and now varying zkVMs being built around higher level programming languages…

The original commenter was speaking of things that you admit are in the fabulous future, and talking about them as if they exist in the present right now. And that's just a lie.

Re: Is “acceptably non-dystopian” self-sovereign identity even possible?

#270

Post by davidgerard »

tatertots1234 wrote: post #107
forum_ghost wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What SSI systems exist that are widely adopted and have a user base in at least few million MAUs?

You could consider Ethereum addresses and ENS aliases to be a limited form of SSI. MetaMask alone suggests it has several million MAUs not that this should be a metric in determining whether a tech is dystopian or not. Various web3 platforms already require verifiable attestations through signing messages with private keys such as multi sig wallets, off chain voting, token gated access.

> You could

(gong show noises)

Post reply on HN