Almost 2 years ago when I created and documented the Social Evolution models for Technology Adoption, I never dreamed that I would be writing an article with the above title.
Paraphrasing, the Social Evolution model states:
A #wanderer is someone who leaves their tribe to share their knowledge and wisdom with others; to later form a party of explorers to explore and conquer a common set of goals; and, even further on, create a clan, a band, a tribe, and a tribal society, a group of people who live and work together – a group of tribes organized around kinships.
Model 2a: Social Evolution: Creation of Nation State, and
Model 2b. Social Evolution: Defining Principles.
Model 2a appears below followed by Model 2b.
Model 2a: Social Evolution: Creation of a Nation StateModel 2b: Social Evolution: Defining Principles
What I didn’t realize is that I was also defining a framework for a new political spectrum:
True decentralization/self-sovereignty on the far left
Complete authoritarian centralization on the far right
…and hence, a new Social Evolution model.
Model 2c. Social Evolution: Self-Sovereignty Political Spectrum
Is the Social Evolution model harmful? No, not at all …as long as it remains helpful in illuminating new concepts like the Self-Sovereignty Political Spectrum.
What is your self-sovereignty political affiliation? Are you:
A decentralized/self-sovereign sheep (that needs to be protected by default), or
An authoritarian centralizationist wolf (ready to devour your sheep mates)?
…or are you a centrist?
Have a great day.
“The mind once enlightened, cannot be darkened” – Thomas Paine
Self-Sovereign Identity, as a standalone phrase or as an acronym (SSI), is a very confusing, overloaded, ambiguous term whose use should be avoided in all situations[1]. In a conversation, a blog post, an article, or a standards document, it could mean any of the uncontracted terms in the following figure.
[1] The most recent example of SSI confusion is the Principles of SSI document published by the Sovrin Foundation (https://sovrin.org/principles-of-ssi/). The document makes no attempt to define SSI nor state what SSI is intended to be an acronym for. Principles of SSI has resulted in a lot of confudsion (https://hyperonomy.com/2018/12/18/definition-confuding/) in the decentralized identifier communities as different working groups try to apply the Principles in new domains without first discerning: a) precisely which definition/application of SSI should be used and b) the types or categories of principles being represented in the document. Without first having a clear and precise definition for (a), successfully achieving (b) is almost impossible.
Figure 1. SSI: Unconscious Contractions
The term Self-Sovereign Identity (or its acronym SSI) could refer to any or all of the uncontracted terms in the above figure – unless an author has taken great care to be clear and precise with respect to every occurrence/usage of the term and/or its acronym.
What is Self-Sovereign Identity (SSI)? …really
To understand, in plain English, what a Self-Sovereign Identity (SSI) is, one must first recognize that “Self-Sovereign” is an adjective applied to the noun “Identity”. The TDW Glossary derivation of Self- Sovereign Identity is depicted in the model below.
Figure 2. TDW Glossary: Digital Identity Neighborhood
Narration
Decentralized Identity is derived from (or is a specialization of) the term Digital Identity.
Self-Sovereign Identity, in turn, is derived from (or is a specialization of) the term Decentralized Identity.
In addition, Anonymous Self-Sovereign Identity and Non-anonymous Self-Sovereign Identity are derived from (or are a specialization of) the term Self-Sovereign Identity.
Key Definitions
Digital Identity
A Digital Identity aggregates:
A Digital Identifier, and
Associated Digital Identity Data.
Decentralized Identity
A Decentralized Identity is a Digital Identity that is Verifiable.
A Decentralized Identity is often persisted in a Verifiable Data Register.
Self-Sovereign Identity
A Self-Sovereign Identity is a Digital Identity whose Digital Identity Owner has the right to exclusively and permanently exert control over the usage of one or more associated Personal Digital Identifiers and, independently, the usage of any associated Personal Identity Data associated with each Personal Digital Identifier.
Because a Self-Sovereign Identity is a specialization of Decentralized Identity, a Self-Sovereign Identity is also Verifiable.
Digital Identity Owner
A Digital Identity Owner is an entity that may be held legally accountable. Digital Identity Owners includes Persons and Organizations but does not include Things. The actual legal accountability of an Identity Owner for any particular action depends on many contextual factors including the laws of the applicable jurisdiction, etc. [Sovrin Glossary]
Anonymous Self-Sovereign Identity
An Anonymous Self-Sovereign Identity is a Self-Sovereign Identity whose Personal Digital Identifier is associated with (or governed by) an Anonymous Digital Identifier Method.
Non-anonymous Self-Sovereign Identity
A Non-anonymous Self-Sovereign Identity is a Self-Sovereign Identity whose Personal Digital Identifier is associated with (or governed by) a Non-anonymous Digital Identifier Method.
Personal Digital Identifiers
A Personal Digital Identifiers is a Digital Identifier associated with a Person as the Subject of the identifier.
Personal Digital Data
Personal Digital Data is Digital Identity Data associated with a Personal Digital Identifier; and hence, a Person as the subject of the identifier.
Anonymous Digital Identifier Method
An Anonymous Digital Identifier Method is a Digital Identifier Method designed to guarantee anonymity and privacy for the Subject of a conforming Digital Identifier.
Non-anonymous Digital Identifier Method
A Non-anonymous Digital Identifier Method is a Digital Identifier Method that does not guarantee anonymity nor privacy for the Subject of a conforming Digital Identifier.
Self-Sovereign Identity Model (SSI Model)
The next most commonly (and generically) used term is Self-Sovereign Identity Model (SSI Model).
The Self-Sovereign Identity Model (SSI Model) is an identity system architecture based on the core principle that Identity Owners have the right to permanently exert control over the usage of one or more of their Personal Digital Identifiers and, independently, the usage of any associated Personal Identity Data. [inspired by the Sovrin Glossary]
PLEASE POST A COMMENT ABOUT WHY THIS PAGE IS IMPORTANT TO YOU. This particular page is 1 of my top 5 most viewed pages (ever) and I’d like to understand why. Thank you!
Ahead of schedule, the first trusted web page was delivered today on the Trusted Digital Web – end-to-end – from a Trusted Digital Web – Data Registry service to a Trusted Digital Assistant client application – using didttp: (DID Trusted Transport Protocol).
The Trusted Digital Web Communication Protocols (include ddttp:) are described in Appendix E of the Trusted Digital Web: Whitepaper.
NOTE: The Trusted Digital Web is built on top of and relies on trusted, everyday Internet protocols, services, and specifications such as DNS (Domain Name Service). If you’re unfamiliar with DNS at a technical level, checkout DNS (Domain Name Service): A Detailed, High-level Overview.
Daniel, regarding our discussion about the multi-process structuring of the Indy Ledger Node and how Anthropomorphic Design might be able to help, checkout the attached conference paper that describes a Paint application created by Eugene Fiume, a cohort of mine while we were in grad school together at the University of Waterloo. [Eugene is now Dean of Applied Sciences at Simon Fraser University.]
It’s an easy read …focus on page 279 and onwards: the concepts of Administrator, Overseer, Worker, Secretary, and Listener processes.
NOTE: The paper starts on page 277 of the proceedings. The paper is a total of 11 pages.
Supporting the development and/or existence of a clique (see above)
The tendency to associate in cliques; the spirit of cliques
#CliqueSpeak: Definition
Degrading, derogatory, and/or any type of speech that seeks to limit conversations to a select group of insiders and/or exclude outsiders from entering into existing conversations or from forming new conversations
Credentials Community Group 2018 Survey Results (March 2019 Report)
These real-life examples are provided as educational training resources with the intent that we can have less #CliqueSpeak across CCG in the future.
“…it’s not like we’re considering any of those topics for the first time.”
“We may want to limit discussion if people that are new to the work, such as yourself, insist on rehashing things that we’ve already discussed.”
“I know it will take time for you to trust that we’re trying to do the right thing for the community, Web, and Internet in general.”
“Unfortunately, trust of that level takes months to years to develop and regular interaction and demonstrating over time that we have the best interests of the community at heart is all we can do to make you believe that we’re trying to do the right thing here.”
“There are things that have strong consensus, such as dereferencing a DID gives you a DID Document.”
“It’s incredibly difficult to navigate all of that if you haven’t been a part of the community since it’s beginning…”
“There are discussions that keep coming up repeatedly that many in the community have explored multiple times and so rehashing those discussions is not useful if there is consensus on the topic.”
“We’ve been having these topical discussions for a few years now and we’re probably through most of them.”
“We need to be careful to not retread territory that we’ve already covered.”
“You are also potentially re-opening discussions that we have consensus on, so we need to be careful not to do that because if we do that, lots of decisions that were finalized end up being reopened and we’ll waste a tremendous amount of time coming back to the same conclusion we came to many months/years ago.”
Michael Herman (Toronto/Calgary/Seattle)
Hyperonomy Business Blockchain Project / Parallelspace Corporation
February 2019
At a recent #BCTechSummit HyperLedger Indy developer bootcamp event in Vancouver, I was fortunate to be part of a conversation where Sam Curren (@telegramsam) was talking to a small group of developers about the importance, over the course of history, for Internet protocols to not only be open, but more importantly, open to innovation …innovations that might succeed as well as innovations that might fail.
“If you look at important Internet protocols like TCP-IP that enable packets on a network to carry any type of data including text, email messages, web pages, etc, and, later on, streaming audio and streaming video, who could have imagined it? It’s vitally important for Internet protocols to not only be open but open to innovation …innovations that might succeed as well as innovations that might fail. No one can foretell how the specifications we’re creating today will be used in the future.” Sam Curren, March 11, 2019
Web 7.0 Pando™ / TDW AgenticOS™ / Hyperonomy™ Digital Identity Lab 