Can You Have Universal Id for All without a Token?

Can You Have Universal ID for All Without A Token?

Thursday 22A

Convener: Jeff Aresty, Nicky Hickman, & Phil Windley

Notes-taker(s): Phil Windley, Jeff Aresty, & Nicky Hickman

Tags for the session - technology discussed/ideas considered:

Discussion notes, key understandings, outstanding questions, observations, and, if appropriate to this discussion: action items, next steps:

Phil started with these slides:

Grace Rachmany: “That kind of token (an anti-spam token) would have to be integrated with a reputation. So if you are identified as a spammer, you'd have to pay me a lot of token to get my attention whereas if you are a reputable expert, I might have to pay you in order to get your messages. 
The problem with pure attention tokens is that they go to the higher bidder -- and then you just end up with The New Google.”

The next slides were from Jeff Aresty.

Note: not all slides are being captured (some go by too fast).

Jeff’s conclusion: ultimately, a project like this needs funding, and the token might help with this.

Next Nicky Hickman talked about “Universal SSI Service”.

Zoom Chat Transcript

3:33:18 From Grace Rachmany : I have tokens in my background

23:33:46 From dsearls : I like those tokens!

23:35:41 From Drummond Reed : The only change I would make is to add “things”

23:36:24 From Nicky Hickman : It's from the website

23:39:51 From Nicky Hickman : Guardianship is really essential if you want a properly self-sovereign identity system

23:40:10 From Juan Caballero : +1

23:40:31 From Darrell : +100 Nicky - Guardianship is foundational

23:40:35 From Grace Rachmany : It makes me a little queasy when I hear the "universal for all" slogan. It feels like that something "for all" will inevitably end up centralized.

23:41:26 From Nicky Hickman : Definitely not - Universal relates to basic Universal Service, like telco or electricity, or as in your talk earlier @Grace, universal basic housing & food

23:42:33 From Grace Rachmany : Universal electricity and telco are not provided by one organization

23:42:41 From Nicky Hickman : no

23:42:52 From Nicky Hickman : so not centralized

23:43:27 From Drummond Reed : +++1 to not centralized. It’s not self-sovereign if its centralized.

23:43:42 From Darrell : Speed bump : meaning anti-spam

23:44:10 From rouven : How would the token be able to help with GDRP issues?

23:45:23 From Grace Rachmany : Is a dedicated token essential or just nice to have? Could another digital cash form be used.

23:46:22 From Vic Cooper : I would like to see a token for attention - as in pay me to look at your message, accept your connection, etc.

23:46:35 From Drummond Reed : +1

23:46:40 From Nicky Hickman : love it @ Vic, I call this 'identity work'

23:47:48 From Grace Rachmany : @Vic That kind of token would have to be integrated with a reputation. So if you are identified as a spammer, you'd have to pay me a lot of token to get my attention whereas if you are a reputable expert, I might have to pay you in order to get your messages

23:48:17 From Grace Rachmany : The problem with pure attention tokens is that they go to the higher bidder -- and then you just end up with The New Google

23:49:05 From Vic Cooper : This would be helpful in the cases where someone I don’t know wants to connect with me. Fixes the problem with email-type spam. There is email spam because sending email is basically free

23:49:34 From Juan Caballero : I have heard some buzz about attention tokens-- didn't Brave integrate a token?

23:49:34 From Richard Esplin : @Grace when using a different form of digital cash, you have to figure out the on-ramps and off-ramps while avoiding introducing a 3rd party who could erode privacy.

23:49:38 From Vic Cooper : Good point @Grace

23:49:59 From Richard Esplin : A native ledger token simplifies that.

23:50:07 From Vic Cooper : Brave uses the BAT or Basic Attention Token

23:50:41 From rouven : Q: Does the token change in the network of network model?

23:51:20 From Juan Caballero : ^ This is what I came to hear about! Please ask that at the end :D

23:52:27 From Vic Cooper : The other great use for a token would be as a way to reward early adopters and stimulate network effects for the Sovrin network. But there are legal challenges

23:53:30 From Juan Caballero : @Vic, the media/journalists I know are super supportive of the Brave model and hoping to see it amplified/scaled! Then again, they might just be desperate for any business model other than paywalls :D

23:53:38 From rouven : ok, thx Phil

23:54:26 From Grace Rachmany : It's interesting to think about pricing for digital goods. Nominal cost of digital goods is pretty much zero-- so there's a concern about the constantly decreasing real value of any type of digital service.

23:56:05 From windley : Although credentials might represent physical goods. An airline boarding pass, for example, is a digital artifact, but it doesn’t represent a digital good. It represents the authority to board a flight on a certain day to a particular destination . 00:00:28 From Grace Rachmany : Right, but unless you are flying RyanAir and you don't have a printer in your hotel, you don't pay for the actual ticket. You pay for the right to fly and the ticket/credential is a QR code that has no extra cost associated with it.

00:00:55 From rouven : @Richard - don’t you still need on/off ramps even for a native token?

00:02:01 From windley : Right, but it represents the thing you paid for. You could imagine paying for your flight in tokens and what you get is the boarding pass as a credential.

00:03:36 From rouven : yeah, if it’s about a write access that could work. But the combination of different use-cases with the same token make it hard… peer 2 peer payment, or payment for a credential vs. a write access

00:04:09 From rouven : if it’s a fungible token with a certain value -> just a normal payment token -> could be just a usd token

00:04:34 From rouven : and a voucher for people who cannot afford it - and someone else would pay for handing out the vouchers

00:04:50 From Grace Rachmany : I can imagine paying for my flight in anything fungible. All I'm saying is that the long-term viability of a token is based on the long-term value of that token. What I'm question is the long-term value of something that is a digital good. As Jeffrey just said, look at that musician. He produces a digital good and the nominal value of the reproduction of that music is nothing, and the guy doesn't have two nickels to rub together.

00:05:09 From Darrell : @rouven- you can also replace “can’t afford” with “can’t be seen to use” as well.

00:05:26 From rouven : if people would ‘invest’ into the token -> there usually is an expectation for returns. otherwise - it could be just a donation?!

00:06:18 From rouven : @darrell - and how could the token solve this compared to a voucher, or someone donating a usd token?

00:08:51 From windley to Nicky Hickman(Privately) : Rouven and I have been having this argument for two years. I don’t think we’re going to resolve it here.

00:08:56 From Darrell : I'

00:09:12 From Richard Esplin : @rouven With a native token, it's easier to build on ramps that don't undermine privacy (you can buy from the network itself). Off ramps only matter if you need liquidity.

00:09:17 From Darrell : @rouven - just saying “I can’t be seen to use” is similar to “can’t afford”

00:09:19 From Nicky Hickman to windley(Privately) : I see - he seems to be missing the point that there are two ways of using the token 00:09:36 From rouven : Developing value in a refugee camp or so are interesting concepts. But how would this model of local economy tokens with the one Sovrin token?

00:09:49 From Nicky Hickman to windley(Privately) : Darrell hits on this important point about tokens masking exclusion 00:09:53 From rouven : > you can buy from the network itself

00:10:11 From rouven : Richard -> buy from the network? From a steward?

00:10:35 From Grace Rachmany : Money and value are not equivalent.

00:10:37 From rouven : Stewards could just ‘sell’ USD tokens against a credit card payment :)

00:10:41 From Nicky Hickman : I think he means 'network' of people @ rouven

00:10:53 From Richard Esplin : @rouven There are various models. I don't know what the Sovrin network would choose.

00:13:25 From windley : @rouven, using single-use credential for value transfer is definitely an interesting model. But I don’t think that removes the utility of on-network value exchange. If nothing else, it simplifies use case development by providing a single, well-known API for value transfer that use case developers can depend on without having to solve the problem on their own. The other benefit is finality (the value and credential exchange occur simultaneously).

00:13:27 From rouven : + 1 value not money. But isn’t the topic here the Sovrin token - which is expected to have monetary value … ?

00:15:19 From rouven : @phil - onchain value transfers can be very beneficial. just could also be a stabletoken representing a currency :) 00:15:42 From windley : Sure. No argument there.

00:16:37 From windley to Nicky Hickman(Privately) : I think you ought to start on the universal service discussion or we’ll run out of time (15 minutes left) 00:16:55 From Nicky Hickman to windley(Privately) : sure let's do that

00:19:08 From rouven : Could someone share the ideas about scaling the token transactions to use it for payments? What are the plans around privacy aspect using a UTXO model for the token transfers?

00:19:58 From rouven : ^^ it’s late, not sure the question made sense. Basically thoughts on scaling and privacy? :)

00:22:48 From Adrian Gropper : Yes! Like clean water protects all of us.

00:23:32 From Adrian Gropper : Like Aadhaar but better

00:25:08 From Drummond Reed : +1

00:26:21 From Juan Caballero : should we use the yes/no buttons?

00:26:24 From Juan Caballero : to poll?

00:26:35 From Grace Rachmany : I understand we are supposed to raise our hand or say +1 or show our video to show our hands. 00:26:49 From rouven : next to the ‘raise hands’ -> we could use ‘yes’ or ‘no’

00:27:05 From Grace Rachmany : we can?

00:27:09 From Juan Caballero : @Gihan: like "gas" or "usage fees" (for admin functions)

00:27:14 From Nicky Hickman : of course yes/no sounds good

00:27:20 From Grace Rachmany : Oh yeah, there is one of those. Let's do yes/no

00:27:38 From Grace Rachmany : That would align with my goal of using at least 1 new Zoom feature per day!

00:27:54 From Adrian Gropper : +1

00:27:58 From rouven : A token will also create extra friction :)

00:28:09 From Nicky Hickman : happy to help with your learner passport @Grace :-)

00:28:27 From Grace Rachmany : #rourven, you just gave the idea, use the buttons!

00:28:27 From Drummond Reed : Ironically, the real work wallets we use today we use for two things: 1) credentials, 2) money 00:28:34 From Drummond Reed : “world”

00:29:38 From Nicky Hickman : we have also considered that there are some basic digital identity credentials that are essential for everyone e.g. birth notification

00:30:43 From windley : @rouven only if it’s the only allowed option