4 ms·
That's a good point, and I hope nobody is taking the position in this thread that someone has legal rights just because a digital signature matched. Unless the
by sowbug 8y ago
That's a good point, and I hope nobody is taking the position in this thread that someone has legal rights just because a digital signature matched. Unless the legal body grants that privilege, the match has no meaning.
A decentralized solution removes the question who maintains a centralized database. That's important because, as you say, the answer to that question has always been the state. Which means it's never really been a question.
If you're cool with the government owning your identity -- and truly having the power to erase your entire existence, so they're not denying you any rights because there is no "you" -- then it doesn't matter. But for some people, it might matter to be able to point to something other than the mirror and say "I exist, and not just because I say I do. This matters because [this entity] is taking actions that are inconsistent with my existence and implied rights."
It's a small step, but it's one that opens up options that don't exist today.
- nrclark 8y agoA decentralized solution still needs to be hosted by _somebody_. Where is it expected to live? On the PCs of Rohingya refugees?
- sowbug 8y agoI don't know. Maybe on a Raspberry Pi running on your bookshelf and the bookshelves of 1,000 more people around the world. We wouldn't have that choice if it were centralized.
- GenericsMotors 8y agoAnd when you've got this network of RPis running, the Myanmar government simply says "Nope we don't recognize those individuals as citizens. But thanks for compiling a convenient persona non grata list for us!"