3 ms·

I always try to distinguish between decentralization of infrastructure and decentralization of control. I think the former is very difficult to achieve, but th

by ryan29 3y ago

I always try to distinguish between decentralization of infrastructure and decentralization of control. I think the former is very difficult to achieve, but that’s ok because the latter is by far the more important of the two. As long as I can (technically) take my domain based handle and move to another host I’ll be thrilled. I also hope it’s not a fad because I think it’s a huge win for users, especially small businesses. I wonder how they handle dropped domains that are re-registered.

bnewbold 3y ago
dropped domains will be a bit of a UX problem. the human root of identity is the handle (memorable/recognizable), but the real identity root for the account is a DID. which is a pretty open/wild spec, so we mostly use did:plc ("placeholder"), which is a self-authenticating tricky tricky. withing the protocol and applications, everything under the hood works via DID references, not handle references. a domain handle works by pointing at a DID, but does not control the actual DID ("DID document"). so any old users/followers/href will still be attached to the "old account". and it would be possible for the old account to recovery and set up a new handle. but the superficial bits (anchor text), and human identity for new lookups, are attached to the handle, and could get pointed to a new DID, or just not resolve. that would be messy.
- ryan29 3y ago
  So the domain is a mutable pointer to an immutable DID? That’s pretty much how I’d do it too [1]. Very cool! 1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32755618 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32755618
- ryan29 3y ago
  I’ve been thinking about this a bit more. What happens if the server operator bans a DID? Does that ban the DID across the whole network via federation? What if I run my own server? Does that make me un-bannable? Is there even such a thing as DID bans or is everything handled via moderation and filtering? I’m guessing impersonation would still be an issue even if domain based handles solve most of the impersonation problem.

by ryan29 3y ago

bnewbold 3y ago

dropped domains will be a bit of a UX problem. the human root of identity is the handle (memorable/recognizable), but the real identity root for the account is a DID. which is a pretty open/wild spec, so we mostly use did:plc ("placeholder"), which is a self-authenticating tricky tricky. withing the protocol and applications, everything under the hood works via DID references, not handle references. a domain handle works by pointing at a DID, but does not control the actual DID ("DID document"). so any old users/followers/href will still be attached to the "old account". and it would be possible for the old account to recovery and set up a new handle. but the superficial bits (anchor text), and human identity for new lookups, are attached to the handle, and could get pointed to a new DID, or just not resolve. that would be messy.

ryan29 3y ago
So the domain is a mutable pointer to an immutable DID? That’s pretty much how I’d do it too [1]. Very cool! 1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32755618 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32755618
ryan29 3y ago
I’ve been thinking about this a bit more. What happens if the server operator bans a DID? Does that ban the DID across the whole network via federation? What if I run my own server? Does that make me un-bannable? Is there even such a thing as DID bans or is everything handled via moderation and filtering? I’m guessing impersonation would still be an issue even if domain based handles solve most of the impersonation problem.