3 ms·

Definitely, we can use a government issued id, or we can create our own. Social graphs i call em. Zero knowledge proofs have so many ground breaking application

Definitely, we can use a government issued id, or we can create our own. Social graphs i call em. Zero knowledge proofs have so many ground breaking applications. I have made a comment in the past, relevant to how could a social graph be build, without the need of any government [1]. We can create effectively one million new governments to compete with existing ones. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36421679 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36421679

paulryanrogers 3y ago
Governments monopolize violence. At least at the foundational level. When too many of them compete at once it can get very messy very quickly.
- emporas 3y ago
  Let's suppose that 1 million new governments are founded, and violence still can be enforced only by the existing ones. The new governments will be in charge of ids, signatures, property ownership and reputation. Governments of Rust programmers, or Python programmers, or football players, or pool players, or truck drivers will be created. When a citizen of Rust programmers social graph uploads code, he can prove his citizenship via his id. We may not even know his name, but he can prove his citizenship. He can sign his code via his signature, even pull request in other projects. He can prove his ownership of an IT company, as it's CEO, the stock shares and what not. And he will be tied to a reputation system, so when a supply attack happens, his reputation will be tainted. Other citizens of Rust's social graph, will be able to single out the id of the developer, and future code from him will be rejected, as well as code from non-citizens. Speaking of supply chains, how about the king of supply chains of products and physical goods? By transferring products around, in a more trustworthy way, by random people tied to reputation, Amazon may get a little bit of competition ain't it? see also an older comment of mine https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38800744 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38800744
  - dotancohen 3y ago
    Government is not the correct word to use for this idea.
    - emporas 3y ago
      Allright, social graphs then. I use social graphs and e-gov interchangeably, but social graphs might be better.
thomastjeffery 3y ago
I've been thinking a lot lately about decentralized moderation. All we need to do is replace the word "moderate" with "curate". Everything else is an attestation. We don't really need a blockchain, either. Attestations can be asserted by a web of trust. Simply choose a curator (or collection of curators) to trust, and you're done.
- emporas 3y ago
  Yeah, blockchain is not needed at all. A computer savvy sheriff might do it, an official person of some kind. Or even private companies, see also "Fido alliance". Additionally the map of governments which accept Esthonian passport might be of some relevancy here[1]. [1] https://passports.io/programs/EE1 https://passports.io/programs/EE1

paulryanrogers 3y ago

Governments monopolize violence. At least at the foundational level. When too many of them compete at once it can get very messy very quickly.

emporas 3y ago
Let's suppose that 1 million new governments are founded, and violence still can be enforced only by the existing ones. The new governments will be in charge of ids, signatures, property ownership and reputation. Governments of Rust programmers, or Python programmers, or football players, or pool players, or truck drivers will be created. When a citizen of Rust programmers social graph uploads code, he can prove his citizenship via his id. We may not even know his name, but he can prove his citizenship. He can sign his code via his signature, even pull request in other projects. He can prove his ownership of an IT company, as it's CEO, the stock shares and what not. And he will be tied to a reputation system, so when a supply attack happens, his reputation will be tainted. Other citizens of Rust's social graph, will be able to single out the id of the developer, and future code from him will be rejected, as well as code from non-citizens. Speaking of supply chains, how about the king of supply chains of products and physical goods? By transferring products around, in a more trustworthy way, by random people tied to reputation, Amazon may get a little bit of competition ain't it? see also an older comment of mine https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38800744 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38800744
- dotancohen 3y ago
  Government is not the correct word to use for this idea.
  - emporas 3y ago
    Allright, social graphs then. I use social graphs and e-gov interchangeably, but social graphs might be better.

thomastjeffery 3y ago

I've been thinking a lot lately about decentralized moderation. All we need to do is replace the word "moderate" with "curate". Everything else is an attestation. We don't really need a blockchain, either. Attestations can be asserted by a web of trust. Simply choose a curator (or collection of curators) to trust, and you're done.

emporas 3y ago
Yeah, blockchain is not needed at all. A computer savvy sheriff might do it, an official person of some kind. Or even private companies, see also "Fido alliance". Additionally the map of governments which accept Esthonian passport might be of some relevancy here[1]. [1] https://passports.io/programs/EE1 https://passports.io/programs/EE1