6 ms·

Excellent explanation as always from Dan, and timely with the latest news from Bluesky on moving the PLC management. We picked the same DID systems for https:/

by rmccue 1y ago

Excellent explanation as always from Dan, and timely with the latest news from Bluesky on moving the PLC management. We picked the same DID systems for https://fair.pm/ https://fair.pm/ to decentralise WordPress plugin distribution (and general management for user-facing packages; think App Store rather than Cargo). The Bluesky folks (especially Bryan) were super helpful in helping us out - even shipping Ed25519 key support so we could use libsodium. (We’re designing our protocol on top of DIDs and using Bluesky’s stackable moderation, but chose not to use atproto directly - but the great thing is that DIDs are a W3C standard, and PLC isn’t tied to atproto.)

password4321 1y ago
Not gonna lie I can't resist asking for more info on who is "we" (and a link with more about the "what"), it sounds like a technical solution is coming down the pipe vs. all the WordPress drama.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- rmccue 1y ago
  “we” = group of long term contributors and core committers, including myself (I wrote the WP REST API), hosted by the Linux Foundation. (More info on the linked site; I don’t want to hijack the thread too much.)
supermatt 1y ago
> PLC isn’t tied to atproto Isn’t PLC (a did method created by bluesky) tied to bluesky (or some other central authority)? Why do they call it a did when it’s centralised? As did:plc isnt portable, why didn’t they just use did:web, and decorate the identity docs with PLC-like behaviour? Why isn’t the method-specific-id part of the did something deterministic/portable, like a hash of a public key that can at least permit some revolver-driven portability? Why didn’t they use some mechanism for decentralisation, like a DHT (e.g. did:pkarr)? It seems to me that PLC is thinly veiled attempt for another master to exert control.
- danabramov 1y ago
  I think they're saying using PLC as an identity method is not tied to buying into the whole AT spec. So you can use it for something else. >Isn’t PLC tied to bluesky (or some other central authority)? Yes, PLC is currently tied to Bluesky, and is in the process of moving out into a separate legal entity (https://docs.bsky.app/blog/plc-directory-org https://docs.bsky.app/blog/plc-directory-org). It would indeed remain centralized. >Why didn’t they use some mechanism for decentralisation, like a DHT (e.g. did:pkarr)? AFAIK Bluesky is open to supporting more did methods in atproto in the future as long as they can act as permanent identifiers. I found a response from Bryan about `did:dht` here: https://github.com/bluesky-social/atproto/discussions/2705#discussioncomment-11514233 https://github.com/bluesky-social/atproto/discussions/2705#d...: >did:dht is interesting and maybe could work, for atproto, but there have been many DHT projects in the history of decentralized computing, and only a small handful have really worked out. AKA, been resilient to abuse, attacks, neglect, etc, over years and decades. magnet links are cool but kind of the exception to the rule. I think if the W3C standardized did:dht it could be a real contender, but somebody needs to carry the flag and demonstrate it working "in real life" with millions of users, and I suspect that will be difficult, and I would not expect Bluesky to lead that charge (we already have our own pet DID method to maintain and support).
- rmccue 1y ago
  DIDs are a W3C standard, not invented by Bluesky. The PLC method specifically is currently hosted by them, but they’re working on moving it, as Dan says. The method specific ID for PLC is a hash of the genesis operation, so it’s not just an arbitrary ID that the PLC server creates.
  - supermatt 1y ago
    The PLC DID method is absolutely created by bluesky. I never said the id they use is arbitrary, I said why not use something deterministic, so it can be handled by alternate resolvers - something that is absolutely possible while still maintaining plc integrity.
    - 1y ago

by rmccue 1y ago

password4321 1y ago

Not gonna lie I can't resist asking for more info on who is "we" (and a link with more about the "what"), it sounds like a technical solution is coming down the pipe vs. all the WordPress drama.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
rmccue 1y ago
“we” = group of long term contributors and core committers, including myself (I wrote the WP REST API), hosted by the Linux Foundation. (More info on the linked site; I don’t want to hijack the thread too much.)

supermatt 1y ago

> PLC isn’t tied to atproto Isn’t PLC (a did method created by bluesky) tied to bluesky (or some other central authority)? Why do they call it a did when it’s centralised? As did:plc isnt portable, why didn’t they just use did:web, and decorate the identity docs with PLC-like behaviour? Why isn’t the method-specific-id part of the did something deterministic/portable, like a hash of a public key that can at least permit some revolver-driven portability? Why didn’t they use some mechanism for decentralisation, like a DHT (e.g. did:pkarr)? It seems to me that PLC is thinly veiled attempt for another master to exert control.

danabramov 1y ago
I think they're saying using PLC as an identity method is not tied to buying into the whole AT spec. So you can use it for something else. >Isn’t PLC tied to bluesky (or some other central authority)? Yes, PLC is currently tied to Bluesky, and is in the process of moving out into a separate legal entity (https://docs.bsky.app/blog/plc-directory-org https://docs.bsky.app/blog/plc-directory-org). It would indeed remain centralized. >Why didn’t they use some mechanism for decentralisation, like a DHT (e.g. did:pkarr)? AFAIK Bluesky is open to supporting more did methods in atproto in the future as long as they can act as permanent identifiers. I found a response from Bryan about `did:dht` here: https://github.com/bluesky-social/atproto/discussions/2705#discussioncomment-11514233 https://github.com/bluesky-social/atproto/discussions/2705#d...: >did:dht is interesting and maybe could work, for atproto, but there have been many DHT projects in the history of decentralized computing, and only a small handful have really worked out. AKA, been resilient to abuse, attacks, neglect, etc, over years and decades. magnet links are cool but kind of the exception to the rule. I think if the W3C standardized did:dht it could be a real contender, but somebody needs to carry the flag and demonstrate it working "in real life" with millions of users, and I suspect that will be difficult, and I would not expect Bluesky to lead that charge (we already have our own pet DID method to maintain and support).
rmccue 1y ago
DIDs are a W3C standard, not invented by Bluesky. The PLC method specifically is currently hosted by them, but they’re working on moving it, as Dan says. The method specific ID for PLC is a hash of the genesis operation, so it’s not just an arbitrary ID that the PLC server creates.
- supermatt 1y ago
  The PLC DID method is absolutely created by bluesky. I never said the id they use is arbitrary, I said why not use something deterministic, so it can be handled by alternate resolvers - something that is absolutely possible while still maintaining plc integrity.
  - 1y ago