https://img.inleo.io/DQmVus6viXbbvbUUrvrjEw2FMxUkrFMXyKu59ecUg9Vq6rq/microstrategy-btc.jpg
Oh look more news related to privacy.
So on the heels of Samurai devs being prosecuted... and Roger Ver... and the FBI telling everyone to KYC everything... and cooking pans being money transmitters... now we have Michael Saylor coming forward to talk about how the first thing his company is going to build on BTC is an identification system. Fascinating. It's all coming together fam.
https://img.inleo.io/DQmV8XxAVgpte1uaXTbdzDvP2YnWeptcqz1nxyXPoWMaz3B/image.png
https://microstrategy.github.io/did-btc-spec/
"The Bitcoin Inscription DID method (did:btc) uses the bitcoin blockchain exclusively to store and retrieve DID information. UTXOs on chain are used to control DIDs. Inscribing data in the witness of transactions allows for greater extensibility and verbosity when creating DID documents, while reducing fees and block space consumed."
https://img.inleo.io/DQmc2DgChrLpMR9RHJXCdEN5Z1KQdNsWCCEqJSCHsG5LqTU/image.png
Of course the concept of DID is nothing new.
The complications of such a technology are quite difficult... especially when they are built by, and cater to, centralized institutions. Microsoft has run into all kinds of problems creating DID. Remember Bluesky and former CEO of Twitter Jack Dorsey? He's got a plan for DID as well. Remember Dan Larimer and More Equal Animals & Voice Social? Same story. But what is the point?
One person one vote
While many people in crypto are going to immediately knee-jerk react to an announcement like this I like to take the more balanced and unbiased perspective. While an ID system in the hands of oppressors clearly leads to more oppression, isn't the entire point of something being "decentralized" is that the oppressors can't control it? Or perhaps this type of proposed network is simply "decentralized" in that it is a group of oppressors working toward the common goal of power. These are all things we have to pay attention to going forward; the devil is in the details.
One person one reputation.
It's not just voting. A good decentralized reputation system is the key to building a better Internet, and also just a better world. A lack of this type of reputation (especially online) is the foundation of all Sybil attack. Why is social media crawling with bots? Sybil attack. Why does every video game economy get exploited? Sybil attack. How do criminals or teens looking to buy alcohol get fake drivers licenses? Sybil attack.
In fact the very premise of the Byzantine Generals Problem and fault tolerance is rooted in reputation. Bitcoin was able to solve it with POW mining consensus. Miners play by the rules because it is in their best interest to do so. However, the scope of Bitcoin is quite narrow. The Bitcoin network having a good reputation and high security as a whole only solves a very particular problem.
What about all the other problems? How are we going to solve war, hunger, greed, minority rights, poverty, pollution, and overpopulation? Maybe them Bitcoin miners will hash out an answer? Unfortunately people are much more complex than that, and the systems we've built compound atop such complexity in this simulation of chaos.
https://img.inleo.io/DQmQoTuHnbQB4aXjAe6XYYu5896S8BPBN6wMZGeD4wQbSLj/Illustration-of-Sybil-attack.jpg
The dilemma of reputation networks.
If the rules are too strict and rigid they end up filtering out too many good candidates. If those rules are controlled by an elite few we have even bigger problems. But then if the rules are too loose and permissive the scammers move in to exploit these weaknesses where ever they can. A Wild West lawless environment is not ideal in most settings, although it can still be better than the alternative end of the spectrum. Unsurprisingly balance is a key element within this discussion.
While an identification system on Bitcoin could have its uses, I think most people are much more worried at this point of how it could be misused. Honestly though having this data on-chain is going to be expensive no matter what, so we definitely have to assume that the entire protocol is opt-in.
Users would enact DID on purpose because they want to, not because they're forced to. Of course as we all know if something like this has any success whatsoever there's nothing to stop governments from passing laws that legally coerce citizens to use it (and by that time it might be too expensive for lone citizens to use anyway). Whether they can actually enforce the law is another question entirely. After all, I've never gotten a ticket for jaywalking, downloading a song, or failing to use my left-turn blinker.
What about Hive?
Aren't we closer to solving DID than these other chuckleheads? My account @edicted has a higher reputation than my name, birthday, and social security number does. Of course it took years to cultivate my reputation here, but it still undeniably exists. As the AI revolution trudges forward everyone is collectively realizing that Sybil attack and the ability for bots to act like people is going to get exponentially harder to deal with.
The difference being of course that Hive identities are not officially connected back to names, birthdays, and social security numbers. But then again how can it be called "decentralized" if the goal is to loop what we are building back into the old broken system? I'm sure they'll find a way to spin it.
Conclusion
Michael Saylor's first move after acquiring 1% of all the BTC is to create an identification system. Bold move, sir. Bold move. And while I must admit that the topic of identity and reputation exist at the very core of society itself... well let's just say I'll believe it when I see it.
Return from MicroStrategy Decentralized ID to edicted's Web3 Blog
