Nick: cooperative voting (one member one vote) is one of our key needs ✪
<juancaballero> @ChrisA sorry, I didn't follow the reference to a WG or event. do you have a link for the PoP stuff?
<christophera> I'll start
<angus_mcleod> Definitely interested in that group Christopher, if you could invite email@example.com and firstname.lastname@example.org
Topic: Wyoming's approach to digital identity
<manu> s/[name lost]/Clare Sullivan/
Christopher: we've been tustling around our technology and property law, and intellectual property law. as a tech community we've avoided terms that would confuse the domain. we have not had a good answer on the law side ✪
<christophera> “Personal digital identity” means the intangible digital representation of, by and for a natural person, over which he has principal authority and through which he intentionally communicates or acts.
<manu_sporny> The "reasons" were we had a huge ranked choice vote on it and the term "holder" was what we could agree to at the time. :P
Agropper: your innovation was to switch from property law to agency law. a question (buried in old CCG/SSI work) regards the label the subject of the identity as the holder instead of controller. relabel? ✪
<tallted> well... It's often possible to effectively share one's identity ("here, Horace, use my passcard to get the thing from my office"), which is typically done where it's not possible to provide specific delegation (e.g., adjust systems to permit *their* passcard to open your door). Sharing one's passcard is obviously problematic (e.g., as it makes it appear that *you*, not Horace, went through that door), but very common.
Christopher: never intended the SSI principles to be more than a starting point for a conversation. changes possible given sufficient consensus. a recent paper incorporated the principles in a list with more. it may be time for a new generation of principles. we jsut didn't want to say, five years ago, "owner". ✪
<bobwyman> If anyone wants to talk about did:tag, I would be pleased to do so during this afternoon's CCG Information DIscussion meeting.
Angus: also a laywer and id thesis on philosophy of law. we're talking here about a relationship of rights. ✪
<kerri_lemoie> I'd be interested in a workshop(s) on the SSI principles and moving them to next generation.
<kerri_lemoie> In education we struggle with "ownership" of ed data. Many have agreed that ownership belongs to the issuer but access/persistence belongs to individual.
Clare: difference is between US and Australian law ✪
<bobwyman> But, are they "natural rights" or rights delegated by states?
<kerri_lemoie> Can we cover this topic more regularly?
Dazza: thing to keep an eye on is [lost details and] that this doesn't foreclose property viewpoints ✪
<tallted> "... unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness ..." and digital identity
Christopher: request for CCG is to look at privacy violations as a coercion of authority ✪