revise and publish rethinking identity
This commit is contained in:
parent
8be44e7c32
commit
23dcdb1d85
@ -7,22 +7,23 @@ description: >-
|
||||
|
||||
In my view, the major social media platforms (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram,
|
||||
etc...) are broken. They worked well at small scales, but billions of people are
|
||||
now exposed to them and [Murphy's Law][murphy] has come into effect. The weak
|
||||
now exposed to them, and [Murphy's Law][murphy] has come into effect. The weak
|
||||
points in the platforms have been found and exploited, to the point where
|
||||
they're barely usable for interacting with anyone you don't already know in
|
||||
person.
|
||||
|
||||
[murphy]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murphy%27s_law
|
||||
|
||||
But social media is a powerful tool that humans have developed, and it's not one
|
||||
to be thrown away lightly (if it can be thrown away at all). It's worthwhile to
|
||||
try and fix it. So that's what this post is about.
|
||||
On the other hand, social media, at its core, is a powerful tool that humans
|
||||
have developed, and it's not one to be thrown away lightly (if it can be thrown
|
||||
away at all). It's worthwhile to try and fix it. So that's what this post is
|
||||
about.
|
||||
|
||||
A lot of moaning and groaning has already been done on how social media is toxic
|
||||
for the average person. But the average person isn't doing anything more than
|
||||
receiving and reacting to their environment. If that environment is toxic, the
|
||||
person in it becomes so as well. It's certainly possible to filter the toxicity
|
||||
out, and use a platform to your own benefit, but it takes work on the user's
|
||||
out, and use a platform to your own benefit, but that takes work on the user's
|
||||
part. It would be nice to think that people will do more than follow the path of
|
||||
least resistance, but at scale that's simply not how reality is, and people
|
||||
shouldn't be expected to do that work.
|
||||
@ -32,18 +33,18 @@ what a non-toxic platform would look like.
|
||||
|
||||
The ideal definition for social media is to give people a place to socialize
|
||||
with friends, family, and the rest of the world. Defining "socialize" is tricky,
|
||||
and probably an exercise only a socially awkward computer nerd who doesn't do
|
||||
enough socializing would undertake, but "expressing one's feelings, knowledge,
|
||||
and experiences to other people, and receiving theirs in turn" feels like a good
|
||||
and probably an exercise only a socially awkward person who doesn't do enough
|
||||
socializing would undertake. "Expressing one's feelings, knowledge, and
|
||||
experiences to other people, and receiving theirs in turn" feels like a good
|
||||
approximation. A platform where true socializing was the only activity would be
|
||||
ideal.
|
||||
|
||||
Here are some trends on our social media which have nothing to do with
|
||||
socializing: artificially boosted follower numbers on instagram to obtain
|
||||
product sponsors, shills in reddit comments boosting a product or company,
|
||||
russian trolls on twitter spreading propaganda, trolls everywhere being dicks
|
||||
socializing: artificially boosted follower numbers on Instagram to obtain
|
||||
product sponsors, shills in Reddit comments boosting a product or company,
|
||||
russian trolls on Twitter spreading propaganda, trolls everywhere being dicks
|
||||
and switching IPs when they get banned, and [that basketball president whose
|
||||
wife used burner twitter accounts to trash talk players][president].
|
||||
wife used burner Twitter accounts to trash talk players][president].
|
||||
|
||||
[president]: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/07/sports/bryan-colangelo-sixers-wife.html
|
||||
|
||||
@ -68,7 +69,7 @@ fundamental than that.
|
||||
|
||||
In the context of online platforms, where a user creates an account which
|
||||
identifies them in some way, identity breaks down into 3 distinct problems
|
||||
which are often conflated.
|
||||
which are often conflated:
|
||||
|
||||
* Authentication: Is this identity owned by this person?
|
||||
* Differentiation: Is this identity unique to this person?
|
||||
@ -77,7 +78,7 @@ which are often conflated.
|
||||
For internet platform developers, authentication has been given the full focus.
|
||||
Blog posts, articles, guides, and services abound which deal with properly
|
||||
hashing and checking passwords, two factor authentication, proper account
|
||||
recovery procedure, etc... While authentication is not 100% a solved problem,
|
||||
recovery procedure, etc... While authentication is not a 100% solved problem,
|
||||
it's had the most work done on it, and the problems which this post deals with
|
||||
are not affected by it.
|
||||
|
||||
@ -89,10 +90,10 @@ I want to make very clear, once more, that I am _not_ in favor of de-anonymizing
|
||||
the web, and doing so is not what I'm proposing.
|
||||
|
||||
Differentiation is without a doubt the most difficult identity problem to solve.
|
||||
It's not even clear that it's solvable offline. Take this situation: You are in
|
||||
a room, and you are told that one person is going to walk in with you, leave,
|
||||
then another person will do the same. These two persons may or may not be the
|
||||
same person. You're allowed to do anything you like to each person (with their
|
||||
It's not even clear that it's solvable offline. Take this situation: you are in
|
||||
a room, and you are told that one person is going to walk in, then leave, then
|
||||
another person will do the same. These two persons may or may not be the same
|
||||
person. You're allowed to do anything you like to each person (with their
|
||||
consent) in order to determine if they are the same person or not.
|
||||
|
||||
For the vast, vast majority of cases you can simply look with your eyeballs and
|
||||
@ -101,15 +102,15 @@ Identical twins are an obvious example of two persons looking like one, but a
|
||||
malicious actor with a disguise might be one person posing as two. Biometrics
|
||||
like fingerprints, iris scanning, and DNA testing fail for many reasons (the
|
||||
identical twin case being one). You could attempt to give the first a unique
|
||||
marking on their skin, but who's to say they don't have a solvent which can
|
||||
clean that marking waiting right outside the door?
|
||||
marking on their skin, but who's to say they don't have a solvent, which can
|
||||
clean that marking off, waiting right outside the door?
|
||||
|
||||
The solutions and refutations can continue on pedantically for some time, but
|
||||
the point is there is not likely a 100% solution, and even the 90% solutions
|
||||
require significant investment. Differentiation is a hard problem, which most
|
||||
developers don't want to solve. Most are fine with surrogates like checking that
|
||||
an email or phone number is unique to the platform, but these aren't enough to
|
||||
stop a dedicated individual or organization.
|
||||
the point is that there is likely not a 100% solution, and even the 90%
|
||||
solutions require significant investment. Differentiation is a hard problem,
|
||||
which most developers don't want to solve. Most are fine with surrogates like
|
||||
checking that an email or phone number is unique to the platform, but these
|
||||
aren't enough to stop a dedicated individual or organization.
|
||||
|
||||
### Roll Your Own Differentiation
|
||||
|
||||
@ -131,74 +132,82 @@ proper solution, it might look something like this:
|
||||
|
||||
* A dedicated support team would be needed to handle edge-cases and mistakes.
|
||||
|
||||
None of these is trivial to implement correctly, and not one I'd trust to an
|
||||
up-and-coming platform which is being bootstrapped out of a basement.
|
||||
None of these is trivial, nor would I trust an up-and-coming platform which is
|
||||
being bootstrapped out of a basement to implement any of them correctly.
|
||||
Additionally, going through with this process would be a _giant_ point of
|
||||
friction for a user creating a new account; they likely would go use a different
|
||||
platform which didn't have all this nonsense required instead.
|
||||
platform instead, which didn't have all this nonsense required.
|
||||
|
||||
### Differentiation as a Service
|
||||
|
||||
This is the crux of this post.
|
||||
|
||||
Instead each platform rolling their own differentiation, what if there was a
|
||||
Instead of each platform rolling their own differentiation, what if there was a
|
||||
service for it. Users would still have to go through the hassle described above,
|
||||
but only once forever. Then platforms, no matter what stage of development
|
||||
they're at, could use that service to ensure their community of users is free
|
||||
from the problems of fake accounts and trolls.
|
||||
but only once forever, and on a more trustable site. Then platforms, no matter
|
||||
what stage of development they're at, could use that service to ensure that
|
||||
their community of users is free from the problems of fake accounts and trolls.
|
||||
|
||||
This is what the service would look like:
|
||||
|
||||
* A user would have to, at some point, have gone through the steps above to
|
||||
create an account on the differentiation-as-a-service (DaaS) platform. This
|
||||
account would have the normal authentication mechanisms that most platforms
|
||||
do.
|
||||
do (password, two-factor, etc...).
|
||||
|
||||
* When creating an account on a new platform, the user would login to their DaaS
|
||||
account (similar to the common "login with Google/Facebook/Twitter" buttons).
|
||||
|
||||
* The DaaS then returns an opaque token, an effectively random string, to the
|
||||
platform, which uniquely identifies that user. The platform can then check in
|
||||
* The DaaS then returns an opaque token, an effectively random string which
|
||||
uniquely identifies that user, to the platform. The platform can then check in
|
||||
its own user database for any other users using that token, and know if the
|
||||
user already has an account. All of this happens without any identifying
|
||||
information being passed to the platform.
|
||||
|
||||
Similar to how many sites outsource to Cloudflare to handle DDoS protection,
|
||||
which is better handled en masse by people familiar with the problem, the DaaS
|
||||
allows for outsourcing the problem of differentiation. And actually, since the
|
||||
DaaS also handles authentication, a platform could outsource almost all of
|
||||
identity management.
|
||||
allows for outsourcing the problem of differentiation. Users are more likely to
|
||||
trust an established DaaS service than a random website they're signing up for.
|
||||
And signing up for a DaaS is a one-time event, so if enough platforms are using
|
||||
the DaaS it could become worthwhile for them to do so.
|
||||
|
||||
Finally, since the DaaS also handles authentication, a platform could outsource
|
||||
that aspect of identity management to it as well. This is optional for the
|
||||
platform, but for smaller platforms which are just starting up it might be
|
||||
worthwhile to save that development time.
|
||||
|
||||
### Traits of a Successful DaaS
|
||||
|
||||
It's possible for me to imagine a world where use of DaaS' is common, but
|
||||
bridging the gap between that world and this one is not as obvious. Still, I
|
||||
think it's necessary if interaction on the net is to ever evolve passed being a
|
||||
home for trolls. There are a number of traits of a DaaS trying to make it which
|
||||
would aid it in being accepted by the internet.
|
||||
think it's necessary if the internet is to ever evolve passed being, primarily,
|
||||
a home for trolls. There are a number of traits of an up-and-coming DaaS which
|
||||
would aid it in being accepted by the internet:
|
||||
|
||||
* **Patience**: there is a critical mass of users and platforms using DaaS's
|
||||
* **Patience**: there is a critical mass of users and platforms using DaaS'
|
||||
where it becomes more advantageous for platforms to use the DaaS than not.
|
||||
Until then, the DaaS and platforms using it need to take deliberate but small
|
||||
steps. Making DaaS usage optional for platform users, and giving their
|
||||
accounts special marks to indicate they're "authentic" (like Twitter's blue
|
||||
checkmark); giving those users' activity higher weight in algorithms; allowing
|
||||
others to filter activity of non-"authentic" users; etc... These are all
|
||||
preliminary steps which can be taken which encourage but don't require
|
||||
steps. For example: making DaaS usage optional for platform users, and giving
|
||||
their accounts special marks to indicate they're "authentic" (like Twitter's
|
||||
blue checkmark); giving those users' activity higher weight in algorithms;
|
||||
allowing others to filter out activity of non-"authentic" users; etc... These
|
||||
are all preliminary steps which can be taken which encourage but don't require
|
||||
platform users to use a DaaS.
|
||||
|
||||
* **User-friendly**: most likely the platforms using a DaaS are what are going
|
||||
to be paying the bills. A successful DaaS will need to remember that, no
|
||||
matter where the money comes from; if the users aren't happy they'll stop
|
||||
matter where the money comes from, if the users aren't happy they'll stop
|
||||
using the DaaS, and platforms will be forced to switch to a different one or
|
||||
stop using them altogether. In that same vein, competition is important, and
|
||||
so...
|
||||
stop using them altogether. User-friendliness means more than a nice
|
||||
interface; it means actually caring for the users' interests, taking their
|
||||
privacy and security seriously, and in all other aspects being on their side.
|
||||
In that same vein, competition is important, and so...
|
||||
|
||||
* **No country/government affiliation**: If the DaaS was to be run by a
|
||||
government agency it would have no incentive to provide a good user
|
||||
experience, since the users aren't paying the bills (they might not even be in
|
||||
that country). A DaaS shouldn't be exclusive to any one government or country
|
||||
anyway. Perhaps it starts in that way, to get off the ground, but ultimately
|
||||
anyway. Perhaps it starts out that way, to get off the ground, but ultimately
|
||||
the internet is a global institution, and is healthiest when it's connecting
|
||||
individuals _around the world_. A successful DaaS will reach beyond borders
|
||||
and try to connect everyone.
|
||||
@ -232,9 +241,9 @@ use-case could also be implemented:
|
||||
This is a tricky situation. It adds a lot of liablity for the user, since their
|
||||
raw data will be stored with the DaaS, ripe for hacking. It also places a lot of
|
||||
trust with the DaaS to be responsible with users' data and not go giving it out
|
||||
willy-nilly to platforms, and instead to only give out the bare-minimum that
|
||||
the user allows. Since the user is not the DaaS's direct customer, this might be
|
||||
too much to ask. Nevertheless, it's a use-case which is worth thinking about.
|
||||
willy-nilly to others, and instead to only give out the bare-minimum that the
|
||||
user allows. Since the user is not the DaaS' direct customer, this might be too
|
||||
much to ask. Nevertheless, it's a use-case which is worth thinking about.
|
||||
|
||||
## Dapps
|
||||
|
||||
@ -243,29 +252,30 @@ While not mainstream yet, I think they have potential, and it's necessary to
|
||||
discuss how a DaaS would operate in a world where the internet is no longer
|
||||
hosted in central datacenters.
|
||||
|
||||
Consider an Ethereum-based dapp. If a DaaS user were to register with their
|
||||
account one ethereum address (which are really public keys), the
|
||||
following use-case could be implemented:
|
||||
Consider an Ethereum-based dapp. If a user were to register one ethereum address
|
||||
(which are really public keys) with their DaaS account, the following use-case
|
||||
could be implemented:
|
||||
|
||||
* A charity dapp has an ethereum contract, which receives a call from an
|
||||
ethereum address asking for money. The dapp wants to ensure every person it
|
||||
sends money to hasn't received any that day.
|
||||
|
||||
* The DaaS has a separate ethereum contract it manages, where it stores all
|
||||
addresses which have been registered to a user.
|
||||
addresses which have been registered to a user. There is no need to keep any
|
||||
other user information in the contract.
|
||||
|
||||
* The charity dapp's contract calls the DaaS' contract, asking it if the address
|
||||
is one of its addresses. If so, and if the charity contract hasn't given to
|
||||
that address yet today, it can give that address money.
|
||||
that address yet today, it can send money to that address.
|
||||
|
||||
There would perhaps need to be some mechanism by which a user could change their
|
||||
address, which would be complex since that address might be in use by a dapp
|
||||
already, but it would likely be do-able.
|
||||
already, but it's likely a solvable problem.
|
||||
|
||||
A charity dapp is a bit of a silly example; ideally with a charity dapp there'd
|
||||
also be some mechanism to ensure a person actually _needs_ the money. But
|
||||
there's other dapp ideas which would greatly benefit from some insurance that
|
||||
they are not being abused.
|
||||
there's other dapp ideas which would become feasible, due to the inability of a
|
||||
person to impersonate many people, if DaaS use becomes normal.
|
||||
|
||||
## Why Did I Write This?
|
||||
|
||||
@ -273,10 +283,10 @@ Perhaps you've gotten this far and are asking: "Clearly you've thought about
|
||||
this a lot, why don't you make this yourself and make some phat stacks of cash
|
||||
with a startup?" The answer is that this project would need to be started and
|
||||
run by serious people, who can be dedicated and thorough and responsible. I'm
|
||||
not sure I'm one of those people, I get distracted easily. But I would like to
|
||||
not sure I'm one of those people; I get distracted easily. But I would like to
|
||||
see this idea tried, and so I've written this up thinking maybe someone else
|
||||
would take the reins.
|
||||
|
||||
I'm not asking for equity or anything if you want to try, it's a free idea for
|
||||
I'm not asking for equity or anything, if you want to try; it's a free idea for
|
||||
the taking. But if it turns out to be a bazillion dollar Good Idea™, I won't say
|
||||
no to a donation.
|
||||
no to a donation...
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user