[Kbi-webcivics] [IA - members] MyHealth Record

Thu Jul 19 11:41:48 AEST 2018

The term "self-sovereign" Comes from Christopher Allan, who has more
recently become intrinsically involved with the credentials work I helped
establish, with a few others a few years ago.

https://www.w3.org/community/credentials/2014/08/06/call-for-participation-in-credentials-community-group/

His writings are worthy of having a good look at:
http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2016/04/the-path-to-self-soverereign-identity.html.
As are the rather extensive amount of writings available on the relevant
GitHub pages.

They originally worked on a concept called "respect network" which had a
centralised username method for login. This was first worked on via oasis,
prior to the takeover of the w3 credentials work, around the time the main
person driving the work got SBIR funding with the US department of Homeland
Security.

I am not a subscriber to "self sovereign" methods, they are aware of our
differences of opinion in this area.  They are not currently "solid
compatible" or part of that stack, they have a broader different means
which is not an inforg (no point telling people everything, where the claim
may be made that those doing so, aren't meaningfully contributing ;))

The nature of human identity is different to the identifiers and related
works, somewhat formatively illustrated very well by our own Roger Clarke
whose materials I find serve as a great "reality check" resources, with
good provonance heritage to boot!

http://www.rogerclarke.com/ID/

With respect to existing catalogues of data, I think people are simply not
aware.  Whilst a movement of people seeking to live without
telecommunications / computers / database records about them (whilst
seeking to retaining personhood) might be a great experiment for TV, it's
not very practical.

More soon.

Tim.

On Thu., 19 Jul. 2018, 11:15 am Todd Hubers, <todd.hubers at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Tim,
>
> As usual, you have plenty of insightful things to say. The improvement of
> healthcare is truly a worthy goal, but not if that means dragnetting data
> against citizens. But with so much information and ideas to cover: I think
> progress would be achieved with goals and a strategy.
>
> Strategically, there is a limited amount of impact I believe we could have
> in this particular group. I would also suggest that "Privacy" alone isn't
> enough of a reason for the majority of the population, so that line of
> conversation will benefit the privacy-concerned, but won't appeal much
> broader than that.
>
> If you can summarise distinct problems in dot-point forms that would be a
> great asset. Here are some of my own to kick-start:
>
> 1. *Can a citizen "withdraw"?* - There is a lot of talk about opt-out and
> a deadline. One would think that a person's situation and beliefs are not
> static. If withdrawal is not a planned mechanism, that's very problematic.
> Actions would be: highlighting this to relevant groups to lobby for such a
> mechanism to be created.
>
> 2. *Is there a better design?* - I would think that a self-sovereign
> (SOLID?) framework would be a more direct 1:1 digital conversion. It would
> be one where you have total control over the data, and choose who can
> "view". Currently, people manually carry records (and quite a lot are sent
> digitally Org to Org directly). Actions would be: signalling the open
> source development of a self-sovereign platform, and have people opt-out,
> not because they are concerned about privacy, but because they want to
> influence the Government to evolve to the better solution.
>
> Any more high-level points?
>
> (I was involved way back with NeHTA, PHR, and other related systems. There
> is much controversy beyond an "opt-out" model. But I do hope that something
> will succeed given that over $1bn was spent on this.)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Todd
>
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 at 12:58, Timothy Holborn via members <
> members at lists.internet.org.au> wrote:
>
>> I would call it data dignity, noting in my opinion, the best person to
>> fix that is the internationally extraordinary Hon. Michael Kirby, but we'll
>> need to do some internal work prior to making best use of his time.
>>
>> On Wed., 18 Jul. 2018, 12:40 pm Ian Mann, <ianmann897 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I fully appreciate your concerns about data privacy and control. I
>>> recall in Germany in before WW2 all Jews had to register, and that
>>> registry was used later to exterminate them.
>>>
>>
>> I am sure the registries were full of all sorts of claims made by the
>> government at the time...
>>
>> The temporal process, through which "verifiable claims" are evaluated is
>> hygienic, but also a series of features that may be considered "out of
>> scope".
>>
>> It is not the job or public servants to fix that. It's the job of the
>> people to do so, in any working democracy with a functional system of
>> government.
>>
>> One might wonder how functional ours is, if reasonable considered today.
>> Do public servants understand the legal rules in which their work as agent
>> relates?  Does it not matter, as most data is governed by international
>> contract law + support for foreign affairs / law enforcement workers ..
>>
>> Do they believe reducing the available funding for civil society groups
>> will improve the results formed in their eco-chambers?
>>
>> The worst thing, in my opinion, that they did to jews in WW2 was not
>> death; it was the requirements put upon them on the basis they sought to
>> continue to live and what that did you their humanity, what was required of
>> them to decide, agreeing upon a set of human rights was a good idea.
>>
>> Even still, even today, we're defending those decisions...   Go figure.
>> It's a police prosecutors job to defend the actions of police, it is not
>> their job to uphold the law.  That's why access to lawyers is prohibitively
>> expensive, as to diminish the means for a judge, a court to hear about
>> unfairness...
>>
>> Same series of beliefs are manifesting in our health system and it'll be
>> more expensive than the cost born by way of the failures of our legal
>> systems.
>>
>> Imho & cheers,
>>
>> Tim.
>>
>> On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 at 12:36, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > It is my opinion that the manner in which someone, or group of people,
>>> store your data...
>>> >
>>> > They'll be able to review your decisions, temporally, as they've been
>>> made in past with increasingly improved resolution.
>>> >
>>> > My view is that you, or those nominated in your last will and
>>> testament, should be the people who control how this 'inforg' works.  You
>>> should not be limited as to what you can store in it, but rather, how and
>>> what others see; and whether their able to rely upon it, to make decisions
>>> that affect you and others.
>>> >
>>> > I think this is an important decision to make.  I think currently,
>>> there is very little technology services (if any)to make it.
>>> >
>>> > Facebook is default.  Government seems to be making attempts to
>>> compete, rather than redesign.  It's a marketplace problem, We need one.
>>> We need to define the rules of engagement, what "fair dealings" means, "in
>>> good faith", for the information age...
>>> >
>>> > Tim.
>>> >
>>> > On Wed., 18 Jul. 2018, 12:28 pm Ian Mann, <ianmann897 at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Yes Tim a lot of beneficial things have arrived as your introductory
>>> >> paragraph says.
>>> >>
>>> >> I am sure some not so beneficial things are there too, but on balance
>>> >> I would never wish to return to the past days even if it were
>>> >> possible.
>>> >>
>>> >> I watched a documentary called Ghost land a while ago where they took
>>> >> Kalahari Bushmen to Germany. The first part of the documentary shows
>>> >> the Bushman current life.
>>> >> Then hey go to Germany and vist their first city ever.Once our own
>>> >> ancestors lived that way I thought.
>>> >>
>>> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCfcxAbbShY
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Ian Mann
>>> Mobile 04 7859 7859
>>> International +61 4 7859 7859
>>> Home International +61 2 4873 5444
>>> 10 John Street, GOULBURN NSW 2580
>>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=10+John+Street,+GOULBURN+NSW+2580&entry=gmail&source=g>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and
>> is
>> believed to be clean. _______________________________________________
>> members mailing list
>> members at lists.internet.org.au
>> http://lists.internet.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/members
>>
>
>
> --
> --
> Todd Hubers
>

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180719/46f5507f/attachment-0001.html>