The Values Project
This was one of the first documents produced, and likely needs to be comprehensively updated - given the importance of this project.
An artifact from an old project that has continued to provide me something to refer to when feeling lost about the problems that seem to be inexorable, is this short video, which was produced with the help of Thomas Keneally who wrote the words; and i had the opportunity to ensure was playing on the Public Screens in Perth for CHOGM that year, an event that does in-turn relate to The Commonwealth Charter.
Whilst my experiences lead me to consider the fictional nature of how the sentiments connect to the realities and lived experiences of my / our Australian people (understanding that there are problems in all regions of the world, not simply Australia); I have found it useful to refer to the sentiments expressed as an example of the sorts of things that we should be striving to make true; which is the fundamental purpose of The Values Project.
Through the applied use of technology in a particular sort of way, the statements made; both, by the media clips provided below and the underlying instuments, laws and values that they in-turn refer to - can be made far more real for people, who want SafetyProtocols.
The Australian Way from AusCivics on Vimeo.
UK: Provides a 2 minute explaination of Human Rights.
USA: one of the best American examples i've found is this 5:45 video presenting the terms of the UDHR.
Fundamentally - one of the primary objecties in the short-term is to define ValuesCredentials as is required to ensure the WebizenTechStack supports the critical requirements illustrated by various topics relating to SocialFactors and in-particular, providing means to support the growth of CommercialModels particularly therein via the WorkProject.
NOTE ALSO:
Background
I was involved in the creation of works within W3C communities that became advanced towards an outcome commonly known as ‘SSI’. There are many areas of great concern, it is reasonable to note - I'm not very happy… Regardless of these concerns & any merit that may exist for alternative approaches; the reality is, that these components are now globally implemented, with increasing market-pressures to deploy / employ them, world-wide.
Whilst a future project might seek to accomplish a similar task using a related, yet (thought to be) distinct method; producing infrastructure to support the needs of humanity on this ‘SSI platform’ - is likely to mitigate issues that already exist, without proper consideration; and provide a means for markets to consider the implications of ‘features’ it doesn’t easily support today. The downside is, that there’s a probability it will also advance commercialisation; however when weighing up the factors relating to the situation, it is thought that the commercialisation is not going to slow-down, so, the best thing is to seek to temper some of the issues it has; whilst seeking to build a better pathway, if it is possible to do so overtime. The broader problem is about ‘technology lock-ins’ being deployed, that are not necessarily good for humanity & its socio-economic moral infrastructure.
Overview
The values project is premised upon a desire to ensure people are furnished an opportunity to express terms in relation to online contracts. This in-turn stimulates the development of a symmetrical agreement framework, rather than asymmetrical, as is the case today - as a consequence of the designs & priorities, illustrated by others at large.
There is presently no known solution to express ‘values’. There is also no good solution for humans to declare preferences with respect to the collection of information or the storage of profiling related information - such as cookies. Whereas a relatively simple solution to address the ‘pop-ups’ that appear in websites asking for ‘cookie permissions’ would remove the need for these sorts of things, for users; The ‘values’ frameworks, is intended to provide a capacity for persons to define a set of terms that are expected to be honored; and in-turn, as a consequence of contract law - as is used by electronic services to seek rights, that any breach of contract may result in consequences / penalties / enforceable obligations. Whilst the basic concept may be employed for purposes not intended (exploits, in-effect - as is personally felt to be the case with the broader ‘platform’ this looks to be deployed with); the purpose of this project at the present-time, is to focus on declarative instruments that are well-known and/or relating to jurisdictional laws. In particular, the first examples will seek to deploy solutions for SDGs, Human Rights instruments and other ethics related statements of significance for international use.
Goals
Technical Goals
To produce a solution that provides a means for a branded images to be used to denote a corresponding values statement; in a manner that,
a. supports both inspection of the terms via language (ie: english); and also,
b. Machine Readable Semantics (RDF).
To furnish the ability for electronic systems to be able to accept these instruments as part of the electronic contracting process; whereby,
a. The ‘values’ credentials in relation to their online contracting (“identity”) systems.
b. That these terms are provided the same legal capacity as the use of other ‘identity’ related instruments used in relation to electronic contracts; and to,
c. Enable signed documents that are able to be retained in a manner that is ‘tamper evident’ and consistent with the exact copy executed by the parties involved.
To enable end-users to find, collect & use commonly known ‘values statements’; as a way to empower users to usefully engage with others upon a basis of mutually defined & articulated values (rights & rules) that are important to them online.
The ability to manage the relationships they’ve made online with other legal entities.
The ability to distribute these assets in a permissively controlled manner via DLT URIs in addition to HTTP(s) uris.
Social Goals
To illustrate & address the issues that act to hinder the useful purpose of ‘digital identity’ to serve & support the rights of persons; rather than being employed to empower rulers above & beyond rights; by forming the infrastructure needed to address how we fix it.
To provide a capacity to engage in online projects with others via contract law principles on a basis of ‘shared values’; or in-effect,
a. Legal tools to better manage relationships with others via electronic contracts.
b. To Support rights & address issues that seek to dismantle our foundational rights.
c. To improve the basis upon which we are empowered to work together in peace.
d. To support the ability for people to do good work for humanity - in areas, where there may be ‘dual use’ (or similar) implications, that are not sought to be endorsed or furnished meaningful assistance in any way common to intended purposes.
Specifications - issues
In writing these ‘specifications’, there’s a few known issues; such as,
- The nomenclature; Terms such as ‘wallet’ as to define a person by their ‘wallet’ is not considered desirable.
Thinking ATM; it's more like a persons robot app - R2-D2 or a persons ‘digital twin’ control interface & means to create, store & manage evidence.
- The differences between what is easily achieved vs. what is hoped to be achieved. Addressing this issue features implications relating to time / resources / talent.
- The hope / desire is to define the ‘minimum viable solution’ to then engage in further development, which is hoped to be exponential in nature overtime.
- The broader intended ecosystem - is different to the ‘ssi’ ecosystem model; although, it is also desirable to ensure that any dominant ‘platform solutions’ be made compatible.
Specifications Goals
The specification goals seek to outline what it is that the design is attempting to triage.
There’s a few components to it.
The way in which the ‘SemWebOntologies’ are handled generally. a. UnderstandingOntologies provides general 'non-technical' information.
Ideally, the moral owners of the ‘ValuesCredentials’ would be stewards of those instruments, versions of them, etc.
Presently HTTP Uris are used for ontologies - DLT/DHT ontologies are useful; as such, the objective is to implement PermissiveCommons. SeeAlso; PermissiveCommonsTech
VerifiableClaims&Credentials (including the above noted 'values credentials') are also able to be provided by providers / group entities.
There are presently ‘wallets’ that are defined in a particular way, which is in-turn part of a broader ecosystem that is developing.
a. I don’t like the term ‘wallet’.
b. I am also not confident that the specifications of these ‘wallets’ will be ‘fit for purpose’, as such changes might need to be made.
c. There is a desire to store an array of digital artifacts via a ‘personal cloud’ (protected by law) solution; that will end-up having alot of ‘important (s/w files) documents’ in it. This isn’t simply a ‘wallet’ & its not quite to the extent to which (in future) the hope is to end-up producing a capacity that might be termed an inforg.
The solution will require packages that are built for online platforms like wordpress.
A major part of the intended purpose of these works, is to end-up with a solution that can be used for collaboratively undertaking online projects with others. This ‘projects’ element, will in-turn require additional functionality.
There is a requirement also to support ‘verifiable claims’, which may be different to what are now known as ‘verifiable credentials’. These requirements would include the ability to define characteristics of persons required to engage in projects.
The ‘values’ credentials are intended to support ‘logic’ processes that will progressively improve support for compliance tracking & relationships between credentials.
A modeling requirement will be needed, in time, to support arbitration considerations where values stipulated in one of the values' credentials, has considerations that may conflict with others; as evaluated on a situation-specific basis.
Seniors (in particular) have problems retaining their password / username details for websites, something that is similar to what is known as a ‘password manager’ is required. There is also ‘hearsay’ that suggests government workers in agencies relating to national security & defense, may not be properly (securely) storing their access credential information (ie: putting the information into a document that’s stored on their desktop).
Designs need to consider how solutions will scale to support the needs of persons whose decisions are able to be made as a consequence of consent by a guardian. A way to address these sorts of issues was historically attempted through the lens of a ‘pets app’.
Another use-case of importance (i think) is the ability to support ‘annotations’ on content.
Specifications Resources & Considerations
I am advised that the US company SpruceID ( https://github.com/spruceid ) has been doing good work. I note in particular, their libraries for a ‘did kit’ and also a ‘did wallet’ solution. It does not appear that the ‘did’ / ‘ssi’ solution presently supports functionality otherwise produced (earlier) for the education market; whereby notes include,
Whereby the problem with ‘open badges’ is that they’re very much designed for education / academia; rather than an ability for people to have a similar sort of thing, relating to values.
A related, desirable requirement; is to produce the tooling required to support the means for people to articulate licenses & other terms in relation to work activities online (inc. accrued rights); alongside, a means to support the ability for web-sites, to support membership and/or privacy related ‘credentials’; which would have the effect of addressing two linked issues,
- The GDPR pop-up issue could be addressed for users of this ‘Digital Vault’’.
- The ‘membership’ and/or related instruments (could be group instruments / affiliations, etc.) could better support the means to address ‘micro-payments’ use-cases for content that is not otherwise publicly available.
More sophisticated considerations; relating to ‘cyber security’ / sensitive projects, confidence, etc.
‘https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Internet,_nobody_knows_you%27re_a_dog
There are circumstances where people will be bound to obligations (ie: employment or professional obligations) that preclude them from being able to engage on a basis that may otherwise be afforded to them; support for considerations are important.
There is also; a significant desire for support for instruments; that may be private and/or sensitive in nature, such as clearances, vetting, police / working with children checks, etc.
This may also include a requirement to have credentials should there be problems with these sorts of ‘checks’, as may be taken into account by others when seeking to engage in fair-dealings.
Also - there should be means to address personal & humanitarian related issues; relating to mental health / illness & treatment related characteristics that should seek to better support people who are acting honestly & responsibly, rather than those who deceptively seek gainful benefits otherwise - this is in-turn, not intended to act punitively; rather, to support security.
Finally; the intended ‘cyber security schema’, featured various constituent components to the overarching authentication fabric, which was in-turn an enabler for activity related factors. The effect was, to bring about an ecosystem solution - that is more appropriate for real-world security capabilities - subject to - deployment methodologies, law & operational capabilities.
Some of these more complex considerations are desirable, but perhaps treated differently.
NOTE: In related work, there are various projects that will be seeking to employ these tools; whilst also, making them available for broader use. The projects i’m particularly focused on presently are as follows;
- An International Peace Infrastructure Project
- A Cyber capabilities project (domestic)
- A ‘community’ app & related ecosystem (for FNQ).
Whilst the ‘initial requirements’ for each of these projects do have differences; there are also core requirements that are sought to be employed for all of them; and, as a consequence of ‘human centric designs’, it is expected that at least some people who seek to use this ‘identity solution’ will be involved in all of these projects, alongside many more.
The expectation is that there will be an array of authentication & cyber-security technologies used to create a form of ‘informatics fabric’ that seeks to produce a hardened trustworthy environment; this is not similar to the design of ‘SSI’ & related commercial solutions; yet, the design of the underlying technologies later used for SSI relates to the history of these tools.
Addressing the ‘social factors’;
The concept of addressing the social factors has been an on-going ‘discussion’, with little progress; and much of the progress that has been made, done in ways that weren’t ‘all good’.
There is a vital requirement to set-up a capacity for people to expressly state terms they seek to be employed in the online contracts they enter into online; and in-turn, furnish an opportunity for a market-segment of online services that support this sort of social-ideology, to grow and i believe - flourish. There are many, many ‘projects’, or jobs / things about peace, human rights - good stuff, areas of work - that needs to be done; but it can’t reasonably be done in a manner that is built upon a propagated belief that the idea of ‘web slavery’ or ‘digital slavery’ or any form of slavery / abuse of human rights & other related values - should be considered fair or reasonable or ok in any way whatsoever - when its clearly not.
There is a change in modality that is able to be achieved - as is otherwise required - for the ‘more sophisticated use-cases’ alongside the needs of people, who seek a life - of respect, dignity & fairness unto ‘rule of law’, including a capacity to engage with civic (ie: elections) & civics (ie: peace infrastructure, or advocating for means to address social problems / issues) activities…
Some of these requirements do in-turn require a means to have a safe space to store records of importance. This is presently not very well provided for by existing solutions that now thereby define the nature of the ‘identities’ of the persons who’ve been involved & the values of their groups. Whilst it is hoped that these sorts of exhibits will be positively influenced through the production of technology - that led to the way things are done today - to be made, to function as intended - it is also expected, that some people will always prefer alternatives for various reasons; in this way, its not unlike the circumstance of ‘freedom of religion’, whereby the concept of choice - is intended to be empowering, and not a device to force others to comply, in circumstances where the implications are knowingly unlawful & without lawful remedy by design.
The use of PNG or SVG Containers
The concept is to use PNG, SVG or other suitably defined image formats as a form of container format for VerifiableClaims&Credentials is a fairly old concept, that was instrumental to the OpenBadges designs. The 'image' format (particularly SVG) may be interactive / dynamic or may be static. The Container would then also include the semantic ontology formatted to support presentation of what that asset communicates both in a human readable form and in a format that can be consumed by software agents (rdf).
In the future there may be a better definition for a file-container method that becomes standardized as something other than an SVG; nonetheless, its thought - SVGs will do for now.
Temporal support
Whilst it is desirable to start with the ‘values credentials’ that have static meanings or are represented in a manner that defines the version (noting - new version of laws emerge all the time, perhaps a qualification URI should check for any new versions as to support validity); as does, the circumstances in which the credential was used. As such, there are a variety of time-stamps that are important to employ, as to ensure historical records remain accurate.