kaliya on trust ness
kaliya young (id woman) on trust ness
via michel bauwens tweet [https://x.com/mbauwens/status/2081426416243966219?s=20]:
” the internet never got protocols useful for “social trust”. “
perhaps because (to me) protocol ness is a cancerous distraction to legit trust.. to legit free people.. et al..
and to me.. that’s huge.. because to date.. we haven’t used tech/net/ai/whatever for what it could be.. and what we can’t seem to be.. unconditional .. ie: tech as nonjudgmental expo labeling so that we can have ai as augmenting interconnectedness
“There is no *common way to prove you are a real person, no way to verify who authorized an AI to act on your behalf, no way for a community to govern the tools it depends on. The things that should have been held in common include identity, the social graph, group memberships, collective memory, and by extension trust itself they all had had no protocol layer to hold them. So the platforms of the early 2000s emerged into that gap and enclosed them. Each drew a fence around the part of our social life it mediated and claimed what was inside as property. Twenty plus years of escalating harm followed.
*verifiability law et al.. identity ness et al.. marsh label law
**any form of m\a\p ‘draws a fence’
Now AI is making the gap critical. Deepfakes, autonomous agents, synthetic identities, AI-powered manipulation — all accelerating on top of an internet that was never built to handle them. *AI doesn’t create the missing trust layer. **It weaponizes the absence of one by manufacturing personhood at scale and acting through agents that answer to no one you can name.
*yeah that.. ie: tech w/o judgment et al
**actually.. we do that.. that’s what we keep ‘protocol ing’
AI governance is, at root, an infrastructure problem. You cannot regulate what you cannot verify.”
both reg and verify ness cancerous distractions
nothing to date has gotten to the root of problem
legit freedom will only happen if it’s all of us.. and in order to be all of us.. has to be sans any form of measuring, accounting, people telling other people what to do
how we gather in a space is huge.. need to try spaces of permission where people have nothing to prove to facil curiosity over decision making.. because the finite set of choices of decision making is unmooring us.. keeping us from us..
ie: imagine if we listen to the itch-in-8b-souls 1st thing everyday & use that data to connect us (tech as it could be.. ai as augmenting interconnectedness)
the thing we’ve not yet tried/seen: the unconditional part of left to own devices ness
[‘in an undisturbed ecosystem ..the individual left to its own devices.. serves the whole’ –dana meadows]
there’s a legit use of tech (nonjudgmental exponential labeling) to facil the seeming chaos of a global detox leap/dance..
ie: whatever for a year.. a legit sabbatical ish transition
otherwise we’ll keep perpetuating the same song.. the whac-a-mole-ing ness of sea world.. of not-us ness.. of part\ial ness.. perpetuating survival triage.. for (blank)’s sake..
______
next day via michel tweet [https://x.com/mbauwens/status/2081428860957036683?s=20]:
* Project Weave
https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Project_Weave
= building a trust layer for the AI-driven internet
again from above – this is what we need ai for – ie: tech w/o judgment; nonjudgmental expo labeling; et al.. to undo hierarchical listening – so we can hear what’s already on each heart as global detox in order to org around legit needs
< ” We see the need for this trust layer to be held as a commons — open protocols governed cooperatively, so no future platform can buy it. The commons-holding governance matches the commons-holding architecture. ” >
this is not trust.. this is control/judgement.. all the forms of m\a\p
notes/quotes from michel’s link to p2p wiki addition:
Kaliya Young:
1.
” It is a stack of open standards, most of them already shipping:
- Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs) — a W3C standard. An identifier you hold the keys to. No platform issues it, and no platform can revoke it.
if still talking id, standard, revoke ness.. not legit free/open/common
- Verifiable Credentials (VCs) — the digital equivalent of a membership card: cryptographically signed, privacy-preserving, presented on your own terms.
again.. verifiability law et al.. credential.. membership .. presentation.. ness.. all cancerous distractions
- Wallets and agents — software that holds your credentials and acts for you, rather than a platform holding them on its servers.
to me.. this has nothing to do with trust
- Trust Over IP and the Trust Spanning Protocol — a four-layer trust architecture modeled on TCP/IP, so any party can establish trust with any other the way any host can reach any host on the internet.
and again.. if it’s not unconditional from the get go.. not trust.. rather .. still earn a living ness.. still perpetuating the same song.. the whac-a-mole-ing ness of sea world.. of not-us ness.. of part\ial ness.. perpetuating survival triage.. for (blank)’s sake..
the ‘reach’ able ness we need – e: imagine if we listen to the itch-in-8b-souls 1st thing everyday & use that data to connect us (tech as it could be.. ai as augmenting interconnectedness)
the thing we’ve not yet tried/seen: the unconditional part of left to own devices ness
[‘in an undisturbed ecosystem ..the individual left to its own devices.. serves the whole’ –dana meadows]
there’s a legit use of tech (nonjudgmental exponential labeling) to facil the seeming chaos of a global detox leap/dance.. for (blank)’s sake..
ie: whatever for a year.. a legit sabbatical ish transition
The First Person Project pulls these together into a coherent architecture based on work by the Trust Over IP Foundation and the Decentralized Identity Foundation, and adds the two pieces AI makes urgent:
- Personhood Credentials (PHCs) answer the question is this a real, unique person? — without a global biometric database and without surveillance. This is the lock on the grandmother’s door.
- Verifiable Relationship Credentials (VRCs) answer the question do these two people actually know each other? Issued peer-to-peer, they assemble into a Decentralized Trust Graph — the social graph held in open protocols instead of sitting in a hyperscaler as an asset on Meta’s or Microsoft’s balance sheet. The scam call from outside your grandmother’s real network has no credential to present, so the architecture could stop it before she ever hears it.
These same credentials extend to AI agents — every agent can carry credentials tied to the person it works for and sign every action it takes, so “who authorized this?” finally has an answer, and a permission you revoke is revoked everywhere at once.”
again from above.. none of this will get to the root of problem
legit freedom will only happen if it’s all of us.. and in order to be all of us.. has to be sans any form of measuring, accounting, people telling other people what to do
2.“At Project Weave, we do not build platforms. We work to inspire funding for a protocols-not-platforms approach — backing the values-based technologists already building the alternative to Big Tech. What is needed is funding for interoperability between projects that already exist, so builders get resourced to keep building and to work with one another on complementary problems. A coordination team maps the ecosystem, facilitates protocol development, and runs interoperability testing.
coord we need – tech/ai/whatever that listens to the itch-in-8b-souls 1st thing everyday & uses that data to connect us
The vision is to fund the ecosystem, not individual projects — multiple implementations, no single point of failure. It is how email works across every provider and how the web works across every browser. We are finishing what should have been built alongside them: the trust layer the internet was missing, arriving exactly when AI makes it impossible to do without.”
and again.. to me.. actually.. it’s us that was missing the thing the net/tech/ai/whatever can do that we can’t seem to.. ie: pearson unconditional law.. w/o that.. we’ll just keep perpetuating same song
_____
_____
______
______
______
______
be you. 