To Whom It May Concern, I would like to propose to cooperate on the development and maintenance of Validbook.
The proposal is available at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/19pJ3_xMyNX-bAZSHTXvnwr5x LWsV-ShVv3Vy1S4gN6E/edit?usp=sharing The alpha version of Validbook is available at: http://futurama1x.validboo k.org/ The code is available at: https://github.com/Validbo okFoundation/Validbook-Services-Backend and https://github.c om/ValidbookFoundation/Validbook-Services-Frontend Validbook definitions Main definition: Validbook – a universal platform for cooperation. Functional definition: Validbook is a suite of protocols and services used to enhance cooperation between things, people and virtual entities. Validbook slogan: Do important stuff with confidence. Validbook mission: To improve cooperation between things, people and virtual entities by making it more transparent and reliable and to support unalienable human rights among which are the right for Self-Sovereign Identity, Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. The crux of Validbook idea - Use graph analysis to prove the unique representation of a human individuals by digital self-sovereign identities - Distribute tokens among self-sovereign identities that proved to uniquely represent human individuals, in a such way that incentivizes participation of people in Validbook tokens distribution and makes tokens valuable - Use tokens to fund development and maintenance of Validbook services - Use tokens to align interest of Validbook maintainers and developers with interests of Validbook users and Validbook mission This proposal was originally published at W3C Credentials Community Group mailing list (https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-credentials/201 8May/0024.html), where technical standards for Self-Sovereign Identity, Verifiable Credentials are being created. As Validbook's governance and policies are inspired by Wikipidea/Wikimedia example, I hope it is suitable to discuss the idea of Validbook and "Proposal to cooperate on the development and maintenance of Validbook" here. To discuss technical details of Validbook Statements and Identity please use W3C CCG mailing list. See full proposal at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/19pJ3_xMyNX-bAZSHTXvnwr5x LWsV-ShVv3Vy1S4gN6E/edit?usp=sharing -- Bohdan Andriyiv Validbook Foundation P.S. Adding a few clarifications in anticipation of the most likely reservations and questions: *- Q.* Is it an ICO scam? A. No. *- Q*. The Validbook name sounds a lot like Facebook. Is it an open source clone of Facebook with a coin attached to it? A. No, it is not a Facebook clone. Social networking service is only one part of Validbook that may or may not used by Validbook users. Validbook Social Service is a social networking service that combines UX features from Twitter, Pinterest, Facebook. By using Validbook books, Validbook channels and other Validbook-specific UX features, Validbook Social Service provides a new, functionally unique, universal, low engaging UX solution for posting (information dissemintation/signalling) and following (information consumption/screening). *- Q.* Who stands behind Validbook? Why did they do it? How did they do it? What are their incentives? A. Who? - Validbook was created (designed and speced out) by Bohdan Andriyiv. Why? - Long story short, about 5-6 years ago I was bored and wanted to work on something complex from technical and social point of view. Validbook is a result of continuous evolution of UX design changes and me trying to understand how people, technology (especially trustworthy computing) and economics work. At the beginning I was doing it part time and for the last 10 months full time. How? - It was developed with the help of small team of freelance and for the last 10 months full time developers. Incentives? - besides doing something interesting, and having satisfaction from seeing something cool and useful like Validbook built; Kudos - afterall, they are forever. *- Q.* Is Validbook doable? It looks like this idea is too gigantic, not realistic. A. Yes, it is doable. Taking into considerations developments in the area of trustworthy computing (DLT), self-sovereign identity, verifiable credentials, graph analysis capabilities, and the general state of the Internet, I do not see reasons why Validbook cannot be done. *- Q.* Will arbiters, graph analysis work against Sybil attacks? A. In short – it remains to be seen. Long answer - as of now, there are no definitive proofs that arbiters and graph analysis will work against Sybil attacks. It can only be checked in practice. I think, initially, about 95-98% of identities with SURLHI claim will be real (which is good enough to deem kudos distribution fair and for kudos to be valued). With time as practices and tools to do graph analysis and check SURLHI claim become better, close to 100% of identities with SURLHI claim will be real. I do not have hard mathematical way to prove it. It is an intuitive understanding, based on the fact that we can show to an arbiter paths between identity with SURLHI claim and Giant Component (graph component that includes known valid and trustworthy identities). It will be the most important way to eliminate fake identities and communities of fake identities as they will not have many connections to the Giant Component. On Facebook real people generally do not add unknown/fake identities to their friends, this will be even more so when endorsing SURLHI as it is *much more official*. Also, arbiters will be able to see and evaluate shortest paths between identity in question and known high trustworthy identities (for example, path between identity that claims to be a student of some university and the president of that university). Graph analysis is a natural, "evolutionary fun" activity for people, so arbiters will have easy time to uncover false SURLHI claims. Also, the fact that we have quite precise estimates of human population in different localities and in the world allows to put an upper limit on possible number of fake identities. After all, maybe not perfect analogy, but the fact that Wikipedia works, gives me hope that arbiters and Validbook in general will work also. *- Q.* Validbook idea looks interesting, but so far it is a private work, basically a one man job. It needs to be a community work. A. Definitely, yes. It needs to be developed with community's input and supervision, and also more directly via open Kudos tenders and bounties. Development and maintenance of Validbook should be done in open and transparent way, similar to how Wikipedia is developed. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>