Re: [arch-d] Proposed IAB program on Wholistic Human-Oriented Discussions on Identity Systems (WHODIS)

[Martin Thomson <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Jun 22, 2023, at 16:52, Eliot Lear wrote:
>>  From my perspective, devices are relevant only to the extent that they are agents of or proxies for people.
>
> They all are, and the program text indicated that they were in scope.  

Hi Eliot,

I carefully worded this and I think that your conception of this is different than mine.

My phone is a physical device that is, most of the time, acting as an agent for me.  Same as my laptop.  In many cases, the identity of that device also acts as a proxy for my identity (such as when sites track me using my IP address, but let's not get into that).

I don't agree that a humidity sensor in an office building fits either of those categories.  Or the whatsit that regulates the speed of an escalator.  Or the doodad that regulates the temperature in heated car seats.  Or the numerous other "devices" that might exist.  Sure, these devices all work toward human goals, but they are not an agent for a human in the direct sense that I intended. It is not useful to consider these a proxy for a human either.

I explicitly want those devices left out of any human-oriented discussion of identity systems, not because they aren't relevant in some ways, but because the narrower goal is helpful in focusing the discussion.  We can simultaneously recognize that the universe is all connected, but not let ourselves get paralyzed by bringing all the things into all the discussions.