So, there's going to be 20 minutes of initial talk. Each session is basically going to be 40 minutes. It's 20 minutes of talking that's been within second 20 minutes. It's going to, we're going to try to focus on the three most important takeaways. And that, that you had the 20 minutes, you know, we're going to, 20 minutes of those. And then at the end of that 40 minutes, we're going to report back. Everybody, every group is going to report on one of those takeaways. Christopher Wall is through all this. Don't worry, you don't need to learn much. This will all be handled by the facilitators. But please, if you're interested in either being a facilitator or a scribe for a topic table, you know, volunteer to do that. A scribe, by the way, doesn't have to write everything down. Speaking of scribes and facilitators, we have Cita Magnus. She is our graphic facilitator. Thank you, Block Street for inviting us. And Cita was really picked, and she's going to visually capture the key ideas that happen here in the plenary. So there's going to be a plenary stuff where everybody is involved. There's going to be the breakout stuff. She's going to capture stuff for the plenary. So media, privacy, et cetera, we are going to have some video recordings. But so if you don't want to be on video respectfully, don't get into the video camera. If you don't want to be recorded, then avoid being recorded. It will be pointed at the podium. It will be pointed, I'm looking at you right now. And this is the only place that's going to be recorded video-wise. If you're interested in doing the whole DASA's and that's possible interviews, if you're interested in being on the video thing, come talk to DASA. And speaking of interviews, Bailey, are you here? Bailey Roycele is going to be here. She is an important person, stuff and stuff, for the plenaries. No.  Thank you. Coin desk, she's probably going to be doing a couple of interviews. If you're interested in being interviewed, you can talk to her. Otherwise she'll talk to her. She has made sure that she will not quote anybody unless they get permission to be quoted. And speaking of quoting people, social media. The hashtag for this event is WatchChainWeb. Please do not quote people out of context. This gives you a trouble because other people are probably interested. Let people know as you plan on tweeting about them if they said something. If that's not the answer, they're here until it's their game. Say something. Please ask them before you tweet it. Follow the golden rule. Tweet others as you would want to be tweeting yourself. So just be careful that the things in here don't spread out of context elsewhere. This is obviously a public thing and it's meant to be public, but we don't want people to have to defend things. That's something that they said in this room in the larger media stage. OK, why we're here is an opportunity for collaboration. If you see wants to know if there's anything that is ready for standardization, maybe a hole for that, is there any way in which the blockchain can help the web? Standards? Or vice versa? Is there anything that what standards can do for blockchain? That's what we're interested in. There may be other things that come out of this, other collaborations that you have. There's nothing to do with standards. That's great. We're glad to hear that. Somebody had to talk a little bit about standardization now. How do you know about standards? I'm not going to talk about the process. We need to talk a little bit more. When is something greater standardization? Is there a clear problem statement that this would solve for a significant number of people? That's being indicated that there's value in standardization. Is there any starting point? Is there already implementation? Is there a set? Is there a clear solution? Or are there a set of meeting solutions? Those are also good candidates for standards. And we have right stakeholders. Are the right people ready to come together at that time? Are they ready to implement things, test things, write things, etc.? Are they ready to deploy this thing? If none of those things are true, it's probably not ready for standards. If all of those things are true, it might be ready for standards. WCBC focuses specifically on pretty main things. We focus on my-executive features, the algorithm-based part-time-inducing features, jobs-friendly APIs, user-based features. This is our main focus. This is what most of our stuff is. We also do stuff around data formats, interchange formats, ontologies for calculators, language system, and the building data, etc. Just as a copy of it, a lot of browser vendors are very far clear of these things. So if you want to get involved in this, it's good idea to talk across vendors first and make sure that this is something they're interested in. If it's something that's going to touch on browser and client-side stuff at all, it's probably a good idea to get a browser vendor to get involved earlier rather than later. We also do communication work holes. We do those more rarely. Usually only when there's a client-side API, for example, WebRTC, there's client-side APIs and there's stuff for that. These protocols usually do partner with the ITX to stuff like that. So there's lots of WebRTC staff here. Will all the WebRTC staff stand up? So I see Jeff Jaffe back there. Jeff is our CEO. I see Alan Berg. Alan is our big step guide. If you want to join WebRTC, you'll get us lots of money. Alan's a good guy. He's a guy working on solid and some similar stuff. Formats. Wendy Seltzer is the head of technology standards domain. Doug Shepard's Jack of all trades. Nothing, nothing, nothing. So I want to thank our sponsors, Daza, and Jaha, I do have a BLAB, Mr. Sandy Temperance Space. NTT, do we have NTT here? NTT is over here. They're going to be doing a demo over at this table. I invite you all to go to the demo and talk to them. They can do anything for us. Thank you very much for the sponsorship. They're making a lot of sponsors. They're making this possible. Blockstream. Blockstream. Blockstream. Generative TTC members have provided us with this. Meals. We have twice the number of planned attendees. We've got meals for everybody. They can get sponsors. They might get sponsors. Try to get meals for everybody. If you do not not register in your time, you might not get a meal. If you don't have a badge, because we're naming you for tonight, respectfully, ask people, make sure that the people who have, who are in the effort to get involved early on, make sure that they have their meals. If it's vegetarian, if we can get foodie meals, please do not take food that they didn't ask for. Vegetarian. Everybody, you're vegetarian food. So don't take one of the vegetarian boxes. Assess it's clear that all the vegetarians who already got their food. I'm vegetarian, and I believe humans if you come down to this. So don't push me. If you had a request from the, me. If you were not able to feed you, I apologize. There are food trucks right around there. There's really good food. I need food trucks here. And we probably have food for everybody, but I just want to make sure is that the people who had food first. Another thing, apparently there was some food over there in that area. Please do not take food that's out there are being put in here. That is for a set of other people. And all your trash, there are three bins back there. There's trash recycling and compost. Please bust your own tables and put your trash back there. That's it. Thank you for tuning. Treat it respectfully. Have fun or don't. Whatever you prefer. If you have any problems, you are here or outside. If you have any issues, contact me. This is my phone number. And any trouble that you're having, let me know. I'm going to turn it over to Wendt. He's intended at the moment to get her slide set up. And thanks everybody. Any questions? Comment. Hashtag is blockchain web. On the WPC. Well, getting set up, I might invite people to join the IRC. Fantastic. So thank you all for joining us here. I'm thinking through what blockchain technologies and the industry interests and development needs for us to work in standards. So when it comes to W3C, this is for everyone. Working to build that form that is accessible globally and interoperable to everyone. So if you have technology that you want to work on that global open basis, W3C is the consortium and standards body of the works to help keep the web open and help to build the consensus on which the web is founded. We don't have a lease power to compel the web standards. So we need to build consensus through the W3C process and with our open royalty free patent policy to invite people to work together. And so we have more than 400 new organizations, 1,000 participants to working groups, community groups, interest groups to work together. We have a relatively small staff to work with all of those people. The members of the technical and administrative staff working to facilitate that consensus. We work in working groups are the groups that develop the recommendation trap standards. We also have interest groups and community groups that work at the leader stages of development. These cases are requirements generating ideas helping to incubate the standard process. As I mentioned, we're governed by process documents. Our constitution sets out the ways that we work and bring people together. We rarely take boats and we much more often are engaging large groups and it's a discussion to figure out what can we live with, what can we all live with to work together. So here's a rough and barely readable diagram of our standard development process. We start from the bottom. We are in the very early phases of thinking about blockchain and thinking about the technologies. We start in our investigation of technologies often with workshops and community groups to brainstorm. Thinking about what does the web need, what does the technology need, where are the places that our public and our membership can work together with the health of our technical staff. We can help facilitate working together. Possibly out of that comes the formation of a working group.  What is possible development there? So after that information happens after, for example, say, you know what we really need to work together is a common interface. So common idea, common format, what we have that level of, we might form a working group, working group iterates on the proposed standard, sends it out for public comments, invites and comments from participants, moves up to the recommendation back, and after a consensus, which being the working group and the wide review for the public, that might be public as a really great recommendation. And that's not saying again that we know what any particular reason might come out of here, but if we find something, that's where it will go. So what are we thinking of more particularly, here with is the blockchain on the web standard to work together? What does the web mean to add in order to support the blockchain better? And that's possibilities like crypto, formats, APIs that could be added to the web to make it easier to access the distributed ledger universally in any place you have a web browser, easier for the web to interface with those distributed ledgers. And then conversely, there are also opportunities in how can the technologies of blockchain support the web. So for example, distributed ledgers supporting certificate transparency, examples that's underway at the IETF, storing the record of certificate issuance on the ledger publicly transparently so that anyone can check for certificate misuse. So as I mentioned, some things are right for standards. Some things are totally wrong. Yes, standards are right. Standards are great for improvement of harmonization and consensus where there are already multiple examples of the way something might be done and we need to smooth the rigorous work. I think two or three or four of them together on the same framework where there are already working examples from which to write a consensus address to match to bringing to standard market for standards are less well suited at the beginning of the innovation process. There's lots of new ideas going on. We don't want to walk anything into a standard. We're not yet ready to say, yes, this must be the block size or this must be the format in which things are expressed. One innovation is, I'm trying to be innovating possible standards and identifying places where you might need more coordination and not yet the time to write it into, this is a global recommendation for the web. So I wasn't recently mentioned some of the work the WNCCC is already doing that might be relevant to work that you're looking at. So we can, in the security and privacy area, we have work in the web authentication. There's that group here. We have work from the CUTO, we have application security, payments. We have privacy interest group. We have an interest group and a working group. Then in the broader web, we have HTML being worked on with the platform working group. There's work on web performance, CSS, HTML media, WebRTC, real-time communications, there's graphics, there's audio, there's fonts, there are all sorts of pieces. I wanted to dive into a couple of them in a little bit more detail. The web authentication is one of the new pieces of work that came over to WNCCC from a private audience. User name and password is a terrible way to authenticate. If we do it everywhere on the web, how can we get beyond that and make strong code show the basis of all of our web authentication? The web authentication working group is building the web APIs to act as the interface between the local authenticator, the web client, and the relying party. Specifically where that big arrow is between the local client, which might be a web browser on a mobile device, a web browser on a laptop, a website, a relying party. This will be one module of a larger authorization framework. We are building a way to do strong authentication from the web client. Another piece of work that is in its candidate recommendation phase is the web crypto API. Instead of inviting every web developer to write his own or her own JavaScript crypto libraries, we are building an API standard across the browsers when implementers are building the implementation. We are standardizing what the API looks like so that calls to encrypt or decrypt or verify produces a result across browser. This is a place where if there are specific crypto functions, specific algorithms that we need for blockchain operations and update to the work of the web crypto working group could be a good interface for that. At the moment we have a set of standard curves and algorithms and those are being tested for interoperability and moved forward toward recommendation, but the API is extensible and if there are additional algorithms needed, this is a good place to build for those. Lots of work in our web application security working group. If you're building web applications and want to assure that others aren't injecting in cross-sized tripping attacks and data theft, various APIs designed in the web app set help to secure a web application, make it easier for the authors of web apps to deploy securely and rely on the transform layer security on HTTPS and places to think about if you're developing applications in the browser hoping into web app set APIs and signs and support for encryption everywhere because we believe that a strong web is one where people can rely on end-to-end security and authentication and integrity protection and so we support HTTPS with browser-side features and we have web payments work that's filling up a payment request API and that's looking across payment types and so if you're there because you're interested in Bitcoin or crypto currencies, look into the web payments work to think about whether that is extensible in the ways that you would need to support alternative currencies whether it's default, the protocol will support payment and does it improve the payment features or is it extensible to include payment features that you might need for the cryptocurrency and along with the basic payment request API there are payment method identifiers, basic card payments and progress on payment applications to support so I'll put this up on the web with links to the various cases of existing W3C work and if I could think about that as one template for the way standards work can happen one interface for kinds of work that you might be doing but most of all I want to invite you to share ideas and thoughts about work that maybe will pre-standard phase right now, think about W3C as a big tent in which you can have conversations about that and come back to our recommendations down the road that's something that looks standard ready so thanks very much and thank you again for coming to share your ideas of this workshop Chris Brown and I'm going to be handling that session which is about collaboration but first I'd like to do a little housekeeping so we're going to be distributing some stuff on the table so the other thing we need to do is distribute some people so I'm going to make this hand, keep yourself a stretch, a wiggle look at your table if you've got 70 people at your table I need one of you to move to another table next table there's space if you've got space under your table so there's some space if you've done one with your wiggle and you've got enough people at your table ideally every table should have four or five people that's the other side if you're at the table with six people and these people next to you if you're at the table with four people and any one of you is at the table with four there'll be more time to see if you're at the table with four people or if you're at the table with three people basically a table of four many men at my table if you're more than one so the goal of this session is to share stories and lessons around collaboration we're handing out right now we're is a distillation of over a century of facilitation these over 50 facilitators got together and looked at what were the patterns in common for the best events the best collaborations that they were involved in and distilled them down into 91 patterns of what makes for a great, wonderful, magical collaboration so everybody's going to get one of these collaborations you can either all of them are passed out grab one randomly or you can pick one of the seven and my suggestion is when you're done reading it put it in more behind your back so I would like you to be the avatar for that particular pattern for the rest of the two days I'd like you to think about what it is that is this particular pattern of greatness and see if you can't embody it or recommend it or find it in the next two days so for the next 15, 20 minutes or so I would like each of you to tell a story about a collaboration that was really meaningful to you it can be a business collaboration, a standards effort that you worked on it can be another team and your company or it can even just be a personal collaboration that you just found really, really powerful I'd like you to share about three minutes of a story about a collaboration that you found very, very powerful the time is now 9.23 so let's try to do this in around about 15 minutes so the five person table is three minutes each three, two, one, two, four that's next round these are not for now though oh yes so I think the exercise is we look at the cards and that we talk we share with each other and we have successfully collaborated with other organizations I think the story doesn't have to focus on the cards it is more it could be ourselves with that avatar for the unsuccessful collaboration what kind of operation do you mean thoughts on successful previous collaboration do you want to share it, is that the objective I would say my most recent collaboration is our blockchain startup inside of Microsoft where basically everyone involved in the project has opted in to the success of the project whether or not they were authorized to do so and so it's created a very fulfilling across across the company across many, many different groups virtual team that is basically collaborating on moving the ball forward in a lot of different categories all including this one point the last event I would not be able to deal with that and the point is there are a lot of different consensus so people already have some people and most of them we just talk we go in different directions and the group misses the actual funds and so there must be one test of that actually if there is a lot of knowledge of the problem there writes down a summary of each different point and makes sure that it's going to stop all the conversation that is happening to make sure there are things that we've been discussing to you we're trying to go up to the story we're thinking of like as band folks together the creative tension of each of them writing these hit songs it just doesn't happen but a friendship is actually so in my previous life before I entered this crazy blockchain space I used to work as a consultant for McKinsey and one of the things they were really good at is teaching you processes I guess so one thing which I learned during the training and that we agreed on in our group which is quite important is a shared problem statement so that's an evolving kind of document where you spend a lot of time to formulate like an actionable measurable problem that everybody agrees on but then also like the measures you have at hand to solve that problem so that's one thing we think inside of our table is very helpful to actually make sure also that what you do is what you come up with in the end solves the problem I'm at table four we talked about a lot of things about mechanics of collaboration and how you make things one of the things that we thought was most important to share actually is that it's really important to be nice when you're finished or when to stop when we're all going on tour we're all in other groups and other areas where either something's failing it's never going to work we did a good job but now that thing's finished and that standard is brought in we didn't need to hire 20 people to work there so we didn't need a specialist and so our story is several decades ago there was a guy and he was like sort of rivals of this other team that also wanted to go to the moon and so that's one of our aspects was sort of this collaboration and then you also want this spotlight aspect where everyone's united against the enemy and has sort of this motivation above and beyond so those are sort of our aspects you want competition and collaboration really go hand in hand a lot of cases you kind of want motivation that is not maybe rational and I think that's pretty common in a lot of technology or as I call it Bitcoin especially people are kind of crazy about it I wasn't necessarily around with the first web standard so those are sort of the secrets and flexibility and diversity I don't think has been mentioned so having diverse teams where people bring different social skills and different technical skills to the table and then our final one which is the one we want to emphasize the most is trust through facing common challenges and having a common vision and Gladys has a the story I want to tell you is fundamentally a story about trust it happens right here I hear about Professor we are like if you guys trust me I'll press you officer and he said well that suits me all sorts of breakdowns servers and breakdowns but it was just trust walk away our secret sauce was failed fast but safe focused is that when we prototype at the proper time we can continually create consensus that is more grounded and create projects that are more expedient and focused it's a story where one organization has got the responsibility to sort out the problem for customers but there are other organizations also involved in that problem the issues that that sort of can get jammed and never gets resolved so in this case the organization crosses the customer exploration of the problem and they decide to in order to make it to explain it to other organizations to break down the problem into practical explanations so that they break down major silos and they're able to present the problems so ours focus more or less on side stepping proprietary interests and examples one was from the degrees the MIT has got a blockchain based degree edition here and that collaboration came together it was critical that also the experience that MIT have had trying to endless conversations with various groups who do have ownership interests received very slowly and then suddenly in a small group of students in a Ferris Law School to themselves and now they're now charging it so they don't have the ecosystem yet so they're not inhibited by the problem of the law I'd like to just make one point which is it might be blockchain solves is that ownership problem that is it's a way for folks who ordinarily have got vast vested interests concerning problems so table number 10 as far as I know it's the only table number 10 our take away is encourage early adopters to hands on play one of our user stories was SVG for example started off in 1998 but nobody was using it in 2010 because it wasn't in all the browsers but before it was in all the browsers it was an adobe plugin adobe plugin let a large community start to play with this and see actually it's visual so you can see what you were doing change the code within the browser you can immediately see your changes so that encouraged a lot of play and a lot of experimentation and if it weren't for that early phase of having that plugin that thing that worked in the browser that everybody could use that was quite an employee it needed legs to carry it forward to the long slog of getting it into every browser and then another user story that was shared on our cable similarly was your first bitcoin transaction needed to do that that first time is really powering experience so basically letting people play with the technology putting it into their hands having something that they can viscerally experience for themselves is really one of our key points was talking with not people I see a lot of familiar faces in the room and I know some of you well enough to know that you hope that I've finished this quickly as possible and I've been involved in a lot of these groups before and a lot of times people talk just to talk because they want to feel a sense of participation but all of our time is precious and everybody here has specialized knowledge and if you don't have specialized knowledge about a particular area that people are talking about and they're making progress then it's sometimes good to exercise restraint and allow that progress to happen rather than just to anticipate you can find other goals to be able to collaborate and communicate that are productive and so if you feel like you're being left out or something like that but everybody's making good progress and you want to participate in an instinct but just try to recognize the balance where your own desires are all holding back to you Hi, table 12 we have long size maybe more top of clay so you may see something about the danger Hi, we're table 13 so I wanted to start with a story so I work here at the Digital Currency Initiative at the Media Lab and we're a really interesting group because we have computer scientists former journalists, a politician ethnographers, we have a really interesting mix of people and the story I wanted to share is about how someone was presenting an idea once in a meeting and the computer scientists immediately started finding security goals in what they were talking about and problems and this really offended the person and the computer scientists really quote this is what we do, you know like we're talking about your idea we got to find the rough edges and stuff and so I think Aline's going to share the point from the story I think that helps build consensus about what people actually want to develop so that's kind of the point, setting up the conversation might be very important and these assumptions I can I'm going to put this hat on are really important for us so our secret sauce is diverse groups finding common ground for discovery and part of that we thought about the emerging behavior of the poll being greater than the sum of its parts about the resources at its disposal than this thing that we talked also about was connecting to some sort of way of achieving those things despite the fault to me that a few of us spoke about our different areas one of which was always having an open door policy literally another was one of our individuals had open forum where artists as well as engineers were both invited so there's a university there also I think it's probably about it just having diverse groups finding common ground to discovery defaulting towards open for a year goal of having something connected by impact what a copy is that a single yes, Mr. Samson tried to solve we tried to solve what the solution was there so then we rejoined having more diverse trying to solve the problem it's just Ravi from Table 16 our secret source was open communication listening to one another in fact the team was actually building out one of the people's stories so the collaboration worked out very very well the NCP talked about the red and green flags an idea or a story where we would give negative to details and getting down to the modular level that really matters and once you get there you'll be able to make the consensus re-operate Mr. Samson talked about his experiments with ground sourcing and how he's trying to build that out in terms of making a larger sense of things and getting that in the ground so we had that talked about getting the context and that context these will help people realize what exactly they're trying to agree about and build that context with that foundation and we had that all talked about do the pieces and some of these things that come about you start the experiment, you do it you learn more from it and then you will build out on that experiment and finally we agreed upon the storyline of Milk Cooperate in India which is called Amal and here you have to build consensus among people who are actually illiterate and they used to sell milk individually they had to agree and get together across farms across villages and across various towns to build out a cooperative society that could work together with each other preserving individual interest as well as the community interest as a whole and the idea behind the story was if you build the bigger vision where you can show that personal interest can multiply if the group interest is also held has got a lot of minerals and cocaine on the keys that we are seeing today with the Dow and so on and if individual interest can be held back a little bit for a later time and the group interest can actually be supported for a little while longer the individuals also will get a lot that we hope we can build better consensus across and collaborate with as well so thank you very much secret sauces in mind because the goal at the end of this event is that we want to collaborate on some things I also encourage you to keep your cards they are useful and then finally Dazza is collecting all of the sheets if you did not have your notes please make sure that Dazza has the sheets that are important thank you very much we got started a little late and I talked too long we have a break right now let's try to keep it to 5 to 10 minutes so let's meet back here in 7 minutes bathrooms are down there down the hall we come back we will have Arvind on stage giving us a little keynote speech to inspire us all thank you and so you know nobody likes a pompous keynote and that's not what this is think of this as more of a conversation starter and again heavily influenced by the things that we do today so the big thing that I hope to do today is share some of my excitement for why I think there is a unique opportunity around standardization in the intersection of blockchains what the web can do for blockchains and vice versa and in particular how it might be possible to marry the power of blockchains with the rage of the web I want to see if there is a way to get to that I want to see if there is a way to democratize blockchains and see if there is a way to put those two together so that's going to be the broad theme before I get into that I want to address one sort of skeptical point as well which has come out in a couple of the position statements Wendy made at this point as well what's ready for standardization where are we is it too premature is it too soon obviously I don't have an answer for that again my role here is not to give answers it's to start the conversation what I do want to address is one small component of this from a computer science perspective I'm a computer scientist one question that we can ask which is important to ask is are bitcoin and other blockchains are they going to be around and something similar to their present form in 10 years 20 years I think it's important to try to know the answer to that question to some degree of confidence as we go through this process and that is something that as an academic computer security researcher as part of that community I can bring something to the table and one thing I want to share with you is the fact that research on bitcoin in particular has been very very vibrant to the academic community this is a Google scholar search you can do for yourself looking at the number of papers that mention bitcoin the number per year now is in the thousands it's sort of stabilizing recently but as of 2013 or so it's exploded lots of people analyzing bitcoin so this does not mean that all of these are papers that are totally about bitcoin I would estimate there are maybe 100 couple hundred really serious papers per year about bitcoin people analyzing the properties of the system by the way why am I talking about bitcoin here not blockchains well it turns out that from a computer science perspective there is relatively little of substance that you can say that applies to all blockchains without being specific about which one you're talking about and that's a point that I will come back to later in a few minutes what does that mean for us to what extent can we be successful in sort of abstracting away the properties of specific blockchains and addressing all of them in general so that's one thing I want to see so there's been a lot of vibrant research academics are certainly incentivized to try to find any underlying problems with the system a lot of people have been trying to do that what is the result of all that I would summarize it with about three points one I would say is that so far again this is my opinion looking at all of this research nobody can read 3,000 papers per year they have a perfect view of this oh yes Brian Bishop has read almost 3,000 papers per year but this is my summary of what's been happening in the academic community so I would say that there are no major fundamental problems that have been discovered so far so again so far as I can't count there are certainly various known concerns perhaps one of the best known ones is selfish mining most of you may have heard about that and it's one of maybe several other such potential problems, alluming problems that have been discovered by academics as well as others in the Bitcoin research community pieces of good news is that even though there are these problems that have been come out through a sort of theoretical analysis it seems that so far Bitcoin has been working a lot better in practice than it's supposed to in theory and that's been a phenomenon that's come out over and over again people are getting wise to that now and they're trying to refine their theoretical models and understand and predicts how Bitcoin has been working and will continue to work in practice so this is I would say overall good news and this is something positive from the point of view of standardization in a certain sense the underlying technology is ready and also from a teaching perspective let me tell you some of you may know me and others at Princeton did an online course on Bitcoin, 35,000 people took it huge amount of interest, we did a textbook so it turns out that many instructors around the world are starting to see Bitcoin as a way of introducing many crypto and computer science ideas to undergraduates and to computer science students and so I think these ideas are going to get a lot of traction in the process of research and education and I think we'll have a lot of resources to draw on so it's a healthy situation I will offer one caveat and that caveat is endpoint security what do I mean by that people getting their servers and other things hacks, losing Bitcoins companies going down because of security issues this is a bit different from the underlying issue of the stability of Bitcoin itself but when it comes to endpoint security I think the situation has been I wouldn't have been sports here and so far it's been pretty miserable this just came out yesterday this is called the blockchain grave pretty cool thing, I encourage you to look it up this is by the move from Coinbase talking about a lot of different companies and websites that went under because of security problems so one way in which I would summarize this is that human crypto interaction as I call it is an unsolved problem, not clear if we will ever solve it for regular mainstream users to be able to handle public and private keys securely I think that is one thing that we should really keep in mind during the standardization effort is it possible to abstract away some of those details from end users if we want to really democratize blockchains, if we want to really marry it with the power. I will also point out one other caveat a difference both between the amount of research and the conclusions when you talk about Bitcoin versus Ethereum Ethereum is the red line at the bottom there obviously it's a much newer system not that much research so far but also compared to Bitcoin there is some amount of concern about the fundamental security of the system both about underlying intensive misalignment issues as I call them what's good for individual actors in Ethereum might not be what's good for the overall health of the system but it's remarkably successful at aligning these two with Ethereum this is not quite so clear there are also concerns about the ability of people to write secure contracts that we can reason about and which we can secure properly and of course you've all heard about or have been following in the news the story about the Dow and that's an object less than I think at this point there have been a lot of research on security and Cornell so these are things that you might because there is you know both not going to be at the first of the interviews so very optimistic that it will be on different days and in a few years but at this point I would say there are concerns about this little insecurity of Ethereum so now it begins the big thing that I find great is firing by being at this place at this time which is cash standardization enabled there are a lot of issues sometimes I think things like back and forth believe me that's really important to engage with that that allows each other but sometimes standardization ends up enabling something a little bit of a town and as an example I would give the introduction of cookies to the web and standardization comes over with a little bit of a grasp of the question how to engage with that sending it to the kitchen sort of every time you didn't pay the server but the department will also be a part of the web it can be a lot of new applications possible both for good and bad it has a negative effect as well and this can be a key point I would say there are less and less of an opportunity if we can exploit any of the blockchain or more people buys what standardization add a little bit of browser functionality enable something is that possible so I'm going to give you one example of this where I think this might be possible I'm not saying this is the one thing we should focus on by any means but it's just meant to act as a to prove the point that something like this might be within our range of 5 to 10 years in the future a user, either through a web browser or let's say even an IOT device that's web enables what they're trying to do is they're interacting with some server or a service provider and what they're saying is basically issuing a command to do something on the blockchain what I mean by do this I will make that more concrete the key thing I want to point out is that it's an untrusted server the client is not trusting the server and I want to point out that this is a bin client so as many of you are familiar with the notion of bin client thin clients and generalizing that notion the client doesn't have much functionality in general really wants to rely on the server but doesn't want to now the server carries out that task but in addition it does this one key thing which is enabled by the blockchain which is I've done that and here is the proof and this notion of proof as many of you know is one of the cool things that blockchain enables is having proofs that the client can verify and we claim that this is really important something that we should keep in mind in this integration why does this enable powerful things imagine in this vision of the future the browser over here just like a secure site today shows a green lock in the browser address bar and the user doesn't need to know much about this basically handles the verification and the user is happy and convinced that whatever action they give whatever command they issue has been successfully completed on the blockchain imagine what that world would enable a lot of different applications again I read all of your position statements many different threads of applications came out of that things like contracts not even talking about smart contracts at this point just legal contracts that we might want to timestamp right on the blockchain just basic document time stamping provenance both for creative content as well as for IP and assets and so on lots of people excited about IoT I read decision statements from IBM and again identity was another really important thread so think about any of these applications let's say think about for example you're renting an apartment you walk into the landlord you have a thin client over here the landlord's computer connects to some back-end server which is connected to the blockchain you sign the document and is that my phone? somebody's phone here has an old harm going on I don't know if you know who it is I tried to cancel it not the network okay thank you so imagine you do this in your landlord timestamps that onto the blockchain and a sense of beams through Bluetooth or whatever that prove to your mobile phone and your mobile phone being a thin client not being a node on the Bitcoin network is still able to through your mobile apps or browsers trusted interface web-based interface is able to convince you the user that the landlord has done this correctly and that the document that you just signed is connected to the blockchain you can imagine a similar thing in the identity space for creative content for whatever you want so I claim that this sort of model if we can enable it through standards is going to be a way to combine the power of the blockchain with the region because this enables use of the blockchain to anybody just a web browser without having to interact directly with the standardization process would have to deal with here what is the language for that what is the set of things we want to be able to express and in the reverse direction when the server sends a proof back to the client what does that prove to me who is going to verify what is the user interface for confirming to the user so there is a little bit of work that we have to figure out exactly how to operationalize this but if we can my feeling is that the power that this is going to unlock and today with or without standards I don't think we have anything quite like this that is possible and just as an aside I want to make a quick technical point when I see the proofs here what do I mean and I want to show you a simple example a technical example of how one of these works let me show you the simplest possible proof where the client simply says to the server to put a specific piece of data onto the blockchain and the server sends back so what does this look like visually what's going to happen is this is what the blockchain looks like you've all seen verple trees that are connected together by these hash pointers and different blocks and the piece of data that you want to write out to the blockchain is going to be one of the nodes in this tree so it's going to be this node over here right now what does it mean for the server to prove to you that it has written this data into the blockchain many of you may have seen this but if you haven't seen it this is what I mean by efficient proofs this is the data structure called verple trees so what the server can give you is only these pieces of data that are highlighted you don't have to care about most of the currently 70 gigabytes of the blockchain you only have to care about a very small computer science term to logarithmic amount of data and this will enable any simple dumb client to verify by following these cryptographic hash pointers and by looking at the groups of work and checking for 6 confirmations whenever you want to check that the piece of data you're writing has been written to the blockchain by the server that you don't even trust that's the magic that if the server does all the work you don't trust the server yet you can be cryptographically convinced give you one other example identity has been a huge topic here I know a lot of you are interested in that let's say another slightly different scenario the client wants to ask the server a question wants to ask the client has a particular user or friend let's say in mind the client knows the friend's handle the server can say here's the answer you can verify this yourself so in this vision what I think we can make possible is I'm borrowing here a graphic from blockchain name which is one of the identity efforts there are many of these but they have this nice graphic so I borrowed it here so imagine if the server can send some representation of this identity information back to the client and the client's trusted interface verifies all of this information and so the client can simply trust what they're seeing reflects what's actually on the board I think we should be able to enable that so in other words what I'm saying here is that standardization could be a way to bypass this messy process of human crypto that's sort of the term that I like to use of users manually having to know what public private keys are having to check signature and so on one other technical example of a slightly more complex proof because I think it illustrates an important point now here this is the sort of thing that you can imagine in a system like name coin if you know about that so a client could ask what is the IP address corresponding to a particular domain name since this is a blockchain based domain name system it's a replacement port decentralized ICANN based domain name system the client asks the server what is the IP address for this domain name the server says here's a record here's a transaction record that maps this domain name example.bit .bit is an alternative hierarchy for name coin based domain names I do this particular IP address XX5.16 now do you think it's enough do you think it is sufficient that the server approves the statement over here to the client for the clients to be convinced that XYZZ is the IP address no exactly because that domain name might have changed hands there might be a new record so the server also has to prove this additional statement saying there is no future record after this record that concerns this particular example .bit domain so you can see this is a more complex notion of proof this won't fit into the simple marble tree based proof that I showed in the previous slide so this leads to if you want to enable a broader set of applications it leads to a very interesting set of questions for sanitization you know should we standardize a specific small set of proofs this is a similar to bitcoins approach of white lifting and punitive scripts or should we standardize a language for proofs similar to an Ethereum's approach of having a torrent complete system I know that many of you have thought about this I read this those look for fiduciary signatures where the authors have clearly done a lot of thinking for these language for proofs I get a lot of great ideas I don't have any answers here but these are I think important questions that we should address let's take this a little bit further let me show you just how much potential there is here that can be unlocked I want to claim that in this scenario verifiers can even be offline think about a typical IoT space in this one I'm using the example key I want to say that we can enable the following scenario if you want to for example loan your car to your friend for a period of the day what you could do in this hypothetical world is they could have a USB based car key and look at the USB port into which you can upload some information pertaining to queries the key it asks for over a year and the key says never mind who I am here is a graphic proof that shows that I'm authorized for a period of time starting and the car can verify this using information if you go to this offline model you're losing certain security properties you go into a weaker security model and I know that there are people who are even uncomfortable with the notion of thin bit coin clients slightly weaker security properties but my position on this is that the opportunity here is just so enormous that we should try to fix the security issues and improve the security properties instead of going away from the security I'm a little bit biased here so the win here for me is not having to put internet in not just cars but also toasters in every little IoT device or to have it interoperate with the blockchain what if we could do it without having to do that either with any other shit twitter account it's been cataloging all of the things that's been going disastrously wrong in the last couple of years with putting a chip and full internet access into toasters and everything else if you don't follow this by the way, forget about my talk as you can follow it and I'm sure right now that's the most important thing that you'll learn from this talk but my take on this is that standards can be a way to keep these clients thin and abusing both the obscenity and technical my companies here are interested in IoT and marrying that blockchain I'd love to hear your take I want to make a couple of more points this was the primary idea that I wanted to communicate this opportunity here but I want to make a couple more points and one is that it matters which blockchain we're talking about because let's go back to this visual imagine this notion of the client telling the server to do something on the blockchain and the server communicates about the proof even if it is the case that different lenders are able to do roughly the same set of things where you can identify some set of things that must be even if you can standardize this part this word proof down here is going to be pretty difficult to standardize but you've only solved half of it and let me explain what I mean by that so this part is going to really depend on the blockchain and one example of so why is this the case let me permit me for a moment to sort of deconstruct private blockchains here I'm going to use private blockchains interchangeably with permission lenders and if any of you use them in a different sense I'd love to know but for me they're going to be the same so what do private blockchains have in common? what do they have a difference from Bitcoin's blockchain for example they keep the notion of an appendable blog using hash pointers and virtual trees that I showed you in the previous they keep the notion of cryptographic identity they throw away the notion of proof of work obviously private blockchains they throw away this cool Nakamoto consensus concept which is one of the primary innovations behind Bitcoin and of course they dispense with the need a lot of different private blockchains have also gone back to this notion of Byzantine consensus protocols which go back in the computer science literature today I want to say the 1980s I'm not exactly sure but it's many decades what I want to make here is that this is a different technical configuration most of the technical components are all the technical components that exist in private blockchains go back decades in the computer science literature I mean this idea of purple trees purple trees in the newspaper before anybody had heard of the blockchain this is a company called GuardTime that collects documents from its clients enterprise clients and puts them into a purple tree of hashes and puts the root hash as an advertisement into the newspapers and it's published for all the world to see so every idea that's a private blockchains actually has a pedigree going back really for decades now why am I saying this I would also point out to one really funny tweet that to me really explains why private blockchains have been so successful this person argues that they've been sort of a stone soup for capital market technologies because they're on bitcoin and it's blockchain that have brought all these banks and all these entities to the table to discuss this news or supposedly news of technologies whereas all the underlying actual technical components behind private blockchains really go back to the 90s and 80s why am I saying this I'm saying this because private blockchains have dispensed with import with not motive consensus that means this component here what the blockchain is going to be able to prove to you is that this operation is totally different from public intelligence it's going to be totally different from Ethereum or if you look at some other blockchain that's in there so this is something we should keep in mind a number of different commenters I believe from Hyperledger VisualBazaar, IDFS have proposed this notion of interlinking different ledgers together I think that is good, that is important we should do that I do also want us to keep in mind that's the notion we have a couple of minutes so let me jump to my last point here, which is a note of caution if you've heard me speak on this topic before you knew I was going to get to this but often there is a tendency in the blockchain world to jump too far and try to see me tend to be evolving because I see nots in the audience I don't even have to explain it so I want to offer a note of caution on that instead of me explaining it I want to just read one quote from one of the submissions she says this is something I want to urge us to keep in mind and the reason I'm bringing this up is that here's the new thing I want to say I want to suggest that standardization can actually act as a key check inventing us from trying to seek technicals to ask us is this technology what are the benefits what are also the costs standardization forces us to do that it also acts as a point of regulation for how we want to use this technology and finally it imparts legibility some of you may know this term from books like seeing like the states what I mean here is standardization while it's primarily a process of getting a process in documenting and specifying what we're doing also allows the technology to be legible to people like lawyers to discuss about how we're using this technology in our social world and so I know that today these two days are days for a technical discussion standardization process I would love for us to keep this Marvin thank you so much Marta are you here do you want to come on up Marta is going to be the host for the identity lightning talks and everybody who's doing it you talk to them already is Vladimir here okay if he gets your time I guess he can do a lightning talk Daniel I guess you're first what's your background and three sentences about yourself so we know something about you before you talk and you have five minutes to give your lightning talk so my name is Daniel working Microsoft specifically I work on blockchain identity so here is presentation so I think really what blockchain can enable a few key things I really think it's going to transform our world bigger than sites files all of these cases it's going to come to define the fabric of how everything interacts so blockchain it's a lot of things that already exist it's easy to dismiss because we've had cryptography and peer networks are here Sean Parker is growing gray hair now and I can sense the algorithms are really really it's because of these things it's a lot like Apple does when they take first and created all these things exist in different parts so you prove you own these tokens whatever you want to value them as or how to stand for it's decentralized distributed and most importantly it's a proof of ownership and security so cryptography and security is actually the same to the world like network, local ledger a chronological state of ownership to the system and that's important because those are the same qualifications for something else of identity what is that? well identity is a collection of attributes activities and interactions and so the brass there's a lot of stuff out there about what do we need for identity Chris Fraun out there he has these 10 facets they're very technical facets we learn identity as a prize Kim Cameron Microsoft this is more of a product-centric view so what we need to really enable the decentralized app services all sorts of other stuff out of this system well it has to be an open system Microsoft can't go creating a proprietary thing it's going to listen to us it's got to be user sovereign so it can't be touchable by bad actors even the greatest government the best people can't trust it to open you so it has to suffer itself by the people it's a memberable identifier it's a huge important piece we can argue that we want to create an identity in life but that's important it's also important that a memberable identifier can be created because when I'm walking out in a conference I'm going to go indexable registries so I should be able to register these identifiers in a single place when I can look to one place to say I know his name was Dan I need to be able to find it and know where I'm going to find it and then obviously semantic data so the thing at the other end about identity must be semantic I have to understand machines so when I reach out and grab it everyone's identity isn't different the identity opportunity blockchain presents is historic and impressive why is that? well we've had signed data back by public private keys for a long long time but when you add that to what we already talked about blockchain being which was this brief of ownership we can start registering transactions on a blockchain that reserve names and that becomes interesting because so once you can start registering names essentially co-opting the transactions on a blockchain to do this you can build links out to identity data and then a registry of that data so I can essentially build a name system which is incredibly important because this name system is unknown second clan, an open user sovereign global identity system will be integrated with almost every product, service objects, inanimate objects human activity, possibly imagine and this includes use cases like licenses, agreements documentation, attestation real-time data and here's probably the most wild claim I truly believe that the data that comprises all those use cases I just listed will not live in any fashion on the blockchain we'll talk about the source data generating a miracle putting the hash in the blockchain all those things are irrelevant instead they'll be enabled by the blockchain we know there's a scale problem with blockchains and it's for a good reason so there might be a better way so let's take a look at one example I have a person Jane, she's going to buy a car there's a lender involved in a sales woman so the normal way that this would be done in a lot of these blockchains is where people aspire to is they create some sort of loan object and they have the source data you have to keep it because if there's ever a dispute for the loan on line 9 character 4 I have to actually go look up the loan a hash doesn't do me any if I take a hash of that and put it on the blockchain and I lose the source material guess what, it's worth nothing if someone disputes that, they have to produce it so you get nothing it's important to remember that so instead do this have everyone in the system even the car itself have a blockchain based when the dealership generates these objects Jane, it's generated by the sales woman she signs it the lender bill, he signs it because blockchain identity Jane agrees to those terms so she signs the object with her blockchain identity understand that nothing that occurred here happened on the blockchain their identities that were rooted in the blockchain so they waterfall that trust right, so I'm signing these objects and in the end I give a copy of this signed object to everyone in the group and at any point in the future they can bear that object to prove multiple things it contains the source it contains a verification of everyone that agreed to it and it's proofable and the result here is the point of all this where I think we want to head with identity hope you will join us with is that we can enable line speeds we can enable things that line speed with identity, out clogging a blockchain that are enabled by a blockchain there's something kind of important to keep in mind is releasing new cases over the next two days and all the systems that we're talking about maybe there's a really efficient way next will be Thomas Hart yeah, I think Harjano talking about self-source verifiable identities for future blockchains and as Thomas is setting up I wanted to just tell you that we decided to talk about identity first I'm not sure if I've talked about it because as the steering committee we really believe that identity is one of the most important issues or something that would span in our conversations throughout the whole two days so we wanted to kind of get it out of the way as one of the biggest issues of the blockchain we hope though that's why this is like the first series of hiking talks that we'll have we will later on move to the other big issues that we'll do folks, just a quick intro I work in MIT Connections Science see a few faces from the group here so, but anyway I'm going to talk about identity trust and data which is the three things that are inseparable so, you know, people like to talk about identity great, I'm big on that I've been doing that for a few decades there's an issue of trust and there's also an issue of data and data could mean data is in broad data it could be in metadata, but identity is so, it's a lightning talk so I'm just going to do like four or five slides so, the question is does blockchain technologies solve the following three things that we care about, so the identity problem so it doesn't help us with this question of the quality of an identity system or specifically the security of a digital representation of an identity doesn't help us dependence so we'd love to talk about self-sovereign identities, but how do you measure that how sovereign is an identity what's the gating argument what's the source of an identity so I could argue that the source of my identity is my parents so baby doesn't get to say what is of her identity it's always in parents, in fact in traditional societies it's a community decision so the parents might say, well here's my new baby the name is Joe Blow you live in a village, great the village is going to be a community that's going to attest to that name henceforth so if you look at traditional societies you see people's last names they usually become the village name Joe from whatever Cambridge and when Joe Cambridge goes to to meet Bill Newton from Newton Village there's something going on there it's not all straightforward so that's an issue so there's an issue with a whole bunch of questions I have about this issue of privacy binding to real world attributes and reputations the provenance of an identity the provenance of trust within us and availability and persistence so if you're using an identity a digital identity to transact today who's going to archive it if you can call the question 10 years from now it's going to be available with it and I lose the key what's going to happen so these are all classic problems so does blockchain solve the data problem so this is a pain point just looking at the industry today it's data loss prevention DLP industry that have just grown in the past five years we haven't heard about it so organizations are holding massive amounts of data it's great people want to do analytics people want to do the infrastructure they want to have the terabytes of data well guess what the business community can't share data across institutions their regulatory limitations transporter issues but just for the individual enterprises holding user data they are a great attraction for hackers people remember the Anthem database nothing was lost but the whole bunch of records were coffee so how do you solve this issue what is the ownership of data so there are now in fact organizations in Europe who are saying here's your data you can take it back because we don't want the life so how does blockchain technology help this blockchain technology to allow a metadata to be indexed in search these are issues the trust problem this is the hard one right when you come to talk about digital identities it's a trust problem I like to talk about technical trust and social trust technical trust is a big thing in trust computing because technical trust basically implements cryptography and I like to say in cryptography trust that just gives you technical trust it doesn't give you legal trust social trust is most often encoded as legal so people who are working in the identity space would know what legal trust framework is for identity so we need to solve that problem if there's anything that needs to be standardized it would be a legal trust framework for identity sharing and for data sharing these two are really identity yes but definitely not data sharing trust list is not a equivalent to trustworthy decentralization doesn't map automatically into trust just because something is on a blockchain it doesn't give you trust social trust finally we have to think about we have another problem which is the privacy problem so MIT here is working on a paradigm based on these three principles this was the problem never allow raw data to leave your repository this is breaking out the Hadoop model big data analytics role that data needs to be encrypted all the time that means data in operation or at rest that's why people are spending a lot of time on common morphic encryption this is why MIT Enigma the Enigma project is getting a lot of interest because it provides an avenue for solution always return how do you get answers these are the three principles we think that blockchain technology you get a pair of nodes will have a role particularly for something like Enigma where you have a distributed repository always encrypted where you actually do one series over that was likely thank you Thomas okay Vladimir then Ryan yes you are Ryan we'll talk about software and identity with Blockstack everyone good to be here so yes my name is Ryan Shea and I'm with Blockstack and how many of you have heard of Blockstack we're doing this awesome and who here knows one name so I'm with a source movement called Blockstack the company that I work for is called Blockstack Labs and we work on the protocol and contribute and we also created an application called one name and just a little bit more about who we are so this is our core team it's myself the size the font size yeah I can't really I'll make sure in the future slides that the font size is bigger so that's me my co-founder Maneeb Guy and Jude we have two computer science PhDs from Princeton we also have two Princeton professors as advisors and we've worked on the PDP systems for decades we are the most popular most used layer 2 protocol on the Bitcoin blockchain that means outside of Bitcoin for financial transactions Blockstack transaction represents the largest system on top of the Bitcoin blockchain and because the Bitcoin blockchain really only has it's the only blockchain with meaningful use that also means that it's the most used protocol across all blockchains this is an older graphic but this is the growth of identity registrations over time it has since surpassed this but we continuously get new registrations and we actually represent Blockstack represents one of the largest systems to date that's just a little quick introduction I want to shift gears and talk about digital identity for a second so when we talk about digital identity we can refer to many different things people often are referring to people but it can also refer to organizations devices and ideas and since money is an idea but I want to focus on people right now and when we're talking about identity there's kind of two interrelated concepts that we're talking about one is this idea of entity persistence and another is a bundle of attributes so with entity persistence all you care about is this is the same thing that I was referring to before this is the same thing that I saw before once you have entity persistence you can actually build bundles of attributes on top of those persistent entities often times we don't actually have true entity persistence and so what we do is we use the bundles of attributes as a proxy to inform this entity persistence so for example if I go out and leave the room and I come back you might not know I'm the same person my physical features and deduce that I'm the same person but if I had a twin I could actually be a different person so because you don't have that continuity of observation of something then we actually don't have true entity persistence in the real world unless we have physical cameras everywhere but what's really interesting is with the blockchain we can actually get true entity persistence in the digital identity world we can get entity persistence through digital keys so long as that key system doesn't get broken and we can also have users sign challenges for their keys to prove to continuously authenticate throughout time and then when it comes to bundles of attributes users can sign statements about themselves and then other people can sign statements about them and there are multiple entities that can corroborate these statements so I'm going to introduce a few concepts here first I'm going to say that when a user owns an account and there's no context around that account we're just going to refer to that as basic identity if there are self-attested attributes I'm going to call that contextual identity and then if there's attestations from trusted parties then we can refer to that as a level of verified identity and if it's managed by the person with digital keys then we can say that it is self-sovereign identity as in the user has sovereignty over themselves we can move on to identity with the blockchain and we can ask ourselves why do we actually need a blockchain for this and the reasons for that are one we want to build an identity system that's as global and universal as the internet we want something that supports secure information transfer and we want it to be resilient we want it to be free from identity theft and social engineering and various properties of the blockchain can allow us to achieve that certain things belong on the blockchain, certain things don't digital keys, domain names pointers and hashes belong on the blockchain things that don't belong on the blockchain are both public and private user data self-assigned attestations and third party attestations let's get through this so going back to block stack real quick we have as I mentioned before there is this block stack network that operates as a layer on top of bitcoin and there are multiple clients that operate on top so this is kind of how we thought of it in terms of building a truly decentralized system for naming an identity of public key infrastructure and so I want to go into in the last section what the power of blockchain identity is what can enable so blockchain identities can replace passports drivers licenses, student ID cards social security numbers, passwords Facebook, twitter, google log and physical keys and key cards, security questions if we really want to have a universal identity that can be used in all kinds of different contexts with privacy features of course with features where you can do a minimal disclosure proof that you actually have authorization to access something then we can say that it's more convenient for the user if we can have something that works across all different contexts blockchain identities can be useful in financial services, healthcare services, internet of things, armored forces we really have the potential to create something that is truly universal is powerful is it's similar to how email and password, the email and password is a fairly universal identity system but it is very primitive it has lots of problems so if we want something that is similar to that in its universality but has a lot more capabilities and a lot more security then we need something that is an open standard and is on an open platform and that's where blockchain identity comes in and that's where it's you can check this out if you want more information on it and thank you guys very much it's Adrian Rupper that we'll talk about self-server and support technology okay so I'm going to describe a pilot that we're working on for to demonstrate self-server and support technology and decentralized for medical prescription if regulated and real world sense. I participate in standards and policy development from the privacy engineering perspective and so in effect I'm sort of I love Darwin's takeaway in terms of both the standards and the real social impact so is to use the blockchain to reduce the liability of these potential participants while promoting innovation overall in the system and so what you're looking at here is that a medical prescription involves four parties self-server and two institutions this is the pharmacy which is a regulated situation and the medical society which is in effect managing the license of the so basically the countable, the empty license the medical society is authoritative and the pharmacy is regulated and I live and demonstrate the standards and how this will work in real life I think this is a reasonably broad use case for what's going on here as I said the goal is to reduce the liabilities of all parties and parties to make that point to yourself who's the middle man in this case right now we're used to having something like a hospital that then identifies the patient and in effect that becomes a drag on in a visual sense so the idea is to show it as this concept pilot the standards for self-suffering technology that people are looking to get some of the technology that's used by the patient to interact with each other and it basically will involve the distributor ID the authorization for how personal information moves from one place to another and the transaction hash as a visual post-part in order to be able to find issues and disputes that might arise and so finally there's a group of doctors there that stands for self-solving, support technology and the distributor ID where you can find their information so Vladimir have you showed up I guess so these are all so are people satisfied with these as sort of the topic areas or does anyone else have a topic area and identity that they'd like to form a topic table about sorry I didn't hear this explicitly spelled out there's a bit of work going on in the Verifiable Claims Task Force at W3C I'm sorry around Verifiable Claims so the question is how are we supposed to express statements around identity and there's specific work happening right now to try and start the standards track thing it's very experimental for these standards but I think we should probably be able to so one thing that I didn't hear was how efficiently can we verify that it's very easy to lie without looking at the blockchain we're just putting two identities in the chain and showing the work of proof but it turns out you know that's not an non-membership proof so I would like to see some discussion about efficient management I'm sure if it's separate I just seem like a slightly different case from say the medical one as we're interested in identity from the point of view of education what else is interesting to talk about a project going on in India about a universal identity where you know the iris scan of people is taken and you get in a car with your QR code with your identity on it my key talent from a people perspective is the acquisition and creating of that identity specifically these people are going into remote places having small kids and providing identity to illiterate people who can't even read and write and still should be or having the capability of opening an account and how do we get out there how do we ensure that we can propagate identity process not just in developed countries or countries having access to all kinds of themes with which this can be created but how do we take it across to 7 billion people or maybe 5 billion of those who do not have this kind of an access my name is Jay and we're working on a tournament which is a blockchain consensus engine it's mostly known in private blockchain space but we would argue that it can also work in public space with a proof of stake overlay but anyways the point is that using classical Byzantine fault tolerant consensus using cryptographic public keys as identity for securing the chain to get much better like-kind proofs anyone else on identity? I'm Joshua from BT I just spoke about identity and the fact is that identity management system has identification authentication that is authorization so something you've been looking at is for example to put in the context that the magnification is good if you have say biometrics in place and identity management that's quite relevant as we've been exploring how to do authorization as probably there so I would like to discuss so what we're doing so listen to these topics if any of these interest you more than the we're going to have a topic table for each one of the topics that comes up if any of them interest you just keep in mind which one you want to go to I'll also ask people who just talked about things that they would like to talk about to start moving towards the front so that we'll see them and we'll just start forming groups or whatever it will be easier that way yeah and we'll try to probably merging some of the topics together I will throw in one thing which is what is the minimum set of things that belongs to identity on the blockchain I just want to clarify if I was to do a table the subject I'd really like to talk about is taking all these things off-chain like all these things that you see what blockchain, how do you do it with identity that's the same way so I lead the hyper ledger identity working group and in about 15 minutes there's a conference call where IBM is going to be presenting about membership services so if you are interested in hyper ledger IBM's membership services we have a separate room for people to capture and their thoughts around I'm sorry so hyper ledger has one proposal which is IBM's fabric IBM's fabric has a unique identity architecture with some of its own cryptographic primitives that IBM has not been really clear about the architecture about how it works today is the day that they're announcing how it works and all of that so if you're interested if you've got a deep commitment to the hyper ledger project you may want to come in and join this it'll end at the same time these breakouts if you follow me any of these topics go to the person that you're interested in okay so now people who want to do a table discussion and have something to talk about or had an idea please move towards the front of the room so all the people who gave lightning cults or stood up and held the microphone for 30 seconds please move towards the front of the room we'll pass the mic and please summarize in five words or less okay two sentences what you wanted to talk about and if you think that you can merge with someone who was talking before or after you please merge so that we can actually have working groups and not yes good idea well it's a simple topic to say which is you know how do we get this identity across to more people in the world have a proof of concept now for the patients and physicians to use it doesn't have a blockchain component in it and this pilot that I was talking about is to make a component for a legal pilot so I guess medical application blockchain on medical application amazing like client Merkle proofs or proofs in general for a clarifying idea


Prime Minister, our discussions today were upland doubly strength of the bonds of friendship between our two nations. I'm pleased to report that, though today's meeting was our first, we talked with the directness and ease of two longtime colleagues. This tells me, far more than words alone, that the relations between our countries are in good shape and good hands. Mr. Prime Minister, under your guidance, Pakistan is moving toward the realization of the cherished, its cherished democratic ideals. The democratic path is long and difficult, but free people travel that road together. America is with you as you proceed toward this noble goal.  Pakistan's determination to see Soviet troops out of Afghanistan strengthens the resolve of free men everywhere. Please take this message back to your people.  With you, we look to the day when a free Afghanistan will again be independent and truly nonaligned, the day when the millions of Afghans who have fled can return to their homes and their land to pursue their own destiny. It's time to get on with the business of peace. We Americans understand and support the aspirations of the people of Pakistan for greater prosperity and progress in a region free of tension and threats of conflict. And we applaud and strongly support the steady improvement in relations between your country and India. And we're delighted with the commitment Pakistan and its South Asian partners have made to new ventures in regional cooperation. Mr. Prime Minister, let us build on the solid foundation laid down by American and Pakistan leaders over the years. Our countries continue to share common interests and common goals. By standing together, we can make this a freer and a more peaceful world. Pakistan's national poet philosopher, Mohammed Iqbal, once said, �My life, O God, should be like that of a candle, so that through my efforts I may try to dispel the darkness of evil and illumine the whole world.� Well, Pakistan and the United States together can be a light under the world. And so, ladies and gentlemen, let us offer a toast to the distinguished Prime Minister of Pakistan and to a future made bright by the light of friendship between our nations and peoples. In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful. Junaab-e-Saidah, Mrs. Regan, Qwateen-u-Hazrat, As-salamu-Alaikum. You have expressed your gratitude to me and my country for the wonderful emotions that have been expressed with kindness. I thank you for that. Your words show the strong relations between the two nations. Your hospitality and your personal interest in the establishment of Pakistan is a sign of strength and determination for us. Junaab-e-Saidah, this is the result of your wisdom, wisdom and distance between the two nations that Taban and Israq have gained a new medium. And our relations have entered a new era. We have a mutual sympathy and a good-natured passion that has been in the relations between the two nations since the foundation of friendship. In our region, the present situation that has arisen is being fully understood by you. You are the only person who has said the words on some other occasion. We have not bowed our heads in front of the chaotic circumstances that have arisen on our western borders. In fact, as far as we are able, we have fought them bravely. For us, it is a sign of happiness and satisfaction that you have also felt the need for this. For our peace and security in our region, it was necessary that the traditional friendship of Pakistan and America be given a new heritage and heritage. While we were growing up between Pakistan and America, we are proud of Taban and friendship. The foundation of this Taban and friendship is the accepted principles. These principles are the ones that the international brothers accept. That is, the freedom of peace and security of the people and their right to self-believe in our region are not against any country's legitimate interests. I would like to thank the people of Afghanistan for their help. The fact is that we, the international brothers, have supported the people's right to self-believe in their region. We, the people of Afghanistan, are very close to each other and we are very close to each other. That is why we have been able to help them as much as we could in their difficult times. We could not even think of helping them in any way. This was our moral and human nature that we have helped more than 30,000 Afghans to hide their wrongdoings and wrongdoings so that their problems and troubles could be lessened. During this time, most of Pakistan's territories have been destroyed and destroyed as a result of which many innocent citizens were killed or injured. But our people endured these sacrifices and are still doing it. We are sure that they will not regret the fact that we have been able to help them in their difficult times. The problems and troubles of the Afghans will end and their country will be free from the attacks of other countries. We will be able to return to our homes with respect and respect. It is our belief that the Afghans should be proud of the support that America has given to the Afghans. We are also sure that we will remember the history of our region as a leader. From the beginning, we fought with the Afghans but not the Afghans. You faced a big challenge and it resulted in the peaceful result that was a sign of the freedom and mercy of the world. This is what America's government have been thankful for We are grateful to him for his help, and we look at him from the perspective of his value. With this help, our economic progress has increased significantly, and with him, in the Pakistani nation, the spirit of self-confidence has also been created. For the last few years, Pakistan has taken many steps for the sake of peace and friendship in South Asia. We have suggested that the opportunities of war should be cut off, and that the military should be reduced. We have also suggested that there should be a lot of progress in the development of nuclear weapons. In South Asia, on the other hand, India and other countries of the region are busy with negotiations with each other. Mr. President, there is no doubt that the policy you have adopted is based on facts. Your point of view has proven to be wrong. Your point of view has been very helpful in removing the high values such as peace and friendship. There has been a reduction in the number of casualties, and there has been a lot of progress in the process of removing the signs and signs. At present, the region of South Asia is clearly in the hands of the United States, and it is in the hands of all the countries of this region who are in the hands of the United States. We hope that you will be satisfied with the acceptance of your policy, and the failure to accept it successfully. We also hope that you will first be able to visit Pakistan in time, so that you can see the results of the success of the U.S. policy. Mr. President, on this occasion, I invite you and Mrs. Regan to visit the government of Pakistan. Where your tradition will be accepted with enthusiasm and enthusiasm. In the end, I would like to invite the ladies and gentlemen to visit the government of Pakistan for the health of the President of the United States, Mrs. Nancy Reagan. Here, for the health of all our friends, for the peace and happiness of the United States and for the happiness and strength of the great people of the United States, and for the peace and friendship of Pakistan and the United States, I am a member of the United States of America. Thank you.