Systèmes de reconnaissance d'identité alternatifs (votez, s'il vous plait)



Les humains naissent et demeurent libres et égaux en droit
(Déclaration des droits de l’homme et du citoyen, 1789)

If I am not equal to another human, am I less, or more, human ?

An honest human deserves maybe more than a fraudster. I agree with that, but that is a society choice. To make society choices (speaking about money), each individual has to get the same money rights : creating the same share of money. Be it a fraudster or not.

(I know, that is a digression)

edit : btw, Aristotle wrote in a society that lived on slavery. That is not my ideal society.


Everyone can write in the bockchain but according to specific rules, and with lot of cross-checking. Sometimes 2 people write in it at the same time, and you have 2 blockchains that cannot interoperate anymore (more info on “fork resolution” to solve this problem)

These specifics rules need some code, that’s doable but somebody need to write it.


There are quorums who solve the aforementioned problem, and a fork does not occur.


I don’t say it is difficult, I don’t say it is not already at 95%, I talk about the remaining 5%


Each individual has to get the same money rights, as long as he desires that. The fraudsters and the irresponsibles / indifferent obviously do not desire to have equal (to the other people) money rights . That’s why it is not a unfair to expel them.


Lets stick to the 95% of the cases and hope that the rest 5% will be solved.
There are BIPs (and DIPs) who deal with that kind of issues


Fraudsters and irresponsibles obviously do not desire to have equal (to the other people) money rights .

How do you know that children or insane people don’t want to have the same money rights than other people ?

Fraudsters and irresponsibles obviously do not desire to have equal (to the other people) money rights.

Yes, they obviously want to have more money rights. Is it a reason for me to want them have less than I do ? If it is the only solution to prevent fraud, as a punishment, why not (that is social decision, that should not be part of the blockchain, and there are other punishments). Otherwise, I don’t get the point.

edit : about “indifferent” people : well, if they don’t want, they are free not to create money. :slight_smile:


It is not 5% of the problems that is not solved. Someone will have to type code to put every brick of code you talked about together, and that need some work.


I think the real work is to convince people to run a doodle and agree in a common date.
Then everything else will be easy. The more the participants, the more probable will be to find some people able to put the code bricks together.


If nobody write the code, even if you gather everybody the blockchain won’t work. You’ll have a nice list of QR codes and nothing else.

If you plan to launch your own crypto-currency like that, I encourage you to do so. I’m not convinced but perhaps other people will be. An advice I can give you is to first convince a dev, because he/she will need time and non-devs perhaps won’t be happy to wait so long.


A nice list of proven individuals, even from a single closed room, is a beggining. And the beginning is half of everything. This seed of proven individuals can spread all over the internet, and organize more meetings.


That list would be a nice beginning perhaps, yes. In that case I don’t know what you expect in coming on this forum.


I am unable to convince people who are close to me, about it.
Try it in the people close to you, and you will understand how much difficult it is…


I spoke about irresponsible / indifferent people and about fraudsters. Not about children or insanes. The children and the insanes can participate in the meetings with the help of a guide/parent.

Yes. If you want more, you should be in danger to lose the less. The temporary punishments are sometimes necessary.


Ok, I humbly think the problem is the basics, that are not well defined.

Forget about the technical way (crypto-parties, blockchain, etc…) that is not the most important.

  • Why this community would be for ?
  • What would be the rules to have the right to enter this community ?
  • What would be the benefits for its members to be part of it ?
  • What would be the interactions with non-members ?
  • Who can decide what and how (unanimity ? 51% consensus ? etc…) ?

Once this is defined, gather some people, refine all this, and after that you will be better equiped to choose between different technical solutions.

If you look at Duniter, these questions were answered mainly in the TRM. People gathered around it, remaining questions were discussed, and after that the small group decided to choose some technical solutions (blockchain, WoT) and write Duniter.


The community is just a community of proven individuals (aka proof of individuality) that, for now on, they can meet in the internet and they can be sure that they talk with real individuals and not with fake accounts. And above all they can be sure that there is no severe fraud in case a voting occurs.

All the rest questions you are posing can be discussed and voted in the internet.


Duniter suffers because of lack of governance and because of lack of democracy.
Duniter community is allergic of voting.
Why dont you put all your above questions to the already formed duniter community?


So it is mainly a voting community.
Without the community, I don’t need to vote for anything depending on it, so I don’t plan to go in a closed room for that.
In Duniter case, based on the TRM, the community use the WoT. It is not perfect, but actually it work. If the community want to change the system (and there are discussions about that) it will need a lot of code => a lot of time from a dev. If somebody show us a working system we can decide, but actually we have the WoT (which is working) and only concepts for other systems. We cannot really choose.

Duniter is not a democracy, it is a tyranny : everybody rely on the shoulders of 1 slave (hi @cgeek).

If somebody else write a modification of the actual software, the community will choose which one it want. But saying “Slave, provide us a different software without retribution” is not a democracy either.

All the above questions have already be discussed, and the answers are avaiable on the forum. If you want I can write what I think the answers are.


This is the bold rule.


It is a voting community, that also receives a dividend.