Darrell O'Donnell will be at IIW, 

Neil Thomson co-chair of Data Modeling &___ WG authentic data vs authentic identity, follow on from ISWG many others on same track, triangle similar to issuer, holder, verifier, but different. One issuer, thousands of data providers.  How are these sources and issuers different? what denotes authenticity, consent etc - how do these fit together  e.g. DIF Data Agreements Group, same with Consent, discussions about the process/agreement, but not about the data.

Many reviewers and excellent comments on the paper  leading to improvements on the paper.  Many discussions needed going forward, further work.

Continuing the discussion: Overcoming Harms_Further Discussion Document, initially including detailed and thought provoking commentary from Jill Bamforth.  

Progress against ToDo's

•  take out the moon analogy, Thank you Phil Wolff 
•  move frameworks to appendix & trim
•  simplify and clarify text
•  improve exec summary so that it is a 2min useful read - Darrell O'Donnell looking into. following incorporation of additional community comments
•  remember to add in Pyrou's Dusun people case study
•  draw out the flip side of benefits
•  add business case (Phil Wolff )  Important point about the commercial so-what, Nicky Hickman noted that harms are costs, a similar question to  Michael Becker who asked for thoughts on an article Personal Data Damages: A Reflection on Major vs Micro Concussions

 "A colleague asked me a question today "do you have a personal data harms stat that you can share that will help me shake up an executive? A stat that is so blatantly damaging that it will compel them to invest in the development of personal information management solutions and lean into being a personal information economy leader." 

Harms are costs: they cost businesses billions in customer services, abuse management systems, security, fraud management, reputational damage and opportunity cost. At the same time they cost every public purse billions mopping up the after-effects e.g. healthcare, benefits, national cybersecurity, ... As soon as that senior exec realises that the microharms not only impact his bonus, but also his taxes your friend will have his attention!  Energy concerns also adding in Environment section.  Energy & Resource costs of Tech, how do you reduce those harms. 

Is there a business case for addressing harms, or is it a moral endevour?

Darrell O'Donnell - need concrete examples.  Impact on employees of firms.

Neil Thomson - many things that may be done are additional benefits of using SSI, security benefit.  Future-proofing also a benefit, freebies by adopting SSI.

•  change PEST to PESTEL adding in environmental and legal categories (Jill Bamforth, sankarshan )

• Politics - Manipulation: Digital Identity and Democracy  REQUIRES DISCUSSION
  • include uncomfortable comments and statements
• Economics - Datafication: Digital Identity as a Means of Production
• Society - Fragmentation: Digital Identity and Globalisation
• Technical - Innovation: Digital Identity and Efficiency
• Environmental - Dissociation: Digital Identity and Anthropocentrism REQUIRES DISCUSSION
  • Pyrou - environmental and economic costs, draw out role of indigenous people in stewardship of carbon sinks etc, legalising displacement, double effect, harming them as people and also create more environmental harms.  EG Carbon sequestration, environmental degredation, offsetting this harm with rights = global good
• Legal - Identification: Digital Identity as a Function of the Nation-State

•  Glossary and definitions (in progress, see below)
•  References tidy and x-check
•  Github vs Gdocs and required publication routes - Darrell O'Donnell said that this for Public Review - IPR reasons needs to be in github. Christine Martin will share process with group so that public review can be in github
  •  Concerns about audience with Github excluding people, can be 
  •  sankarshan concerns, enough has been done to seek external reviews, little new reviews, so need to draw a line and move forward in subsequent TF or wider community
  •  Pyrou also agreed.  Folks want it to be practical & specific, but does it need to be in this document.  
  •  sankarshan github is main review tool, following publication can use github for issues or provide feedback on PDF, those issues can then form a new version of the Doc.  Not like code, opinion rather than code, not immediately in the main branch.  Conversation not code.
•  Separate documents: note in conclusion next steps.
•  Pyrou - need alternative publication route than github because won't reach those it needs to.  
•  sankarshan conversations will happen elsewhere, very specific use of Github in this initial review cycle.
•  writing a blog post Pyrou will draft by end next week
•  Readiness for IIW session - volunteer from Neil Thomson to host session if no others more closely involved with the work volunteer. Darrell O'Donnell and Neil Thomson to work together on hosting a session with key discussion points.