hGkXBvR
A practical example is signing the message “I, user 1234, am sending 1000 USDC to user 5678”
The constitution DAO was pretty successful application of the tech. Within a week, they went from idea to public fundraiser, raised more than they would have been allowed to on Kickstarter or GoFundMe, had immediate access to the funds, and paid 0% commission compared to what most corporate platforms would charge. When the bid failed, donors were able to seamlessly exchange their PEOPLE tokens for their initial deposit. The whole process was faster than Kickstarter’s 14 day settlement.
The fees could be mitigated by using a rollup.
They lost the auction because their maximum fixed bid was public knowledge, but another application of this tech could just activate the funds toward the goal such as putting it toward carbon removal.
Disclosure: I was one of the donors and I knew the risks and also the fees involved, and I was satisfied with the whole process. A low fee tech like this on a rollup would be great.
It’s also pretty hard to “address” the post as, in broad strokes, many crypto people will agree with her. Nobody wants all data to be public on a blockchain. Worldcoin is disturbing. SBTs are poorly named and not perfect. Identity data posted on an immutable ledger is dystopian, and why ZK proofs are getting so much attention to try and solve this.
Just to take a specific comment:
> Now [Buterin’s] revealing here that his dreams for soulbound tokens involve police departments uploading criminal records to the blockchain. [..] Not only that, but he’s envisioning a world in which every police department uploads criminal records to a blockchain, providing the level of data completeness required to prove a negative.
That whole paragraph sounds like a crazy rant by Molly. Vitalik never said that criminal records in the real world should be posted to a public blockchain. His statement was that it can be useful to verify some record of a user before taking some action with them. In the real world one way this is done is with a criminal background check.
Vitalik often points to ZK proof primitives to avoid posting any private data online. Molly does not seem to take this into account, and hardly gives it a passing mention when she earlier writes:
> Buterin brushes this off with the argument that such a system could use zk-SNARKs to encrypt the token contents as well as its sender and recipient.
To the casual reader it might seem like Vitalik wants to put private real-world data on a public ledger. But this is not the reality of his statements.
- it provides identity tools that use standards that span across geographical and platform boundaries. this is a different form of “user account” than say an online Amazon or NYStateGov account. it is good to have an option on the web for auth and identity that is detached from any single corporate entity or jurisdiction.
- unlike most of the world’s current identity systems, many of the SSI systems can and are using novel cryptography, which can combine with privacy and encryption techniques such as hashing, private keys and zk-proofs. so instead of sending photos of your passport and drivers license all over the web, SSI allows you to sign a message on a public ledger, or send a zero knowledge proof that the other end can verify.
SSI doesn’t need to replace typical identity and web auth but it could be introduced as another option.
But something like a Kickstarter-ish crowdfund system could be using a blockchain contract to handle funding and escrow, while the rest of the website is hosted in a standard web2 way. Suddenly it’s a “web3 project” where users are able to interact with and even own records in the contract, outside the context of a single frontend website.