Embed Notice

@c060b31fe2bbb0be4d393bc7c40a80848a25b8f0e0f382cb5b49c37bf7476cb4@mostr.pub I don't really understand the importance of cryptographic identities. I'd actually argue that cryptographic identities, like what BlueSky argues for, only serves as a means of tying real identity to user account in an immutable way that reduces the opportunity for anonymity and primarily benefits those interested in tracking and data harvesting (think, targeted advertisements, e.g.). We've gone decades without cryptographic identities, nor any glaring, missing vacancy asking for cryptographic identities. I know it's a bit sensational to claim that Web3 doesn't have to involve "muh blockchains" and "muh cryptography", but it really doesn't (and probably shouldn't).