Saturday, March 15, 2025

Recognition, Identity, and AI: Building Trust in Digital Agents

My first love was self-sovereign distributed data, where each person owns and controls their data, hosting it wherever they choose and permissioning it under their own terms. But I got lost in the complexity of building a robust distributed identity infrastructure. How can you give permission to someone if you can’t 'name' them in a way that is verifiable and resistant to subversion? There's no point in saying "only John can access this" if Tom can show up and convincingly say, "I'm John."

This issue isn’t theoretical—many modern digital problems stem from weak identity foundations. Take email, for example. SMTP, the core protocol, evolved without a strong sense of identity. Had we designed email with a robust identity layer—and maybe a little reputation—spam might have been less rampant. Instead, we've had to patch identity onto email systems, mostly at the DNS layer. Could better choices early on have changed the landscape of digital trust?

As we enter the era of AI and Personal AI, this challenge resurfaces. We will increasingly rely on agents to interact, assist, and even make decisions on our behalf. But how can we trust these agents? How do we know they are who they claim to be, and whose interests they truly serve? When I ask my AI how to unwind after a long day, it might suggest a refreshing Diet Coke. But is that suggestion rooted in understanding my preferences, or is it influenced by unseen commercial incentives?

Recognition and Identity in AI

In the animal world, intelligence is often measured by the ability to recognize oneself and others. The mirror test is a classic example—when an animal identifies itself in a reflection, it demonstrates a form of self-awareness. Similarly, recognizing specific others—distinguishing one individual from another—marks advanced cognitive development.

AI, in contrast, remains limited in this capacity. While AI excels at pattern recognition, it lacks the ability to form a persistent sense of identity, either of itself or others. This limitation restricts its ability to build trust and context in interactions. Without a foundation for recognizing specific entities, AI systems risk becoming tools of confusion or exploitation.

Embedding Identity Systems into AI

One solution is to deeply embed identity frameworks into AI architectures from the outset. Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs), Verifiable Credentials (VCs), and similar systems could provide AI with a structured way to "recognize" and differentiate entities.

  • Persistent Identity Chains: AI could track verifiable chains of identity, ensuring that when it reports information—like "Brad says buy this stock"—it can verify that it truly came from the Brad you trust.

  • Verification of Origin: By leveraging cryptographically verifiable credentials, AI can ensure that information hasn’t been tampered with and originates from a trusted source.

  • Reputation Frameworks: Identity systems could incorporate reputation mechanisms, helping AI prioritize information from sources that consistently meet a trust threshold.

  • Chain of Custody: AI could provide transparency on how information was received and processed, ensuring that its recommendations are based on data with verifiable origins.

The Path to Trusted AI

Trustworthy AI isn’t about making machines socially aware; it’s about ensuring that humans can trust the chain of custody behind AI-generated insights. When AI states that "Brad recommends this action," it should be able to prove that the recommendation came from the right "Brad"—the person you trust, not an imposter or manipulated data source.

The real question is: How do we create systems where AI is not just technically accurate but verifiably trustworthy? In an era where decisions increasingly rely on AI advice, embedding identity systems at the core isn’t just beneficial—it’s fundamental.

Tuesday, January 28, 2025

Take 1... Solid Pods and Dids

My first attempt at building a decentralized app in this day and age will use Solid Pods and DIDs. The goal? A super simple “BooksWeLike” app—a place where I can review books and see what my friends are reading and enjoying.


What makes this app different is how it handles data. Unlike traditional apps where data lives in a centralized database, my app will let users store their own data in Solid Pods. Think of a Pod as your own personal data vault—you control who can access it and how it’s used. And instead of relying on centralized logins like Google or Facebook, I’ll use Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs), which allow users to prove their identity on their own terms.


The plan for the app is straightforward:

If you already have a DID or a Solid Pod, you can sign in using your existing accounts.

If you don’t, the app will help you create them when you sign up.


Of course, part of this journey is figuring out how practical and possible all of this really is. Beyond building the app, I’ll also evaluate the tools, SDKs, client libraries, and documentation available for Solid and DID developers. How well is the building community being enabled? I’ll compare my experience with other distributed ecosystems as I attempt to replicate this app in different environments in the future. Once the app exists across multiple ecosystems, I can explore broader topics like ecosystem interoperability and federation.


These technologies are still evolving, and I’m excited to explore what’s possible—and what needs improvement.


So, what about you? Have you already taken the plunge into the world of DIDs or Solid Pods? Or is this your first time hearing about them? Let’s find out together as I document this journey.


In my next post, I’ll dive into the nitty-gritty of authentication—getting users to log in with their DIDs and connecting them to their Pods. I suspect it’s trickier than it sounds, but that’s all part of the adventure.

Sunday, January 12, 2025

Is anybody out there?

Is blogging still a thing?

If you’re reading this, please comment or like it so I know.


I am, at heart, still the XDI Guy. My passion for robust, secure, and scalable distributed data management hasn’t waned. Building one of the first XDI implementations (shout-out to Markus Sabadello, who might have built the only other one), I learned a lot about the challenges and opportunities of distributed data at scale. Over the years, I’ve reflected on qualities essential for data ecosystems, qualities that are often overshadowed by content-driven ecosystems. For example:

Caching semantics: Apps need governance and management of caches to respect data ownership while maintaining local operational efficiency.

Transactionality: Mature data protocols depend on it for consistency and reliability.

Request batching: Optimizing network requests is vital for performance and scalability.


After years away, I’m ready to dive back in. There are a couple of apps I want to build, and I want to build them on a distributed data platform. My first idea is a fully distributed implementation of Brad deGraf’s BooksWeLike concept—a way to share and discover books that resonate with you. (Brad, if you’re reading this and don’t like the idea, let me know!)


To make this happen, I’ve started scanning the distributed protocol space to see what’s out there. Here’s my initial list of protocols to evaluate:

AT Protocol

Nostr

Solid

ActivityPub

Matrix

IPFS (InterPlanetary File System)

SSB (Secure Scuttlebutt)

DID (Decentralized Identifiers)

Libp2p

Hypercore

Waku

Zero-Knowledge Identity Protocols (ZK Protocols)


What am I missing?

Are there protocols on this list that don’t belong? If so, why? Are there others I should consider? I haven’t started my evaluations yet, so I’m open to your insights. If you’ve built apps on these protocols or have opinions about them, I’d love to hear from you.


I’ll be capturing my journey of discovery here—sharing what I learn, where I stumble, and how I (hopefully) succeed. Let’s make distributed data a reality, by and for the people.