[EURO-Discuss] [At-Large] UA Days

[Evan Leibovitch]

 It was certainly not my intention to cause upset, apologies for that.

At a certain point, all of us here who understand the function of the DNS
and the processes of ICANN are already in a kind of elite position that has
us out of touch with the Internet's underserved to various extents. I had
the opportunity to serve in a role of providing connectivity in African and
Latin American refugee camps under contract to UNHCR for a number of years,
so I have first-hand experience with many of the challenges and solutions
at play in such environments. But that is certainly not the same as living
there.

That is why I advocate so strongly for the need for evidence and research,
to not take Roberto's word or mine or anyone else's here on faith, but to
honestly investigate the needs of the underserved and the available
solutions. It is also why I strongly reject Alfredo's stated approach to
policy, choosing the path of least resistance under the guise of
"practicality". At best such an approach will maintain the status quo and
at worst will cause decline.

On Mon, Apr 1, 2024 at 4:49 PM Roberto Gaetano via At-Large <
at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org> wrote:

As I have stated many times, I believe that “Internet is for everyone”
> means that everybody should have the same ease of use and interaction
> regardless the difference they have from the dominant model. This includes
> the right of having their digital identity - like a web site or an email
> address - being usable and accessible regardless the fact that there are
> other possibilities or turnarounds, or even other ways to assert their
> digital identity. This is my red line, that I will never cross.
>

I agree violently with Roberto that access to the Internet and digital
identity must be universal, I would even call it an aspirational human
right. Where we differ is in the suitability of a DNS-based domain name for
that purpose. To me, domain names are among the most expensive and least
sustainable forms of Internet identity currently available. Memorable
domain names serve numerous roles, but personal identity is among their
weakest. There are many, MANY reasons for this, but the most obvious is
that your Internet identity must not demand an annual fee, which if left
unpaid (even by accident) can be acquired by someone else.

To me the line demanding that everyone has access to an Internet domain is
not only not red, it is drawn with dust. There are many other ways to claim
a digital identity, almost all of them superior to Internet domains. Most
of them are free of cost (let alone annual fee). And a number of them, such
as OpenSSL and Mastodon accounts, do not require putting your identity in
the hands of a commercial organization that profits from use (or spread) of
personal information.

We must also acknowledge the effect of progress and technical evolution.
New forms of digital identity exist now that weren't dreamed of 20 years
ago but dominate today. My children hate using email and my grandchildren
don't know what email is, but they are all very well connected. What they
do use, from Signal to Discord to Xing to WhatsApp to Wechat, all have flat
namespaces and (critical to the UA discussion) most are quite happy with
Unicode characters in IDs. Generally only global trademark holders care
about "memorable" IDs because everyone can use aliases for which duplicates
are OK. And if all you need is chat and finance, even SMS suffices for
identity if you choose not to fully connect (and that choice must be
available too).

These are not stopgap or compromise solutions, they are indeed the
mainstream accessible forms of digital identity today and it is Internet
domains that are the archaic and inferior alternative. (It is these IDs
that I put in my standard signature, not my phone or email.) The rise of AI
in general use only accelerates the decline of domains as identity. I
assert that this reality is a primary reason that IDNs have such poor
uptake from consumers and app developers, the interest for them primarily
comes from financially-interested domain sellers and not from anyone
needing an identity. There is simply too little bottom-up consumer demand,
a phenomenon that we in At-Large must comprehend to adequately represent
the end-user PoV on the issues of IDNs and UA.

But, as I said before, this is only my opinion, even though I believe it to
be well-informed by first-hand experience. I await being disproven. Let's
get some evidence.

Cheers,

-- 
Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada
@evanleibovitch / @el56
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/euro-discuss/attachments/20240402/7804b07c/attachment-0001.html>