The only idea I see is for some certificates handed out by government to citizens and I absolutely hate it even in a democracy.
The least-harm solution, as far as I can see right now, is to just accept that the internet cannot be made trustworthy in this way. The only way to know for sure the nature of who you're dealing with will be to deal with them in person. Much like it has always been.
I don't think that really works, you need some kind of trust system. I hope it doesn't turn out that worldcoin is the best solution.
I think a web that is half identified and half anonymous would work well.
Then you can't be sure.
> you need some kind of trust system.
I agree. I just haven't heard of one that doesn't cause more problems than it solves. Just because we want it doesn't mean we can have it.
Verifying identity is necessarily completely different if you're sending someone an item in exchange for money, or looking to date them for a while, or going into long-term business with them, or maybe just having a discussion where you want to validate that they work where they claim.
We don't need blanket verification of people's identities online. If a bot is posting on a service and is indistinguishable from an interesting human, why shouldn't it stay? "On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog" used to be the Web 1.0 motto.
I think it is based on that in some countries there is less trust in the government than in other countries.
Where I live, Sweden, it is very hard to live without an ID card/passport and starting to get hard without a digital ID.
However, the privacy laws and prevention against abuse is fairly good. Not perfect I am sure but pretty good, compared with the US or even the UK (both places I have lived).
I think this is the answer. Governments already have the infrastructure to verify identities in person, and no other organization is going to build it.
I think we'll see two "tiers" of internet.
One tier will be for day to day usage for "normal" users - banking, social media, news, etc. A tier that you digital ID will be used to verify you are who you are, and others can be assured that they're talking to the person they say they are - though there are flaws in that system if someone can get a hold of another persons' certificate.
The other tier would be the unverified internet - things like boilerplate/startup communities, activities you don't want your digital ID tied to, something to still allow people to remain semi-anonymous on the internet if choosing to.
Not sure if this will be what actually happens or if governments just slowly decide to force people to use only the verified internet while trying to access the "outernet" (or whatever buzzword they'd use) would be met with scrutiny and potentially criminal charges.
Of course there is a lot of space for abuse. And it would unfairly lock many/most people out, because services can only accept certificates from the governments they trusts.
Trusting a safe isn't like trusting a person.
Captchas have solved a real problem. They did work.
I'm not asserting that the compromise they present is a bad one (or a good one). Just that they're a compromise.
How can we _reduce_ the problem once captchas are obsolete?
But yes, as I said, I hate the idea. Was asking for other solutions.
IMO, you can end that sentence after "internet".