• Welcome & antitrust notice

• Agenda review

• Antitrust Policy Notice: Attendees are reminded to adhere to the meeting agenda and not participate in activities prohibited under antitrust and competition laws. Only members of ToIP who have signed the necessary agreements are permitted to participate in this activity beyond an observer role.

• are permitted to participate in this activity beyond an observer role.

Quick review of last couple of calls:

• 1) Over-identification vs under-identification - Goldilocks Zone - Overton Window (political science construct - when something was taboo becomes defacto) - Law 2 Minimal Disclosure for Constrained Use
• 2) Basics - speak to the link w/ legal identification & / or foundational ID
  • Naming - use of unique identifiers
  • Gender - example in Thailand range of # of genders that are recognized (fluidity vs box ticking) - consider outward signs that assert gender identity and create communities / recognize each other.
  • Home location -or if nomadic, see Domicile law - e.g. Aadhar = residency not citizenship - difficulty in changing attributes
  • Age - lots of people don't know how old they are, chinese count age differently, there are different dating systems in different parts of the world
• Many of us don't have an 'is' relationship to identity, much more diffuse than this e.g. 'where are you from', preponderance of evidence rather than binary.  Establish the 'is' relationship w/government so we want to agree mutually what my 'is' is!

If you use SSI to make identifiers fluid even in application at legal identification layer, then to what extent can states deny it?

some formalized identity, collectivised and then asserted towards goverment - can states refuse to acknowledge. - about power, assertion of rights as a collective (trades union advantage), should be possible w/SSI but deeply linked within state systems (e.g. census,).  One particular challenge is that even if we make headway w/SSI, tech and solutions for SSI, the challenge is still are we able to negate the harms.

Bargaining power still difficult, still depend on utilities, still need blockchain.  _ different problem associated with connectivity / infrastructure

Example in Cambodia, facilitating meetings w/indigenous leaders, whole concept of interjecting technology into the mix the biggest challenge is getting them to understand the concepts and relationships w/their rights.

Disconnect between people who work in Human rights / indigenous rights - have idea of understanding international frameworks and conventions (drafted in 70's), these structural concepts of what hr/indigenous rights are - bright people are able to speak to these conventions this is the translation layer, so when you start shifting these narratives into local contexts - framing of conventions is to protect rights but they don't have them in the first place - so can't assert them.  

'What do you want?' - they don't know.  Layers of understanding / comprehension that need to be broken down.  Difficult to design the tech first - need governance, engagement, HX.  

Requirement to from the outset start with a co-creative/ participatory approach so that we are asking communities on the ground about the harms they perceive and their impacts.

e.g. Women in Identity - Aisha's story 

Pyrou will have some sessions w/indigenous leaders in Thailand, informal

Work through storyboard and updates in there

•  Nicky to change meeting time to 11am Pacific and name to SSI Harms _BGBU
•  Nicky to try again to get the Me2B Alliance Harms Dictionary in xls format for analysis
•  Nicky to see if there is a different cadence or timing for APAC meetings