This morning, it rained gently. The raindrops blurred the reflections of the trees on the water, a stark contrast to the tranquility of last night. Reflecting on the year, I've seen waters in many places, especially the mirror-like waters of Zurich and Sentosa at night, where the reflections of trees are captured with precise detail in the rich, satin-like surface. Sometimes, as the water ripples, the reflection of the tree gets fragmented: now like a mosaic, now like a curtain being drawn, now like frosted glass, and now like an impressionist painting. At times, a thought surfaces: What do you see - the tree or its reflection? Which is more real? Or is it the reflection of the tree in a peacock's eye by the shore? Is it the calm waters under the still night? Or is it in the raindrops on the floating duckweed this morning? Yet, the tree remains standing there.
Today, I wonder, what is Identity? Identity is the qualities, beliefs, personality traits, appearance, and/or expressions that characterize a person or group.
Doesn't it closely resemble the reflection of the tree in the water?
Looking at this definition, identity is nothing more than a multi-dimensional definition society gives to an individual. This definition abstractly generalizes a specific person or organization. Identity is not who I am, but rather the compressed concept of me in a society. Clearly, identity serves a purpose of categorization. This categorization allows people to simplify and follow certain judgments and behavioral patterns in a group. For example, if you are a Chinese Crypto entrepreneur and also a father to several children, your behavior at the company and at home will vary based on these identities.
It's like every one of us is a conglomerate of identities within various groups. In a decentralized world, it's even more so. We play different roles in different communities, and these roles, once categorized and compressed, become the datasets that define our identity. From this perspective, I am essentially a collection of identities. These identities may coexist in various communities or hierarchies, or they may be ever-evolving, like a growing cone of life. Broadly speaking, in both the decentralized and traditional worlds, and at their intersection, we possess distinct identity conglomerates. For instance, Satoshi Nakamoto can be seen as a divine creator, a mysterious crypto-revolutionary, or a conveyor of trust.
Clearly, in an era where deglobalization becomes the theme, the decentralized society has a responsibility to reform identity. Just like the recent discussions about the Chinese community versus the English community, or the Singaporean community versus the overseas community, these topics of traditional identity recognition become blurred or contradictory. Looking at it differently, shouldn't we focus on what the new-age Identity might look like? Perhaps it's time to slowly unveil the new concept of Identity.
Firstly, identity, within the context of a broader decentralized society in the future, refers to the simplified cultural symbols that guide our behavior. This should balance the contradiction between individual and collective at the cultural identity level. For example, if we say I am 'A' in a certain community, then with a certain probability, 'A' should follow some norms specific to 'A' when thinking, judging, and acting. However, the entire community might have a collective identity 'B', which has its own set of norms. The contradictions between 'A' and 'B' should be well addressed with new definitions. To give a simple example, traditional societies often have the roles of investors and entrepreneurs, shareholders, and employees. Jack Ma's principle of "customers first, employees second, shareholders third" illustrates such contradictions. But evidently, a term like "contributor" might provide a new definition that effectively balances the contradiction between individual and corporate identities within a collective. In simpler terms, we might need new identity terminologies to better achieve the goal of cultural convergence in a decentralized society. It's likely that, for a long time, traditional identity roles will still play a pivotal role, especially in the early stages in some communities. This implies the need for redefined and concise identity symbols. Equality is crucial from this cultural perspective. Over time, tree-like hierarchical structures will emerge, but how do we address the issues caused by identity rigidity over time, similar to hereditary nobility in capitalist societies?
A potential solution lies in the economic nature of identity. An economically viable identity can evaluate an individual's contributions and reputational costs within an economic body. Essentially, we could assign numerical values to these identities based on individual behaviors within an economic body. These numbers represent unseen economic contributions or costs. For example, a small entity 'C' in community 'D' might, from a token economy perspective, show certain economic indicators like creation, investment, etc. when reaching a certain identity. This approach would make it economically costly for 'C' to disassociate from 'D'. It might ease potential identity conflicts over time. If we had to define "evil," it would be making the cost of malevolent actions extremely high for long-standing, high-ranking identity holders. This approach might also lead to problems, especially under token or PoS mechanisms where the economically dominant often have too much power, making it less friendly for newcomers. Bribery and corruption could also arise.
Considering systems of minimal trust, identity might be bootstrapped. Identity could become a more abstract, non-linear numeric root symbol, perhaps a state or an expression. This expression might bootstrap itself with minimal economic variables and low computational validation. If we envision a future with many distributed systems, then a bootstrapped decentralized identity solution seems more promising than current explorations like W3C or SBT. A vague state expression might be better than precise logical ones. Over time, accuracy might limit the broad applicability and universality of such expressions. For instance, what makes one human isn't possessions but a vague adherence to the definition of humanity. Simply put, we might need a system where one doesn't need extensive validation to prove their identity. Of course, the challenge lies in balancing computational security and validation simplicity. Whether precise or vague, these identity representations will likely catalyze a paradigm shift in decentralized societies, bringing about novel ideologies, governance systems, and decentralized organizations. It's possible that the underlying identity detached from the upper layers exists in an uncertain state.
In short, identity is a bundle of data we possess in the worlds of information, economy, and culture. Its traditionalism and innovation, individualism and collectivism, inheritance and equality, precision and vagueness are all focal points for future attention. We're sandwiched between a past system of centralized identity built on layers of trust and a future system of decentralized identity built on minimal trust. How we face our past, present, and future is vital. Let's transform our nostalgia for the past into gratitude, our present struggles into motivation, and our uncertainty about the future into imagination.
Because it's likely that,
A tree is a tree, a tree is also a shadow, and a shadow is a tree.
Rain or shine.
And I am me, I am also you, and you are also me,
Be it yesterday, today, or tomorrow.