Author: Spike

Editor: Jerry Crypto

DID: Decentralized Identity❎

DID: Dissociative Identity Disorder✔️

When we Googled DID, the first explanation is Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID) which is a medical term rather than the crypto concept(Decentralized Identity) we knew already. Compared to DeFi, GameFi, NFT, and DAO, DID is a highly neglected area that has not received enough attention from investment institutions and technology developers.

In the context of the Decentralised Society (DeSoc) with a richer and more diverse ecosystem, so we believe that DID is a key component of building DeSoc, but also a crucial portal to Web 3. Previously, we had pinned our hopes on the NFT’s unique characteristics to complete the identification in Web 3. In reality, however, some NFT artists and creators are bothered by plagiarism and fraud. For example, Rarible auctioned off the unlicensed artwork of Derek Laufman, the designer of Marvel's Super Hero Adventures. By its nature, it is arguably not Web 3 at all.

Due to DID being the hub of all digital, it is imperative to create a shared, flexible and resilient identity layer. As DIDs are adopted by more users and Dapps, all digital processing permissions are to be in the hands, of the one who is not confined to a single application system, multiple accounts and password records. Only based on DID Web3 empowerment like DeFi, GameFi, NFT and DAO, as well as other promising scenarios, it will blossom into a more exciting narrative.

The full research report is divided into three chapters:

Chapter one: The Road to Decentralization

All links are DIDs. It is an infrastructure that allows users to control their own identity and asset, which has become a must for users of Web3.

The Web 3.0 decentralized world can be seen as a black box that required us to interact. In the process, we completed a brief review of the Internet history, where terms such as browser, WWW, HTML were used to build the main web content from the 1990s to the early 2000s, and where cell phones, especially smartphones such as the iPhone, which contributed to the entire mobile Internet.

So, it's time to explore how DID products will enter the Web 3.0 world. In terms of current DID development, many projects are still figuring it out and the DID-based ecology is in its initial stages. ThePrimedia's analysis is not limited to projects that call themselves DIDs but is an extension of the concept of DIDs, which can be used as interactive portals. We hope we can give you more thinking and inspiration.

1. Front-end interface: MetaMask as an example

The reason why wallets are categorized as DIDs is that the wallet has already completed steps such as address verification, signature authorization, and even KYC interacting with the Dapp.

Although the wallet itself does not store your sensitive information, the process of undertaking the above operations is sufficient to constitute the full functionality of DID. It is required us to switch from DeFi to Web 3.0, which is perfectly technically feasible.

Do we have to do this?

In fact, the biggest problem with wallets is censorship, for two main reasons:

Firstly, the wallet is still primarily interacting with DeFi applications, which are under increasing regulatory pressure with each passing day, and a regulated portal may allow us to avoid the next UST-Luna crash, but this is not the dominant direction for Web 3.0;

Secondly, during the Russia-Ukraine conflict, Metamask blocked IP addresses from Russia and Belarus, and if we embraced DID and Web 3.0 because of sicking of Facebook infringing on our factors, it lacks logical justification for us to choose an identical again.

Let's continue to discussion if the regulated-resistant wallet is possible to integrate DID functionality?

Firstly, wallet providers have an inherent incentive to move to DIDs. This is because the battle for traffic continues, typified by Metamask Swap, which has reached 1,246,780 unique addresses, and even Metamask's direct support for fiat currency purchases, which in effect is already stealing from DEX and CEX. If Web 3.0 continues to grow, it makes no sense for wallet apps not to involve.

Secondly, wallets, as the "wrapper" layer for on-chain addresses, have a natural tendency to expand to become the portal for everything. From the experience in Web 2.0, the expansion of the platform economy can be successful due to being inseparable from the richness and integration, and the on-chain address does not belong to the wallet.

Finally, the biggest problem with the DID is that the functionality and boundaries are unclear, and still in early exploration. And DID still be integrated through the wallet, or will there be a new DID product form?

1. Social Media, the extensions of Web 2 thinking:

Humans are creatures with historical thinking. If one mind existed in the past, it is likely to live on in the present and future as well. In other words, the thinking in this way does not seem new at all, but it is widespread in real life, such as the TCP/IP protocol, which was the first Internet infrastructure, but it is difficult to replace it directly as we enter the Web 3.0.

Based on this situation, we look to social media as the DID for Web 3.0 guided by this thinking.

Therefore, two paths can be divided:

(1) Web 3.0 native social media, as represented by Lens Protocol

Lens Protocol enjoys high prestige among the public, even attracting attention at birth without a physical product. This Web 3.0 social application was developed by the AAVE team in February 2022, which is closer to the concept of Business Layer. It is hoped that other social APPS can be built on Lens Protocol, such as the one launched by LensFrens, which can be seen as a decentralized “Twitter” where users can follow users similar to themselves.

Social networking can have a snowball effect if the number of users increases, it would be natural for it to become a mainstream DID tool instantly. The problem is that Social apps have loyalty, for example, Elon Musk has announced his quit from Twitter many times, but come back every time and even a thought of acquiring Twitter instead of Lens Protocol.

In essence, the promotion of DID and Web 3.0 social tools is a philosophical question of whether the chicken or the egg comes first, and users will not choose to abandon Twitter just because you are Web 3.0. From this point of view, Lens Protocol's exploration is a pioneer.

(2) Plug-in social media aggregators that "combine" Web 2.0 and Web 3.0, as represented by Mask network

Mask Network is not a new force, we are mainly absorbing its idea that if directly promoting Web 3.0 native applications, then directly integrating existing social applications and promoting Web 3.0 on top of them could be a reality.

This is a very clever idea, each person "steals" a little bit of networking and content from Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram, and eventually the little bit adds up and draws people into the new Web 3.0 world, and the Mask Network becomes the DID.

But aggregation is inherently problematic, as the users and different social tools are not the same, and aggregation adds ineffective links without actually generating real users willing to contribute content to the new platform.

In contrast, native DID apps have a better success chance, not necessarily a particular DID application, but certainly native.

1. Unipass: passport to crypto and metaverse

ThePrimedia with the most DID login passport in the second section is intentional, it wants to move away from talking about DIDs, from listing applications and the slogan "preaching", and instead focus on the functionality. The idea is that DID is more dependent on Web 3.0 consistently, starting with the wallet, moving on to the more DID of the social tools themselves, and then on to the passport itself.

This section focuses on Unipass as an example, as it is currently a more mature product form and is more representative.

In short, Unipass can be seen as a decentralised version of Microsoft's Authenticator, the product that best fits the definition of a DID and builds its product firmly from a personal identification and login function.

So, Unipass can be viewed from two perspectives:

Firstly, we want to take a question, do individuals need a separate and distinct DID tool from their on-chain address? The on-chain address is actually problematic as an identifier, it may be different for different chains. Typically set Bitcoin and Ethereum as an example, many users are already fed up with accounts and passwords. As we move into Web3 ecosystem, there will inevitably be a need for an identity hub that holds all the digital accounts. From this perspective, it makes sense to have a separate DID as the entry point.

Secondly, is it possible that DID replaced the wallet as the default login tool? The growth of wallets, and Metamask in particular, as the default login tool is the result of fierce market competition, which started from the real and widespread need for everyone to hold their assets securely off the exchange.

But login tools cannot collect crypto assets. There will be a difference between users using a single tool and multi Web 3.0 applications, and the only way to solve this problem is for the login tools to be interoperable or to support some kind of unified, standard interaction protocol. At the moment, we can only say that there is still a long way to go in terms of marketing and developing user habits.

If the product is too simple, it will be too replaceable and difficult to create a real deposit of users; however, if it is too heavy and does additions to the login, such as adding support for assets and social content, then it will directly conflict with the interests of these applications. This is an open topic, and we look forward to seeing more clever developers giving effective practice and exploration.

4.Others: domain names, email addresses

To conclude this section, a brief discussion of the possibility of developing a personal identity based on ENS and email into a DID.

(1 ) What is the main function of ENS?

Or, a domain name for a personal Web 3.0 site, NO

Or, Twitter suffix, YES

This is of course a joke, the main reason being that setting up a website is actually a technical task, even with all the SaaS tools available in the cloud, it is still time consuming, and after deployment, there is ongoing maintenance, including ongoing payment for the ENS domain itself, just as if you struggled to bought a luxury car, only to find that the maintenance costs are still unaffordable.

The technical barrier prevents most people from using the product comfortably, and if it is to be used as a DID, it is more suitable for institutional users to interact with individuals.

(2) What about email?

Email has no problem with the login function, but they are only suitable as a peer-to-peer communication tool. It is a different usage scenarios in itselves, and sending mass emails and then getting reply messages is not suitable for everyday communication, but more for formal actions and marketing tools.

Having talked about so many possible portals, understand why a DID is necessarily needed - or is it necessarily correct to assume that a DID is a portal? Currently, we use social software such as WeChat and e-commerce platforms such as Taobao, which, along with the ecology they form, have brought us into the true Web 2.0 era by virtue of their level of convenience.

But these are the present, not the future, and Web 3.0 is the application scenario for DIDs. To clarify the importance of DIDs, it is necessary to consider the role of DIDs as a portal, as well as the current state of the ecosystem and its future trends.

Author: Spike

Editor: Jerry Crypto

DID: Decentralized Identity❎

DID: Dissociative Identity Disorder✔️

When we Googled DID, the first explanation is Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID) which is a medical term rather than the crypto concept(Decentralized Identity) we knew already. Compared to DeFi, GameFi, NFT, and DAO, DID is a highly neglected area that has not received enough attention from investment institutions and technology developers.

In the context of the Decentralised Society (DeSoc) with a richer and more diverse ecosystem, so we believe that DID is a key component of building DeSoc, but also a crucial portal to Web 3. Previously, we had pinned our hopes on the NFT’s unique characteristics to complete the identification in Web 3. In reality, however, some NFT artists and creators are bothered by plagiarism and fraud. For example, Rarible auctioned off the unlicensed artwork of Derek Laufman, the designer of Marvel's Super Hero Adventures. By its nature, it is arguably not Web 3 at all.

Due to DID being the hub of all digital, it is imperative to create a shared, flexible and resilient identity layer. As DIDs are adopted by more users and Dapps, all digital processing permissions are to be in the hands, of the one who is not confined to a single application system, multiple accounts and password records. Only based on DID Web3 empowerment like DeFi, GameFi, NFT and DAO, as well as other promising scenarios, it will blossom into a more exciting narrative.

The full research report is divided into three chapters:

Chapter one: The Road to Decentralization

All links are DIDs. It is an infrastructure that allows users to control their own identity and asset, which has become a must for users of Web3.

The Web 3.0 decentralized world can be seen as a black box that required us to interact. In the process, we completed a brief review of the Internet history, where terms such as browser, WWW, HTML were used to build the main web content from the 1990s to the early 2000s, and where cell phones, especially smartphones such as the iPhone, which contributed to the entire mobile Internet.

So, it's time to explore how DID products will enter the Web 3.0 world. In terms of current DID development, many projects are still figuring it out and the DID-based ecology is in its initial stages. ThePrimedia's analysis is not limited to projects that call themselves DIDs but is an extension of the concept of DIDs, which can be used as interactive portals. We hope we can give you more thinking and inspiration.

1. Front-end interface: MetaMask as an example

The reason why wallets are categorized as DIDs is that the wallet has already completed steps such as address verification, signature authorization, and even KYC interacting with the Dapp.

Although the wallet itself does not store your sensitive information, the process of undertaking the above operations is sufficient to constitute the full functionality of DID. It is required us to switch from DeFi to Web 3.0, which is perfectly technically feasible.

Do we have to do this?

In fact, the biggest problem with wallets is censorship, for two main reasons:

Firstly, the wallet is still primarily interacting with DeFi applications, which are under increasing regulatory pressure with each passing day, and a regulated portal may allow us to avoid the next UST-Luna crash, but this is not the dominant direction for Web 3.0;

Secondly, during the Russia-Ukraine conflict, Metamask blocked IP addresses from Russia and Belarus, and if we embraced DID and Web 3.0 because of sicking of Facebook infringing on our factors, it lacks logical justification for us to choose an identical again.

Let's continue to discussion if the regulated-resistant wallet is possible to integrate DID functionality?

Firstly, wallet providers have an inherent incentive to move to DIDs. This is because the battle for traffic continues, typified by Metamask Swap, which has reached 1,246,780 unique addresses, and even Metamask's direct support for fiat currency purchases, which in effect is already stealing from DEX and CEX. If Web 3.0 continues to grow, it makes no sense for wallet apps not to involve.

Secondly, wallets, as the "wrapper" layer for on-chain addresses, have a natural tendency to expand to become the portal for everything. From the experience in Web 2.0, the expansion of the platform economy can be successful due to being inseparable from the richness and integration, and the on-chain address does not belong to the wallet.

Finally, the biggest problem with the DID is that the functionality and boundaries are unclear, and still in early exploration. And DID still be integrated through the wallet, or will there be a new DID product form?

1. Social Media, the extensions of Web 2 thinking:

Humans are creatures with historical thinking. If one mind existed in the past, it is likely to live on in the present and future as well. In other words, the thinking in this way does not seem new at all, but it is widespread in real life, such as the TCP/IP protocol, which was the first Internet infrastructure, but it is difficult to replace it directly as we enter the Web 3.0.

Based on this situation, we look to social media as the DID for Web 3.0 guided by this thinking.

Therefore, two paths can be divided:

(1) Web 3.0 native social media, as represented by Lens Protocol

Lens Protocol enjoys high prestige among the public, even attracting attention at birth without a physical product. This Web 3.0 social application was developed by the AAVE team in February 2022, which is closer to the concept of Business Layer. It is hoped that other social APPS can be built on Lens Protocol, such as the one launched by LensFrens, which can be seen as a decentralized “Twitter” where users can follow users similar to themselves.

Social networking can have a snowball effect if the number of users increases, it would be natural for it to become a mainstream DID tool instantly. The problem is that Social apps have loyalty, for example, Elon Musk has announced his quit from Twitter many times, but come back every time and even a thought of acquiring Twitter instead of Lens Protocol.

In essence, the promotion of DID and Web 3.0 social tools is a philosophical question of whether the chicken or the egg comes first, and users will not choose to abandon Twitter just because you are Web 3.0. From this point of view, Lens Protocol's exploration is a pioneer.

(2) Plug-in social media aggregators that "combine" Web 2.0 and Web 3.0, as represented by Mask network

Mask Network is not a new force, we are mainly absorbing its idea that if directly promoting Web 3.0 native applications, then directly integrating existing social applications and promoting Web 3.0 on top of them could be a reality.

This is a very clever idea, each person "steals" a little bit of networking and content from Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram, and eventually the little bit adds up and draws people into the new Web 3.0 world, and the Mask Network becomes the DID.

But aggregation is inherently problematic, as the users and different social tools are not the same, and aggregation adds ineffective links without actually generating real users willing to contribute content to the new platform.

In contrast, native DID apps have a better success chance, not necessarily a particular DID application, but certainly native.

1. Unipass: passport to crypto and metaverse

ThePrimedia with the most DID login passport in the second section is intentional, it wants to move away from talking about DIDs, from listing applications and the slogan "preaching", and instead focus on the functionality. The idea is that DID is more dependent on Web 3.0 consistently, starting with the wallet, moving on to the more DID of the social tools themselves, and then on to the passport itself.

This section focuses on Unipass as an example, as it is currently a more mature product form and is more representative.

In short, Unipass can be seen as a decentralised version of Microsoft's Authenticator, the product that best fits the definition of a DID and builds its product firmly from a personal identification and login function.

So, Unipass can be viewed from two perspectives:

Firstly, we want to take a question, do individuals need a separate and distinct DID tool from their on-chain address? The on-chain address is actually problematic as an identifier, it may be different for different chains. Typically set Bitcoin and Ethereum as an example, many users are already fed up with accounts and passwords. As we move into Web3 ecosystem, there will inevitably be a need for an identity hub that holds all the digital accounts. From this perspective, it makes sense to have a separate DID as the entry point.

Secondly, is it possible that DID replaced the wallet as the default login tool? The growth of wallets, and Metamask in particular, as the default login tool is the result of fierce market competition, which started from the real and widespread need for everyone to hold their assets securely off the exchange.

But login tools cannot collect crypto assets. There will be a difference between users using a single tool and multi Web 3.0 applications, and the only way to solve this problem is for the login tools to be interoperable or to support some kind of unified, standard interaction protocol. At the moment, we can only say that there is still a long way to go in terms of marketing and developing user habits.

If the product is too simple, it will be too replaceable and difficult to create a real deposit of users; however, if it is too heavy and does additions to the login, such as adding support for assets and social content, then it will directly conflict with the interests of these applications. This is an open topic, and we look forward to seeing more clever developers giving effective practice and exploration.

4.Others: domain names, email addresses

To conclude this section, a brief discussion of the possibility of developing a personal identity based on ENS and email into a DID.

(1 ) What is the main function of ENS?

Or, a domain name for a personal Web 3.0 site, NO

Or, Twitter suffix, YES

This is of course a joke, the main reason being that setting up a website is actually a technical task, even with all the SaaS tools available in the cloud, it is still time consuming, and after deployment, there is ongoing maintenance, including ongoing payment for the ENS domain itself, just as if you struggled to bought a luxury car, only to find that the maintenance costs are still unaffordable.

The technical barrier prevents most people from using the product comfortably, and if it is to be used as a DID, it is more suitable for institutional users to interact with individuals.

(2) What about email?

Email has no problem with the login function, but they are only suitable as a peer-to-peer communication tool. It is a different usage scenarios in itselves, and sending mass emails and then getting reply messages is not suitable for everyday communication, but more for formal actions and marketing tools.

Having talked about so many possible portals, understand why a DID is necessarily needed - or is it necessarily correct to assume that a DID is a portal? Currently, we use social software such as WeChat and e-commerce platforms such as Taobao, which, along with the ecology they form, have brought us into the true Web 2.0 era by virtue of their level of convenience.

But these are the present, not the future, and Web 3.0 is the application scenario for DIDs. To clarify the importance of DIDs, it is necessary to consider the role of DIDs as a portal, as well as the current state of the ecosystem and its future trends.