nostr:npub180cvv07tjdrrgpa0j7j7tmnyl2yr6yr7l8j4s3evf6u64th6gkwsyjh6w6 why does mstr insist on using “the blockchain” for DID?
Is there no other practical way to add key rotation?
https://github.com/MicroStrategy/did-btc-spec/issues/7#issuecomment-2245601679
Key rotation for a ‘name’, not an identifier. I’ve been looking at this problem for a long while and have concluded that this problem needs to be solved at a higher level. I think a trusted nip05 provider that keeps a history of keys (npubs), is a better approach. I think key rotation at the did:method level is not the way to go.
Key rotation is indeed a useful thing. The trouble is that there's more than one way to do it. The harder part is to get people to agree.
FWIW: I like the idea of subkeys
"makes your proposal look like unfinished homework" 🔥
Because they are not living in the real world. I assume these people are just getting paid to write a proposal and then others are paid to write code for the proposal. They do that, then they go home. Then other people see it and get excited and play with it and think it's cool, then go back to using email. None of the parts involved at any point really think this will be actually used by anyone in reality.
Also there is no way to do reliable rotation or key hierarchies without a centralized authority (or a blockchain) and a master key.
