But then there is reliance on an underlying platform to resolve the conflict by providing a globally unique identifier. Instead of process ID, there is the IP address mechanism.
So it's turtles all the way down, if I understand correctly.
If I understand this correctly, the algorithm depends on the underlying platform to ensure correct ordering. Two processes may each get the same bakery ticket number. The conflict is resolved by the process with the lower process id being allowed to go first. This process ID is in effect a ticket number issued by the underlying hardware. If the processes were running in a distributed environment, there would not be a common underlying platform to resolve this conflict.
From the link, it appears that it was developed by a single person in 2000, who then brought on board 2 other people as contributors in 2002 and after.
In a few years, as mid-level cognitive tasks get automated by LLMs, resulting in elimination of some percent of well-paying white-collar jobs, there will be economic dislocation and social disruption.
Oligarchic capitalist societies with a hypocritical philosophy of free market economics (such as the USA) will experience social unrest and civil strife.
In the meantime, social-democratic societies that have effective governance and can grow their safety net with universal basic income will be advantaged in this new economic order. Thinking Scandinavian and some Asian economies.
The geopolitical balance of power will shift toward stable societies that are able to make the conceptual leap to UBI. Others who follow the primitive fantasy of free market economics will crumble and get left behind.
The undocumented workers that I personally know are skilled, motivated, and diligent workers. Perhaps in part because they desperately need to hold on to this source of income. If anything, I think they would boost productivity metrics.
The notion of decentralized identity has been an enchanting vision since Christopher Allen first articulated it in 2016. Since then, DID spec has been around for years in draft form, and there are at least a dozen vendors and/or projects producing DID-compatible or DID-relevant technology.
Of course, these different packages are not (yet) compatible, but that's not the problem. The problem is that, after a good 4 or 5 years, it's hard to find a single project that uses DID protocols at scale in a worthwhile and effective manner.
There are tons of pilot projects and PoCs. A few go into production at limited scale, languish for a while, and then do a slow fade.
I agree with other commenters that DID does not seem to address real-world pain points. I also think that the spec appears murky, abstract, overly complex and hard for developers to work with. I have tried to use DID in projects a couple of times, and found myself sidelining or pushing it into a corner of the system, because it did not seem to serve a useful purpose.
There's a recent alternative to DID, which is narrower in scope and more pragmatic. That is "login with Metamask" or "sign-in with Ethereum" (or something similar in the case of other blockchain platforms).
But then there is reliance on an underlying platform to resolve the conflict by providing a globally unique identifier. Instead of process ID, there is the IP address mechanism.
So it's turtles all the way down, if I understand correctly.