> In short, if the large platforms like Facebook, Google, Apple, Microsoft et al started using DIDs, we could start using logins across platforms instead of creating new accounts for each one.
Not a chance really.
First, DIDs define a method behind resolving data be it use a website, use bitcoin classic, etc. There are over 100 defined, and only "web" and "key" (inlined data in the URI) have achieved interoperability.
Second, if DIDs define authentication then your Apple/Facebook/Google account will require to own the DID so that they can make sure the authentication requirements aren't rewritten to be too weak to qualify.
Third, DIDs used in that way are less privacy preserving than the existing system, since it is now a global identifier shared with everyone.
First,which DID methods will be successful is a question of time, additional your wallet app could support multiple of these DID methods.
Second, DID and the corresponding keys are supposed to be owned by the user or managed by a platform, any indivdual can make the choice whteher he wants convience of managed keys or full privacy under his own control
Third, you can have a seperate DID for every service and they issue you an login credential for that particular service.
Not a chance really.
First, DIDs define a method behind resolving data be it use a website, use bitcoin classic, etc. There are over 100 defined, and only "web" and "key" (inlined data in the URI) have achieved interoperability.
Second, if DIDs define authentication then your Apple/Facebook/Google account will require to own the DID so that they can make sure the authentication requirements aren't rewritten to be too weak to qualify.
Third, DIDs used in that way are less privacy preserving than the existing system, since it is now a global identifier shared with everyone.