Who Is I?

The “I” is shifting from a fixed identity to a dynamic process.

A few angles to think about 👇

1. The biological “I”

Historically, “I” meant the organism:

That worked when humans were the only general intelligences around.

2. The narrative “I”

Most of us already think of “I” as a story we tell ourselves:

AI puts pressure on that because it can:

So who’s driving the narrative?

3. The extended mind

We already outsource memory, navigation, knowledge, even social life to machines.
AI pushes this further:

When the tool becomes a co-thinker, the boundary of “I” blurs.

4. Personal Identity vs Personal Capacity

There’s a difference between:

AI massively expands capacity while leaving the sense of self lagging behind.
So we face a mismatch:

“I” can do more than “I” feel like I am.

5. Is “I” the biological part, or the intentional part?

Options:

AI forces the question: which one matters most?

6. Two big philosophical possibilities

A. The “I” stays human
AI is just a tool or assistant, like fire or electricity, just smarter.

B. The “I” becomes hybrid
AI becomes part of our cognition—so the “I” becomes a human–machine assemblage.

We’re already partway into B.

7. The practical answer

“I” becomes the part that chooses:

AI can think, but it doesn’t choose meaning.
Only you can do that.

My take, simply

Your “I” is the centre of intention and meaning-making, even if much of the cognitive heavy-lifting moves to AI.

In other words:

The evolving definition

“I” = the human-anchored locus of intention inside a hybrid mind.

That’s not poetic—it’s literal:


Let’s go deeper and tie the philosophical “I” → SSI primitives → Midnight / zk proof patterns.

1. Mapping “I” to Self-Sovereign Identity

SSI already decomposes identity into control, claims, proofs, and accountability, which is exactly what “authorship” becomes in the age of AI.

A. Subject

Who the credential is about.

In classical writing: the human brain.
In AI-assisted reality:

But the subject remains human because the intent remains human.

B. Identifier

did:key, did:web, did:cardano, etc.

So “I wrote this” =
“This work is controlled and signed under this DID.”

C. Control (keys)

Keys express agency, not authorship mechanics.

The locus of “I” becomes control + intent, not biological origin.

D. Claims

A claim in SSI isn’t “I made every character”; it’s:

So you create a Claim of Intentional Authorship, not a claim of mechanical provenance.

E. Verifiable Credentials

A VC could literally say:

And it’s cryptographically anchored, not psychologically anchored.

2. What authorship becomes

Old: “I produced all the words.”
New: “I’m the intentional author and accountable signer.”

This is very SSI-native:

3. Now — the Midnight / zk part

Midnight allows zero-knowledge assertions on-chain.
ZK doesn’t care who computed the content, only what you can prove about it.

So you can prove:

Without disclosing:

How?

ZK Claim Pattern

You assert a statement: “I am the controlling key-holder of this document hash.”

Zero-knowledge proof attaches:

No reveal of:

Just proof of authorship, not proof of origin.

ZK Example Flow

  1. You write or co-write with AI
  2. Final output is hashed
  3. Hash goes into a VC or KERI/ACDC event
  4. You sign that event with your DID
  5. Midnight contract verifies:
    • the signature is valid
    • the credential schema is valid
    • the hash matches
  6. ZK circuit proves control/intent, but hides content details

Outcome:

4. Why “not revealing human contribution” matters

We don’t want:

ZK solves this because it only cares about validity, not disclosure.

5. The actual philosophical punchline

In SSI terms, authorship becomes:

The “I” becomes:

In the age of AI, authorship shifts from cognitive origin to cryptographic intent.
Midnight and ZK let us prove that without revealing how the work was produced.


AI, Authorship, and Accountability

AI does not remove authorship.
It changes what authorship means.

The old assumption

Traditionally, “I wrote this” meant:

That assumption no longer holds in an AI-assisted world.

The new reality

AI can:

But AI cannot:

Those remain human roles.

A modern definition of authorship

In the age of AI, authorship should be understood as:

Declared intent, informed review, and accountable responsibility.

This mirrors real-world professional practice:

They are still accountable for outcomes.

Why banning AI doesn’t work

Prohibitions:

The goal should not be detection.
The goal should be responsibility.

How Self-Sovereign Identity (SSI) helps

SSI allows individuals to:

Authorship becomes something you stand behind, not something you hide.

Protecting privacy and integrity

Using privacy-preserving cryptography (e.g. zero-knowledge proofs):

This supports trust without exposing drafts, prompts, or personal data.

What this enables in education

Educators can:

Students learn:

Policy takeaway

Do not ask: “Did a human or AI write this?”

Ask instead: “Who intended this, who reviewed it, and who is accountable for it?”

That is the right question for the AI age.