I think it doesn't get discussed enough how people of different levels of technical sophistication authenticate the *origin* and *integrity* of stuff they see online (to say nothing about the *veracity*, a whole 'nother question)

For example, I think we don't often enough acknowledge the value of URLs as a basically unshakeable source of origin information. This to me is one of the tragedies of PACER: no URL for court documents means that for most people there's no authentication of origin at all

Follow

@xor That's why I think digital signatures are awesome, and we should all use them so people will know what we're capable of.

@cy I think out at the extremes of technical sophistication this is pretty solved! Digital signatures are better than anything that preceded them, ever in history! But it's just not a factor in most people's assessments of most documents they encounter in a given day

@xor Digital signatures are powerful. We don't want to make it easy to spy on people, with signature chains that work better than fingerprints. So there's a lot to consider.

But just because it isn't a factor, doesn't mean it can't be.
Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!