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

(Ditto FOIA documents: If I request something, and get mail from the agency in question, _I_ can be pretty sure of its origin. But then when I post it, you have to trust my assessment of that.)

Bezos news 

Bezos news 

Bezos news 

@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

Generalistic and moderated instance. All opinions are welcome, but hate speeches are prohibited. Users who don't respect rules will be silenced or suspended, depending on the violation severity.