3 ms·
> Not sure why you are downvoted, about 10% of the article addresses it's headline and I frankly do not get the point either. The proposed solution is in the f
by lvh 7y ago
> Not sure why you are downvoted, about 10% of the article addresses it's headline and I frankly do not get the point either. The proposed solution is in the first numbered list and between that and the conclusion list is a bunch of prose on non-JSON payload.
The proposed solution is not in the numbered list. The numbered list describes how to sign a JSON blob from the outside. The rest of the doucment describes what you do if that's not an option, and you need to sign the blob in-line. The very next paragraph after said numbered list describes how to do that.
(I'm the author.)
- pvg 7y ago(I'm the author.) Whee, I can stop rage-typing 'how not to self-attribute your comment about a thing you wrote' now!
- lvh 7y agoHuh, sorry, I'm confused. What should I (not) be doing? I thought not disclosing being the author of the linked thing was poor form.
- pvg 7y agoOh it's nitpicker than that - you don't have to 'disclaim' being the author cause, you're, you know, the author and can just say you are.
- lvh 7y agoAh! So you're saying I should say "Full disclosure" and not "Disclaimer"? (Or nothing at all, as I do here, I suppose :-)) Yes, you're absolutely right and I'll try to do better in the future :)
- pvg 7y ago'Disclosure' is something journalists use to point out a potential external conflict/relationship the reader might unaware of. But you don't need it to point out authorship either. You're really saying 'I want you to be aware I wrote the thing we are discussing' not 'Please don't think I'm sockpuppetting for myself'. This is a bit like an even more persnickety version 'nation state' in that the trivial fix is just dropping the pointless ceremony.