3 ms·
No, god damn it. As soon as the cat's out of the bag, it'll forever be an arms race (there'll be attack vectors, etc.). Let's not just establish a new proxy fo
by eivarv 6y ago
No, god damn it.
As soon as the cat's out of the bag, it'll forever be an arms race (there'll be attack vectors, etc.).
Let's not just establish a new proxy for implicit trust here.
- andrewflnr 6y agoWhat qualifies as evidence, then? Trust is important, but it can only exist long-term if there's a way to detect lies/betrayal. Anyway, I expect market forces to steamroll both of our opinions.
- eivarv 6y agoI don't know – but as far as I see it, that's irrelevant in pointing out that video (in and of itself) should not be trusted by virtue of being video. The fact that you can't imagine – and I don't provide – any alternative proposition does not make implicitly trusting video a good proposition. But, yeah, I suspect reality will probably disappoint us both...
- andrewflnr 6y agoUh, right, implicitly trusting video because it's video is definitely dumb. I don't think that's what I'm proposing. Trusting cryptography, as long as you're explicit about what you're doing and how it can fail, is at least not immediately foolish.