3 ms·

I'm really not sure what this comment is about, sorry. Are you offering a critique or just throwing out ideas for someone to ponder? If you're critiquing the i

by olah_1 5y ago

I'm really not sure what this comment is about, sorry. Are you offering a critique or just throwing out ideas for someone to ponder? If you're critiquing the idea that family/friends won't be able to respond when you need them the most, not everyone has family/friends. So there will naturally be companies that act as account recovery services as well.

lottin 5y ago
I think the critique goes deeper than that. An informal agreement between you and your circle of friends and family is not a legally-binding agreement, and is not enforceable at all. A modern economy needs private contracts that are fully enforceable by courts of justice, it cannot rely on informal agreements like this. Further, you're asking people to become custodians of your on-line accounts? I don't think anyone wants to become custodians of someone else's on-line accounts, even if they are your friends. I find super weird that someone genuinely thinks this a workable idea or that this is something that would be appealing to the general public. It reminds me of survivalism.
- sanderjd 5y ago
  This is just a particular implementation of "reset password". I don't have legal recourse if the sites I use don't implement a good account recovery protocol... They could implement it as "if you lose your password you're SOL" if they want. It's just a nicety for me to be able to "implement" this myself by configuring a set of people or of technical steps I can use to recover my account.
- olah_1 5y ago
  > An informal agreement between you and your circle of friends and family is not a legally-binding agreement You’re right, it’s much deeper and more significant than laws (which are broken literally every day). > A modern economy needs private contracts that are fully enforceable by courts of justice, it cannot rely on informal agreements like this That may be what an economy needs, but what a society, culture, or civilization needs is the deep bonds of human relationships. Those things are built on families. > I don't think anyone wants to become custodians of someone else's on-line accounts, even if they are your friends. Have you ever helped your friends or family? Have you ever been helped by them? I find this a necessary question to ask because the only people that critique this idea are those that do not have any real friends or family. And to be fair, I already addressed that in my original comment (there will be services / companies to help people in that situation).
- EGreg 5y ago
  The point is YOU have the choice of who YOU choose to fulfill role X, and you can spread the tiny responsibility across multiple entities, while removing the liability that one of them could just impersonate you anytime. It’s totally up to you, and you can recreate the legal custodian relationship if you wish, but then they or their employees would technically have full power over your account. Are you the kind of person who LOVES signing in with Facebook, and trusts them to safeguard your keys and identity in their nice centralized database — if anything goes wronng you’ll have the legal system, another nice top-down system of laws and enforcement, to correct everything, right?
  - lottin 5y ago
    I don't have Facebook, but from what I gather they are not in charge of safeguarding anyone's keys or identity. So... yeah, I have trust in the rule of law. For example, banks pay millions every day to customers in compensation for improper charges as a result of court rulings. If you can't trust the rule of law you have bigger problems than worrying about Facebook stealing your identity... but I'll leave it here.
    - olah_1 5y ago
      > If you can't trust the rule of law you have bigger problems than worrying about Facebook stealing your identity Most individuals cannot bear the weight of corporate lawfare. Congrats on winning a nice case and getting a good pay out. but that is survivorship bias.
      - lottin 5y ago
        You got it the other way round. I haven't won any case.

by olah_1 5y ago

lottin 5y ago

I think the critique goes deeper than that. An informal agreement between you and your circle of friends and family is not a legally-binding agreement, and is not enforceable at all. A modern economy needs private contracts that are fully enforceable by courts of justice, it cannot rely on informal agreements like this. Further, you're asking people to become custodians of your on-line accounts? I don't think anyone wants to become custodians of someone else's on-line accounts, even if they are your friends. I find super weird that someone genuinely thinks this a workable idea or that this is something that would be appealing to the general public. It reminds me of survivalism.

sanderjd 5y ago
This is just a particular implementation of "reset password". I don't have legal recourse if the sites I use don't implement a good account recovery protocol... They could implement it as "if you lose your password you're SOL" if they want. It's just a nicety for me to be able to "implement" this myself by configuring a set of people or of technical steps I can use to recover my account.
olah_1 5y ago
> An informal agreement between you and your circle of friends and family is not a legally-binding agreement You’re right, it’s much deeper and more significant than laws (which are broken literally every day). > A modern economy needs private contracts that are fully enforceable by courts of justice, it cannot rely on informal agreements like this That may be what an economy needs, but what a society, culture, or civilization needs is the deep bonds of human relationships. Those things are built on families. > I don't think anyone wants to become custodians of someone else's on-line accounts, even if they are your friends. Have you ever helped your friends or family? Have you ever been helped by them? I find this a necessary question to ask because the only people that critique this idea are those that do not have any real friends or family. And to be fair, I already addressed that in my original comment (there will be services / companies to help people in that situation).
EGreg 5y ago
The point is YOU have the choice of who YOU choose to fulfill role X, and you can spread the tiny responsibility across multiple entities, while removing the liability that one of them could just impersonate you anytime. It’s totally up to you, and you can recreate the legal custodian relationship if you wish, but then they or their employees would technically have full power over your account. Are you the kind of person who LOVES signing in with Facebook, and trusts them to safeguard your keys and identity in their nice centralized database — if anything goes wronng you’ll have the legal system, another nice top-down system of laws and enforcement, to correct everything, right?
- lottin 5y ago
  I don't have Facebook, but from what I gather they are not in charge of safeguarding anyone's keys or identity. So... yeah, I have trust in the rule of law. For example, banks pay millions every day to customers in compensation for improper charges as a result of court rulings. If you can't trust the rule of law you have bigger problems than worrying about Facebook stealing your identity... but I'll leave it here.
  - olah_1 5y ago
    > If you can't trust the rule of law you have bigger problems than worrying about Facebook stealing your identity Most individuals cannot bear the weight of corporate lawfare. Congrats on winning a nice case and getting a good pay out. but that is survivorship bias.
    - lottin 5y ago
      You got it the other way round. I haven't won any case.