4 ms·
Why is this better than just signing it with any private key and sharing the public key? Why do you need to involve a blockchain and I assume transaction fees a
by greenthrow 3y ago
Why is this better than just signing it with any private key and sharing the public key? Why do you need to involve a blockchain and I assume transaction fees as well?
- FridgeSeal 3y agoIt’s not. In no way is it better than the alternative, unless the metric is “pointless and harmful introduction of blockchain things”.
- xk_id 3y agoWhat makes this harmful?
- chizhik-pyzhik 3y agoNo TX fees here, since signing is not on-chain- the advantage is just that having eth accounts means people are already set up with a keypair, often without even realizing it.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- yieldcrv 3y agoIt doesn't use the blockchain, it uses a more ubiquitous user experience and namespace than what GPG failed to do across 30 years.
- World177 3y ago> Why is this better than just signing it with any private key and sharing the public key? People using Ethereum often also use blockchain based domains which makes it easier for non-technical people to be more certain about endorsements. Ethereum leaves the implementation of how something becomes endorsed by a domain up to the owner(s) of a domain. > Why do you need to involve a blockchain and I assume transaction fees as well? This is more dependent on implementation. Just endorsing something does not need to be on chain, so there does not need to be fees.
- xk_id 3y agoThe infrastructure for this mechanism is already implemented, operational and secure. The alternatives are hypothetical at this point in time. And signing doesn’t incur transaction fees, why would you assume that?