3 ms·

Because it's much easier to remove a cryptographic signature than it is to falsify one, and there's a greater incentive in passing a generated file as being cre

Because it's much easier to remove a cryptographic signature than it is to falsify one, and there's a greater incentive in passing a generated file as being created by a human than the opposite.

JohnFen 3y ago
But it's a lot harder for people to do this than for a computer, which means people largely won't. Also, I still don't see how it's fair and reasonable to put this sort of burden on innocent others when they aren't the ones making the problem.
- fluoridation 3y ago
  With software support it doesn't have to be any harder than just saving a file. You set up your keystore once and then your production software does the rest. I'm sure there's a lot of popular digital artists who'd like for people to be able distinguish their art from generated stuff that imitates their personal style. >Also, I still don't see how it's fair and reasonable to put this sort of burden on innocent others when they aren't the ones making the problem. Reality is what it is. There's no point in arguing about what's fair or not fair, what matters is what solves the problem. If you were fighting your evil clone and I had to shoot the fake one, would you say "why should I have to prove I'm myself? My fake should just turn himself in", knowing you're risking getting shot because he'll do the exact same thing?
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    > I'm sure there's a lot of popular digital artists who'd like for people to be able distinguish their art from generated stuff that imitates their personal style. Sure, and this sort of approach makes sense for them. I'm thinking of everyone else. Not artists, but ordinary people doing ordinary things. > what matters is what solves the problem. True, and fair enough. But I don't think putting this burden on humans would actually solve this problem, because not enough humans can or will do this.
    - fluoridation 3y ago
      Ordinary people just send files to people they know and have no interest in proving the authorship of those files, nor are the people who receive them interesting in verifying the authorship. Hell, I have GPG set up on at least two computers and I've never sent a signed message to another person. This is a problem only for people who publish content and want to make sure everyone knows it was they who made something, and for people who consume/use content and want to make sure that a given piece of content was made by a human.
      - JohnFen 3y ago
        > This is a problem only for people who publish content and want to make sure everyone knows it was they who made something, and for people who consume/use content and want to make sure that a given piece of content was made by a human. Right, which includes an awful lot of ordinary people. But if the proposal is intended only to cover the more visible people, that's fair enough for now. We still need a more general solution.

Because it's much easier to remove a cryptographic signature than it is to falsify one, and there's a greater incentive in passing a generated file as being created by a human than the opposite.

JohnFen 3y ago

But it's a lot harder for people to do this than for a computer, which means people largely won't. Also, I still don't see how it's fair and reasonable to put this sort of burden on innocent others when they aren't the ones making the problem.

fluoridation 3y ago
With software support it doesn't have to be any harder than just saving a file. You set up your keystore once and then your production software does the rest. I'm sure there's a lot of popular digital artists who'd like for people to be able distinguish their art from generated stuff that imitates their personal style. >Also, I still don't see how it's fair and reasonable to put this sort of burden on innocent others when they aren't the ones making the problem. Reality is what it is. There's no point in arguing about what's fair or not fair, what matters is what solves the problem. If you were fighting your evil clone and I had to shoot the fake one, would you say "why should I have to prove I'm myself? My fake should just turn himself in", knowing you're risking getting shot because he'll do the exact same thing?
- JohnFen 3y ago
  > I'm sure there's a lot of popular digital artists who'd like for people to be able distinguish their art from generated stuff that imitates their personal style. Sure, and this sort of approach makes sense for them. I'm thinking of everyone else. Not artists, but ordinary people doing ordinary things. > what matters is what solves the problem. True, and fair enough. But I don't think putting this burden on humans would actually solve this problem, because not enough humans can or will do this.
  - fluoridation 3y ago
    Ordinary people just send files to people they know and have no interest in proving the authorship of those files, nor are the people who receive them interesting in verifying the authorship. Hell, I have GPG set up on at least two computers and I've never sent a signed message to another person. This is a problem only for people who publish content and want to make sure everyone knows it was they who made something, and for people who consume/use content and want to make sure that a given piece of content was made by a human.
    - JohnFen 3y ago
      > This is a problem only for people who publish content and want to make sure everyone knows it was they who made something, and for people who consume/use content and want to make sure that a given piece of content was made by a human. Right, which includes an awful lot of ordinary people. But if the proposal is intended only to cover the more visible people, that's fair enough for now. We still need a more general solution.