3 ms·
I think with real property (and probably with "major" capital goods), enforcement and registry are pretty intimately collected. If there's a specific organizat
by rdl 12y ago
I think with real property (and probably with "major" capital goods), enforcement and registry are pretty intimately collected. If there's a specific organization I'd call to get a non-owner removed from my property, I'd probably just let that organization maintain a database of the property, especially if it's using some cryptographic technique to prevent forgery (through time, if nothing else), and some replication strategy.
Where it gets really interesting is with things like cars (and eventually cellphones and other similarly priced goods); putting effectively activation locks and DRM into the equipment. IFF you could trust the whole system, it would make theft much less of a concern, which is great.
- darkmighty 12y agoThere's nothing technical impeding having a database linking each phone to a UID-individual that could be disabled for carriers worldwide through some DRM scheme (iirc, law enforcement demanded it several times). What's lacking is will/coordination from carriers and device makers. They don't see it as a competitive advantage, apparently. It could make phone theft a lot harder depending on the hardness of the DRM.