[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [atlarge-discuss] $1 verification.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
At 01:33 AM 5/25/2003 -0400, Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:
>James S. Tyre wrote:
>
>>Thanks for your response, Sotiris,
>>
>>One reason why I did not initially self-identify as Karl's lawyer is that
>>I realize that puts me in somewhat of a unique situation, as I assume
>>most everyone here would accept Karl's word that I am who I say I am, and
>>my point never was intended to be about me. Rather, it was the broader
>>point that if the analog option is available, why foreclose it?
>
>
>James, I do not outright foreclose the 'analog option'. I recognize that
>there is an expediency to that method. However, you'll have to admit that
>it gets rather complicated to control and keep track of such a system as
>the membership base becomes increasingly larger. The 'analog' method
>leaves far too many possibilities for abuse beyond a given circle of
>'acquaintance magnitudes'. While you may be able to get Karl to vouch for
>you, not everyone can. So, let's say that I vouch for someone I happen to
>meet once in my lifetime, does that act of vouchsafing a given individual
>confer 'notary' status to my protege in the organization, and inter se for
>any of his/her future proteges? Such that, anyone who is vouchsafed can
>indiscriminately vouchsafe whomsoever they please? I assume you see the
>problem with that tack.
Yes, I do, what I've been talking about is by no means incapable of abuse;
but then, neither are PayPal or digital certificates.
I just thought of what may be a good analogy (emphasis on may, I won't be
offended at all if you or anyone makes a reasoned argument that it is a
terrible analogy). Think of what I'm saying as being similar to the PGP
ring of trust (which is unique to the Internet), but better. As it
happens, I've never gotten around to having my key signed by anyone,
because I usually only use it for confidential attorney-client
communications, where the client already knows I'm me. But suppose Karl
signed it, and that's all you knew. Is it not better if Karl says "I've
worked very closely with Tyre for a long time, sometimes he's very weird,
but he is who he says he is?" If all you knew was that he signed my key,
you wouldn't know if, for example, he did it in a drunken stupor, with no
real idea of who I am. ;-)
Then add on notes from, say, John Gilmore, Barbara Simons, Brewster Kahle,
you get the picture. Not a 100% guarantee, but closer, I think, than
PayPal, a digital certificate or a PGP key-signing.
The "key" is for the person doing the vouching to state the relevant
circumstance. If you vouch for Alice saying you met her once briefly,
that's one thing. If you vouch for Alice saying you've worked with her for
three years, that's another. And your vouching for Alice does not extend
to Alice's vouching for Bob. Trust in the person doing the vouching is
relevant, as with PGP key-signing.
I wouldn't presume to know what notarial requirements are in Canada (or any
other country), but at least here in California, all you need to do is
produce a state driver's license or equivalent ID, which are as easy as pie
to make or obtain. Others certainly may differ, but I'd put much more
trust in your statement that you've worked with Alice for three years than
in Alice producing the equivalent of a notarized document, particularly if
the notarial acknowledgment is as near-worthless wherever she may be as it
is here.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
James S. Tyre mailto:jstyre@jstyre.com
Law Offices of James S. Tyre 310-839-4114/310-839-4602(fax)
10736 Jefferson Blvd., #512 Culver City, CA 90230-4969
Co-founder, The Censorware Project http://censorware.net
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.5.2
iQA/AwUBPtBnPieft+CsaFFAEQKWOACgi+LG0JPi8bYNZGUD27tx42Et24YAnR7a
V0WtIQUGykk4RthYoYTZTKEv
=CuH2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de