But... That's good no?
> No video, audio, or text can be presumed real unless signed by the human subject.
Where is the controversy in that?
> No video, audio, or text can be presumed real unless signed by the human subject.
Where is the controversy in that?
Companies can't even wrap their heads around sim swapping scams and social engineering of secret questions.
Follow the thou g ht through to how it would work and what it would mean in terms of privacy for the average person.
Your niceties seem dystopian to me.
Journalists would have a hard time showing that an interviewee actually said what claim they said.
Wire-tapping by the police also would become useless in court.
⇒ I would adjust it to “unless it has a reliably chain of trust”. That would mean that people could judge differently about whether to accept some things as true, but I think that’s unavoidable.