- From: Steven Rowat <steven_rowat@sunshine.net>
- Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2011 11:20:18 -0700
- To: public-webpayments@w3.org
On 8/27/11 1:49 PM, Manu Sporny wrote: > Those requirements seem diametrically opposed to one another. How can > you have a central authority that is required to check that ownership > claims for a particular piece of content is valid /and/ have anonymity > at the same time for whistle-blowers and political activists? Granted; it seems that having multiple authorities is better. And in my example of pseudonyms in the publishing industry, stretching back centuries, it would be a particular publisher (not, say, "The State") who would be trusted with the connection to the author who wished to remain anonymous. > identity. We've been impressed with a sub-set of WebID to publish > identity (public keys, which are then used to verify digital signatures). Very interesting; thank you. Demo was clean and fast. This seems like an interesting step. I dislike having Flash but I understand that it was (is) necessary to make your point. Hopefully eventually WebID or something like it will function without Flash. Steven
Received on Sunday, 28 August 2011 18:20:51 UTC