zlacker

Once again. To meaningfully exist seperate from digital overlords, you must be able to grok nuances of cryptography. You are dead on arrival for 95% of the populace.

>>salawa+(OP)
Do you consider Let's Encrypt to be a digital overlord? Many are using this service successfully without being cryptography experts?

Why can't there be a "local attestation server" equivalent to Lets Encrypt, e.g. offering the Top 10 most-requested OS configurations which are not being addressed by digital overlords?

Cryptographer priests are scarce, but not numerically capped or fully monopolized by digital overlords.

>>walter+Wj
Let's Encrypt is spawned by digital overlords, btw.

Might be overseen by a neutral group, but it was spawned out of them.

And I'm sorry, but no. Absolutely not. If I have to teach someone to do a damn Certificate signing request just to say, get a kernel tweak done, or (nightmare mode) just to run a self-written hello world because the powers that be have decided that nothing less than perfect non-repudiation of every binary ever built from now on is acceptable; (the logical terminis of "apply cryptography to programming until top down control is realized)... I'm not even completing the thought. This is a bad, bad, bad, bad, bad idea.

>>salawa+RL
Very reasonable points but we are sadly entering a world with many legal+tech differences from the last three decades. The convergence of foo with bar is occurring in multiple societal stacks, in both top-down and bottom-up directions. Short of halting these flywheel transformations, OSS EEE is a safety valve.

If you are in the US, take a look at the recently approved UCC changes for CERs (controllable electronic records, e.g. blockchains and CBDCs), which will now proceed to US state legislatures, https://www.clearygottlieb.com//news-and-insights/publicatio...