In the context of Bitcoin I will concede that perhaps it holds true for now. I also never said the actual credential you receive from a government agency is trustable. I completely agree that they are forgeable and not necessarily reliable. That was not my point. I was referring to the vetting process before issuance. Just as you have behavioral characteristics online that contribute to trusting an "identity" you also exhibit in person attributes, such as physically being in a specific location at a certain time or blue eyes or biometrics, that are valuable. You simply cannot capture those in an online-only world. I don't see how you can deny the value there. You are most certainly and undeniably the expert in the Bitcoin context here so I will not even attempt to argue with you on that, but I just think it's not realistic to ignore the value of an in-person network in other contexts. You called it "geek wanking" with no qualifier "in the Bitcoin context" so excuse me if I misunderstood your intent. On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote: > It applies to OP, bitcoin community development and Satoshi. > > "value of in person vetting of identity is undeniable"... no it is > quite deniable. Satoshi is the quintessential example. We value brain > output, code. The real world identity is irrelevant to whether or not > bitcoin continues to function. > > The currency of bitcoin development is code, and electronic messages > describing cryptographic theses. _That_ is the relevant fingerprint. > > Governmental id is second class, can be forged or simply present a > different individual from that who is online. PGP WoT wanking does > not solve that problem at all. > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Brian Hoffman > wrote: > > I would agree that the in person aspect of the WoT is frustrating, but > to dismiss this as "geek wanking" is the pot calling the kettle. > > > > The value of in person vetting of identity is undeniable. Just because > your risk acceptance is difference doesn't make it wanking. Please go see > if you can get any kind of governmental clearance of credential without > in-person vetting. Ask them if they accept your behavioral signature. > > > > I know there is a lot of PGP hating these days but this comment doesn't > necessarily apply to every situation. > > > > > > > >> On Sep 15, 2014, at 9:08 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote: > >> > >>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 3:23 AM, Thomas Zander > wrote: > >>> Any and all PGP related howtos will tell you that you should not trust > or sign > >>> a formerly-untrusted PGP (or GPG for that matter) key without seeing > that > >>> person in real life, verifying their identity etc. > >> > >> Such guidelines are a perfect example of why PGP WoT is useless and > >> stupid geek wanking. > >> > >> A person's behavioural signature is what is relevant. We know how > >> Satoshi coded and wrote. It was the online Satoshi with which we > >> interacted. The online Satoshi's PGP signature would be fine... > >> assuming he established a pattern of use. > >> > >> As another example, I know the code contributions and PGP key signed > >> by the online entity known as "sipa." At a bitcoin conf I met a > >> person with photo id labelled "Pieter Wuille" who claimed to be sipa, > >> but that could have been an actor. Absent a laborious and boring > >> signed challenge process, for all we know, "sipa" is a supercomputing > >> cluster of 500 gnomes. > >> > >> The point is, the "online entity known as Satoshi" is the relevant > >> fingerprint. That is easily established without any in-person > >> meetings. > >> > >> -- > >> Jeff Garzik > >> Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist > >> BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/ > >> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> Want excitement? > >> Manually upgrade your production database. > >> When you want reliability, choose Perforce > >> Perforce version control. Predictably reliable. > >> > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157508191&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Bitcoin-development mailing list > >> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > > > > -- > Jeff Garzik > Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist > BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/ >