Re: Uniqueness and "is-a-person" credentials

[cme@ellisun.sw.stratus.com (Carl Ellison)]

>From: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May)
>Message-Id: <9310181717.AA24067@netcom5.netcom.com>
>Subject: Uniqueness and "is-a-person" credentials
>Date: Mon, 18 Oct 93 10:17:35 PDT

>I don't like the idea of state-run registries of "legal persons."
>Better to live with the occasional vagaries of digital pseuodonyms
>than to ban them.

Amen.

I kept trying to point out on pem-dev, until it became obvious that I was
speaking a foreign language, that the identity *is* a person's public key.
It's already unique and has a firm definition -- all the definition you
need.

It means:  "the person or people who have access to the matching private
key".

That's all you need.  Everything else comes from relationships and
relationships are established by message transmissions and files of
history.

The flesh and blood body doesn't matter in cyberspace unless/until you
start mixing the two worlds (eg., using money, trying to arrest someone,
pairing up for a sexual fling, ...).

 - Carl