The Ontology of Nyms, Trust, Belief, etc.

[tcmay@got.net (Timothy C. May)]

[I've changed the thread name from "Sen. Leahy..."]

At 10:50 AM 5/20/96, bryce@digicash.com wrote:

>Indeed we have, and it verged on philosophical territory, and
>I would really enjoy discussing the issue again with you
>sometime, although perhaps we've gotten about as much as we can
>get out of it in e-mail.

Yes, I also enjoyed the MITM ontological debate--up to a point. Technology
reifies what were once philosophical abstractions, and brings them to the
fore.

>Unfortunately PGP 2 only allows one kind of certificate.  The
>"key-signature".  To PRZ and most other people, it is a
>certificate asserting a mapping between a key and a true name.
>To me it is as I described above.  To TCMay, it is a kind of
>endorsement.  It's just too bad that PGP 2 doesn't have
>different _kinds_ of certificates to represent these different
>assertions.  Until a certificate technology like that is
>implemented, and probably even after that time, we need to
>avoid confusing these various meanings for "key-signatures".

I agree with this point, that the "scalar" nature of key-signings is not
very rich.

A Digression on Tensors: The next step up would presumably be "vector"
signings, where one has multiple attributes, just as with ratings, reviews,
etc. And the step after that would be "tensor" signings--it's perhaps a
leap into the abyss, but tensors have an interesting property that a value
in one direction, for example, and a value in another direction, say, do
not "vector add" to some resultant value. While "wind" acts as a vector
field, with a north wind and and a west wind giving a northwest resultant,
think of "stress" (as in a crystal, a piece of glass, a structural member):
stress in one direction is independent of stress in another direction, and
they don't add as vectors do. Hence, the "stress-energy tensor" is needed
to describe the stress in a material...or the gravitational field!

(This is just a conjecture that this model might be useful at some point.
Near term, I think even having "user-defined" belief fields would be a
useful step. And I don't think it needs to be hacked into a next version of
PGP...it seems better to add these things on later.)


>Now more seriously, the alacrity with which I bring up
>disagreements with Tim should in fact be construed as a measure
>of my _respect_ for his opinions and for his mind, rather that
>as a lack of respect for same.

Thanks, and I promise I'll respect you in the morning, too. (g)

That several of us (and probably many of those who aren't commenting) have
differing interpretations of key signings, trust, belief, identity, proof,
etc., is not surprising to me.

(I didn't put "Licensed Ontologist" in my .sig for nothing. Actually, it's
also meant as a tweak of some local Santa Cruzans who want professions
licensed by the State and ordered to report various forms of physical,
psychic, and existential "abuse" to the proper licensing authorities. I get
a great rise out of them (in scruz.general) by announcing that "my clinic"
refuses to narc out its patients to the authorities...I love getting
threats from them saying that they plan to contact Sacramento to "have your
license revoked." Predictably, and sadly, I've never gotten a call from any
state authorities on this...I can always hope.)

--Tim May

Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software!
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Licensed Ontologist         | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."