Re: cute.

[Tim May <tcmay@got.net>]

At 2:17 PM -0700 11/9/97, Bill Stewart wrote:
>>>What's the point in distribuing your public key through the same
>>>channels as a signature? Kinda defeats the purpose. Esp since I can't
>>>verify that the given public key is indeed yours, since you're anonymous.
>
>As Robert and Tim point out, the important issue is that
>you can tell that a posting claiming to be from "Amad3us"
>is or is not by the same set of authors as the previous
>articles by the pseudonym "Amad3us".  This allows authors
>to create and defend "reputation capital", and allows readers
...

And several days ago someone said, basically, "Fine, but this is only
needed once, and shouldn't be sent more than once...blah blah"

Well, each new entrant into the "cycle" is like a first time viewer or
receiver of this signature information.

I'm not saying a public key block should accompany all posts--the
keyservers work for that--but there is certainly no harm done.

--Tim May

The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
ComSec 3DES:   408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^2,976,221   | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."