Nick Szabo  🔑

@iang_fc @jgarzik This signing, SSL or PGP, would provide integrity of the channel from the signed code to browser -- no more than that.

@iang_fc @jgarzik Previous schemes "failed" because we added expectations crypto doesn't actually provide, e.g. "identity" of source.

@NickSzabo4 @jgarzik users are rational, expect to rely on claims from "crypto". Without reliance, what's the point? What are we saying?

@iang_fc @jgarzik Stop making false claims. Just claim what the crypto actually does not what we wish it did or what signer "guarantees".

@NickSzabo4 @jgarzik Yes but 'no false claims' is silence, users hear nothing. We need a positive claim, integrated, beyond crypto, holistic

@iang_fc @jgarzik Not silence: crypto protects the syntactic content. A positive, true, and important, if harder to communicate, claim.

@NickSzabo4 @jgarzik If I sign over "I am when I semant" then I have to live or slide by the claim.

@iang_fc @jgarzik "Live or die"? Who is going to kill you? Such wet semantics is motivated by human actions if at all: not by the crypto.