Thoughts on Keybase
2014-667rhzu3dc-lists-groups at riseup.net
Wed Jan 7 03:01:38 CET 2015
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Tuesday 6 January 2015 at 2:14:20 PM, in
<mid:20150106141420.GB27281 at IUPUI.Edu>, Mark H. Wood wrote:
> True. But we have established an identity between him
> and a person of interest in the case. Investigation of
> that interest is going to require some more identities
> ("where were you on the night of the 13th?")
We know he was standing with a smoking gun, close to a body on the
ground. We should be investigating what happened, not wasting our time
with yesterday's food and the last three years' commuting habits.
> I suspect that imprecise language such as "who they
> are" lies at the root of the disagreement here.
"Who they are" in the sense of "what their name is" is obviously
irrelevant to whether they fired the gun. And I contend the vast
majority of "choices this person has made over time" would be
similarly unconnected to that night's events.
> think there may be some disagreement about the meaning
> of "invasive" as well.
Probably more to do with context. My comment about sounding too
invasive to be comfortable would, in hindsight, have sat better at the
beginning of my final paragraph.
> Well, if a person is suspected of a crime, many of his
> various identities are irrelevant.
> Others may be
> critical to establishing guilt or innocence.
The authorities need to prove guilt. The suspect does not need to
> o if guilt is proven, that is the only identity we
> care about w.r.t. the crime;
There are those who disagree, and insist on Criminal Record checks
when an individual interacts with them in a context completely
unrelated to any crime - such as a job application.
> o if guilt is disproven, then the suspect's public
> identities are relevant to publishing his innocence.
If the suspicion went to court but was not proven, that is a matter of
public record. If it never went to court, it would often be in the
individual's interest to not draw attention to having been a suspect.
> (This is why I tend to think of identification as the
> establishment and maintenance of sets of mappings or
> labels. I have a lot of labels ("identities") stuck on
> me by family, friends, enemies, employers, trading
> partners, etc., each of which is more or less
> independent. Various sets of these labels make up how
> my associates retrieve their concepts of me.)
That is right. Each person sees only the subset of labels relevant to
mutual interaction, plus any additional that the subject chooses to
reveal or the associate happens to stumble upon.
(What if each of these labels mapped to a UID on an OpenPGP key, but
anybody who didn't see that particular label on you could not read the
corresponding UID on your key?)
MFPA mailto:2014-667rhzu3dc-lists-groups at riseup.net
Confusion is always the most honest response
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Gnupg-users