On Sat, May 23, 2020, 9:36 AM Karl <gmk...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Sat, May 23, 2020, 8:55 AM other.arkitech < > other.arkit...@protonmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >> Sent with ProtonMail <https://protonmail.com> Secure Email. >> >> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ >> On Saturday, May 23, 2020 12:39 PM, Karl <gmk...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sat, May 23, 2020, 8:33 AM other.arkitech < >> other.arkit...@protonmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ >>> On Saturday, May 23, 2020 12:21 PM, Karl <gmk...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Sat, May 23, 2020, 8:05 AM other.arkitech < >>> other.arkit...@protonmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> The solution for this problem doesn't fall into the blockchain >>>> platform. The platform will delete the information if evidence signed by >>>> the right private key is presented. >>>> >>> >>> BSV is a blockchain platform that has been working well for me for this >>> purpose of information preservation. >>> >>> If you want to protect a piece of information from "rubberhosing" you >>>> must follow a procedure to safeguard it. for instance : >>>> 1. break down your key into several parts, using the Shamir secret >>>> sharing squeme. >>>> 2 spread the parts acros a distributed group of people you trust >>>> 3 delete the key so nobody can force you to reveal >>>> 4 the attacker must have to coherce a number of people to reconstruct >>>> the private key >>>> >>>> >>> It is true "rubberhosing" is usually mentioned in the context of secrecy >>> and privacy, but it can also be used to force erasure and destruction of >>> information. In such a case it does not matter whether it is encrypted or >>> not: the device that holds it can be destroyed. >>> >>> Additionally many can indeed coerce a large number of people. The >>> network would need to preserve the information even if all parties purport >>> to want it removed. Most blockchains have pulled that off, although I >>> imagine there are other solutions too. >>> >>> >>> storing in a single device is never secure. it must be distributed. >>> If you want the info never ever deleted by any means you just destroy de >>> private key used to store it. >>> >> >> It sounds like USPS can store things in this reliable way, spreading them >> among many devices? >> >> That really seems the biggest value of a blockchain to me. It also >> attempts to prove when the data was created, as consensus time is included >> in the block confirmation algorithm, which shows that it was not fabricated >> after the fact. >> >> >> The 'registry' function is an important feature. To me, the most >> important feature is the ability to create a perceived macroeconomy based >> on all detailed microeconomies produced by millions of personal coins, >> which was a design feature of USPS. >> In USPS there is not a concept of 'block'. I changed the wording in the >> USPS context to avoid confusion. Instead there exist the homologous concept >> 'diff', representing the difference between the previous state and the next. >> A diif is used to be appplied to a base state producing the next state. >> The both the previous state and the diff can be forgotten or deleted >> because they are never needed again. >> That's way USPS is 'lean', lightweight, not bloated with past >> information, and that's why USPS is not immutable (as a positive trait) and >> for so it is very easy to upgrade the cypher suite without compromising >> past encrypted data. >> Immutability is a threat to privacy. >> > > There is no such thing as privacy. Only the shared respect of not looking > hard enough. >
(but yes, sorry, different goals. we want to make it very hard to look for now.) >