seeing a lot of upvotes here and thats understandable because kneejerk reactions are fun, but there is literally zero information in the article.
if I were to try and fill in the blanks (cuz the article is full of them), I would say that Obama is calling for a way to verify orginal content of data and date. easily done and has zero privacy implications for a publishing author and likely neither the content consumer. as a validation/verification technique, it also has minimal effects on censorship - at the risk of info without validation data becoming second class.
the idea of widespread sign(hash(content+timestamp)) is an interesting one worth discussing. the OP article, however, is just plain bad.
seeing a lot of upvotes here and thats understandable because kneejerk reactions are fun, but there is literally zero information in the article.
if I were to try and fill in the blanks (cuz the article is full of them), I would say that Obama is calling for a way to verify orginal content of data and date. easily done and has zero privacy implications for a publishing author and likely neither the content consumer. as a validation/verification technique, it also has minimal effects on censorship - at the risk of info without validation data becoming second class.
the idea of widespread
sign(hash(content+timestamp))is an interesting one worth discussing. the OP article, however, is just plain bad.