11–20 of 35 posts
There’s nothing cryptographic about this. It’s a central authority that either says “yes it’s real” or not. The system revolves around trust in that central authority. Everyone can easily fake a certificate which cannot be independently falsified without asking that central authority, who will be more likely to check their books than to do anything related to the actual certificate.
Does cryptographic imply decentralized?
Anyone can produce a torn-in-half "Di-faced" fake banknote with Lady Diana's face on it, with a handwritten ID number across the bill.
Hell, I'll validate your Banksy pieces for £64.
Where's the authenticity coming from, and whats even the point of the torn note?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does cryptographic imply decentralized?
No, but I think you'll agree that saying tears in a piece of paper "cryptography" is a stretch. It's not cryptography in the same way that a stamp or wax seal isn't cryptography, unless your definition of cryptography is "any method to protect the confidentiality and integrity of a document".
There’s nothing cryptographic about this. It’s a central authority that either says “yes it’s real” or not. The system revolves around trust in that central authority. Everyone can easily fake a certificate which cannot be independently falsified without asking that central authority, who will be more likely to check their books than to do anything related to the actual certificate.
I get the sense, with the general failure of blockchain to live up to its hype beyond Bitcoin, that we'll see a lot of "crypto-" this and that nonsense, similar to how everything was "e-" this and that in 2000.
I'm missing something here. Anyone can produce a torn-in-half "Di-faced" fake banknote with Lady Diana's face on it, with a handwritten ID number across the bill. Hell, I'll validate your Banksy pieces for £64. Where's the authenticity coming from, and whats even the point of the torn note?
I don't see how this prevents someone with visual access to the note and the painting from creating a fake though. (The article mentions the tear is hard to reproduce but I doubt that.)
Additionally I don't see how this prevents anyone from distributing a valid note with a fake or wrong painting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does cryptographic imply decentralized?
Cryptographic implies math is used, which doesn't seem to be the case here.
> 1650s, "art of writing in secret characters"
[flagged]
I'm missing something here. Anyone can produce a torn-in-half "Di-faced" fake banknote with Lady Diana's face on it, with a handwritten ID number across the bill. Hell, I'll validate your Banksy pieces for £64. Where's the authenticity coming from, and whats even the point of the torn note?
The point of the torn note is (as far as I understood) that the authenticator keeps the other half. So anyone can contact the authenticator and ask them if they have a counterpiece for any given note. I don't see how this prevents someone with visual access to the note and the painting from creating a fake though. (The article mentions the tear is hard to reproduce but I doubt that.) Additionally I don't see how this…