| ▲ | mzajc 3 hours ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brilliant! Just the thing we want: more hardware attestation, more deanonymization, less user control, all diligently orchestrated in a repository where the only contributor is Anthropic Claude [0]. Comes complete with a misaligned ASCII diagram in the README to show how much effort the humans behind it put in! Yes, even their "humanifesto" is LLM output, and is written almost exclusively in the "it's not X <emdash> it's Y" style. [0]: https://github.com/magicseth/keywitness/graphs/contributors | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | delish 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Those are all situationally-valid criticisms, but I've long thought the ability to have smartphones' cameras cryptographically sign photos is good when available. The use case is demonstrating a photo wasn't doctored, and that it came from a device associated with e.g. a journalist, who maintains a public key. Of course, it should be optional. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | magicseth 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hi! I want anonymity! I also want to be able to prove what level of effort has been put in to something. I think there's room for both. This is an encrypted proof that I wrote something on a keyboard that tracks fingers. The protocol allows you to optionally sign it with your identity, but that isn't strictly required. It is an attempt at putting something into the conversation more than just "OSS is broken because there are too many slop PRs." What if OSS required a human to attest that they actually looked at the code they're submitting? This tool could help with that. Yes LLMs were used greatly in the production of this prototype! It doesn't change the goal of the experiment! or it's potential utility! Do you see any potential area in your world where some piece of this is valuable? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | Arainach 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> Yes, even their "humanifesto" is LLM output, and is written almost exclusively in the "it's not X <emdash> it's Y" style. ....no. There's not a single occurrence of that. https://keywitness.io/manifesto There are six emdashes on that page. NONE of them are "it's not X it's why". > Emails, messages, essays, code reviews, love letters — all suspect. > We believe this can be solved — not by detecting AI, but by proving humanity. > KeyWitness captures cryptographic proof at the point of input — the keyboard. > When you seal a message, the keyboard builds a W3C Verifiable Credential — a self-contained proof that can be verified by anyone, anywhere, without trusting us or any central authority. > That's an alphabet of 774 symbols — each carrying log2(774) ≈ 9.6 bits. 27 emoji for 256 bits. > They're a declaration: this message was written by a person — one of the diverse, imperfect, irreplaceable humans who still choose to type their own words. Clarifications: 4 Continuation from a list: 1 Could just be a comma: 1 "It's not X -- it's Y": 0. If you're going to make lazy commentary about good writing being AI, please at least be sure that you're reading the content and saying accurate things. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||