Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I guess the idea is that the content is more relevant if he can prove that he knew it now rather than later.

Why would that be the case? Idk.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

But there's no reason to post the public key then. Just leave the wall of text encrypte by the private key with a note that you'll release the public key if shit hits the fan.

The way he did it shows a core misunderstanding of the point of paired keys and prevents him from using the private key in the future to prove his identity.

Also the private key signature on the post proves nothing to no one. It's literally just him showing off the features in as many ways as possible whether they make sense or not. Signing future posts would at least prove they're the same author as the previous posts but he loses that ability the second he releases the private key which is the point he'd need to start verifying his identity

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

i say this as a feminist ally - maybe his :marseybigbrain: play is that his encrypted message that needs to get decrypted with another public key

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.