Giovanni Biscuolo <g...@xelera.eu> writes: > [...] > pinoaffe <pinoa...@gmail.com> writes: >> - should examine possible workarounds going forward, >> - should move towards something like UUIDs and petnames in the long run. >> >> (see https://spritelyproject.org/news/petname-systems.html). > > I don't understand how using petnames, uuids or even a re:claimID > identity (see below) could solve the problem with "rewriting history" in > case a person wishes to change his or her previous _published_ name > (petname, uuid...) in an archived content-addressable storage system. It would decouple "name" from "identity as represented in the git merkle tree", thus allowing name changes to occur without affecting hashes and the like. I see no possible reason for UUID changes, as UUIDs (by themself) are not personally identifying. This of course would not allow retroactive splitting/merging of identities, but I feel like permitting that is incompatible with the idea of identities anyhow.
> As a side note, other than the "petname system" please also consider > re:claimID from GNUnet: > https://www.gnunet.org/en/reclaim/index.html > https://www.gnunet.org/en/reclaim/motivation.html Sure, I'll take a look kind regards, pinoaffe
