Keybase makes it fairly easy, but people still have to learn what it means and why it’s trustworthy - my bet is things don’t change, there is a small percentage of people who understand how to verify the source, and the general population who either believes anything or nothing.
In the context of scientists and professionals tho maybe it is achievable to do some outreach and get people on eg keybase, something user friendly
I found it well explained etc, but it's hard to reach everybody.
That sounds what's needed, an extension of your IRL identity with top notch tooling to manage signatures (what PGP/GPG should've been) instead of docusign and similar that are charging an arm and a leg to "sign" PDFs with generated initials and signatures. We could go further; the signature is human readable in the rendered PDF (or whatever), and the Internet Archive takes a snapshot as an oracle notary when published, similar to Certificate Transparency for certs, but for all sorts of digital artifacts (the Internet Archive's snapshots have been used by a court of law for evidence authentication, so it's a trusted system [1]).
It ain't hard, it's just work.
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2018/09/04/wayback_machine_legit...
Digital signatures are actually overkill. The same infrastructure one uses to discover the authorship of a paper can distribute file hashes without any loss of autentiction, and I don't think anybody needs the non-refutation feature they bring. Maybe there is a nice use case for a paper authorship database with a PKI, but to my view the idea goes against an open scientific community that I think is much more valuable. (But again, maybe there is a way to have both.)
These are not basic problems. We're talking about scientific papers, not deeds to a piece of land or something.
> how do I know the pdf I’m downloading is what was published?
How do you know the paper photo-copy you have of an article is what was published? You don't 100% know, you make a reasonable assumption.
The exceptional case of needing integrity verification can have a niche solution.
I’m just in a “be careful what you wish for” state of mind, if there was no one in charge of sci-hub, the publishers could go on attack and fill the database with noise, copies of papers with numbers and methods altered.