News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:My First Impressions of Web3 by pshc on Friday January 07, 2022 @07:37PM (#29847146)
I agree, one can’t easily tie an NFT to a physical object. Nothing guarantees that the watch and NFT change ownership in tandem.

All I’m saying is that a serial number doesn’t really prove anything because it’s trivial to copy. A private key inextricable from the object would be better, because it could generate timestamped signatures as proof.

Re:My First Impressions of Web3 by lolinder on Friday January 07, 2022 @10:25PM (#29848334)
But whatever you use would still be easier to implement using traditional tech than web3, because the problems they solve are orthogonal.
Re:My First Impressions of Web3 by pshc on Friday January 07, 2022 @10:37PM (#29848386)
Yes. I regret not being more clear in my original comment, because the scheme I alluded to is an application of public key cryptography, such as Certificate Authorities, and is not about cryptocurrencies specifically.
Re:My First Impressions of Web3 by meheleventyone on Saturday January 08, 2022 @04:33AM (#29850058)
Even with time stamped signatures you can clone the signature onto a fake watch.
Re:My First Impressions of Web3 by pshc on Saturday January 08, 2022 @12:12PM (#29853655)
The point of a signed timestamp (and/or challenge string) is that it demonstrates the signature is freshly generated, proof that the device is authentic right then and there. An old copied signature would not have this property.