[ExI] he said what????
atymes at gmail.com
Sat Dec 31 22:52:34 UTC 2016
On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 7:11 AM, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 1:11 AM, Adrian Tymes <atymes at gmail.com> wrote:
>> That's a confusion between "could" and "does".
> I'm not confused, I realize NIST doesn't do that but there is no reason
> they, or some other trusted third party, couldn't do that.
But why NIST? The kinds of things we trust them on, aren't the kinds
of things we'd need for a trusted signer. Why not the Department of
Justice (if this is intended to be court-admissible evidence), or
Defense, or Agriculture? Why not NASA, the FCC, or clerks of the
United States Supreme Court?
Just pointing out, your entire reason for suggesting NIST - that
NASDAQ uses them - seems to be based on a confusion - what
specifically NASDAQ uses them for (NIST doesn't do the signing in
NASDAQ's case; they just provide the time).
More information about the extropy-chat