On 2/28/23 14:30, juan via agora-discussion wrote:
> Here's an idea for a rule. The text for the second paragraph is inspired
> by Rule 478.
>
> {
> A Fingerprint for a document (the Plaintext) is a document that could
> not have been reasonably created without knowledge of the Plaintext, and
> which is, clearly and unambiguously, uniquely related to that Plaintext
> in some specified way.
>
> Where the rules define an action that a person CAN perform "by
> commitment" to a particular kind of document, that person performs that
> action by performing it by announcement while, in the same message, also
> publishing a Fingerprint for a document of that kind.
> }
>
> I figured the second paragraph would fit well in that same rule, but the
> fact that I needed a definition before, plus the power of the rule, plus
> the fact that it's really old, makes be think it'd be best to create a
> new rule under Obligations.
>
> What do y'all think? Is this formulation good? Are more restrictions
> needed on Fingerprints? Are there any obvious holes?
>
> Notes:
>
> * I don't want to demand players to define a “method” for obtaining the
> Fingerprint from the Plaintext, because that would make it
> inconvenient to add spurious text to the Fingerprint which contains a
> hash, for example, without also specifying that in order to obtain it
> one must “add the SHA512 hash of the Plaintext to the following text
> at the position indicated” or something similar.
>
> * However, I believe the “clearly and unambiguously” language restricts
> one from arbitrarily declaring that a Fingerprint is related to a
> Plaintext through some arbitrary ad-hoc relation, given the amount of
> possible documents.
>
> P.S. I'm laying ground for a minigame I want to propose, but this seems
> useful on its own and could encourage interesting dynamics.
>
This results in every purported "by commitment" attempt diverging the
gamestate, since it's impossible to verify the hash at the time of
publication.
Also, I'm against enacting this alone without at least a specific use in
mind.
--
Janet Cobb
Assessor, Mad Engineer, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
