Timeline for How do you establish identity when people can change their appearance at will?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 19, 2015 at 15:31 | comment | added | Alice | I would advice using digital watermarks instead of signatures. We do not need to verify integrity, only ownership — and most modern watermarks' algorithms are constructed to be resistant to various errors and transformations. As an added benefit, it would make identification after unregulated genetic modifications possible. | |
| Jul 25, 2015 at 19:01 | comment | added | Steve Jessop | @xeon: so use an error-correcting code :-) Also, (approximately speaking) mutations occur once and are inherited by cell lines descended from the mutant, so sampling DNA from multiple places in the body would allow for some error correction. | |
| Jul 24, 2015 at 23:01 | comment | added | Nanban Jim | Haha glad to see I'm not an isolated loon! | |
| Jul 24, 2015 at 21:14 | comment | added | Dan Smolinske | @dsollen: I'm thinking that with this tech they might be able to do it much cheaper, especially if the signature is at a known point in the sequence and they don't have to mess with the full thing. But you're correct that the DNA validation probably wouldn't be used for trivial ID checks. | |
| Jul 24, 2015 at 21:09 | comment | added | dsollen | I would throw in that they would also use a subdormal identity chip, a physical item, as well. Sequencing genes is a pain to do, 10 dollars a pop to make sure you are who you say you are is still expensive if you have to do it every time your carded before going into a bar. A chip would be used for most verification, with DNA resorted to only when you want to varify no one tampered or removed the chip. | |
| Jul 24, 2015 at 19:52 | comment | added | Green | There probably are changes that happen over a life time. Mapping everyone's genome as often as desired would quickly discover any such mutations/drift. | |
| Jul 24, 2015 at 18:43 | comment | added | Vladislavs Dovgalecs | Is our genetic code perfectly stable? If my memory is good, there are some small changes occuring over time (e.g. radiation). This can make the signature check fail or even corrupt that signature... | |
| Jul 24, 2015 at 15:41 | comment | added | Green | Add in a little SHA256 hashing for fingerprints of the genome and think it would work quite nicely. | |
| Jul 24, 2015 at 15:32 | comment | added | Dan Smolinske | @Green: I've had vague ideas for a story for a while now where people had implemented a public/private key sign on a genetic level - as part of their DNA replication process - as a defense against hostile genetic modifications and mutations. So this was just a logical extension of that. | |
| Jul 24, 2015 at 15:16 | comment | added | Green | Brilliant! So good! | |
| Jul 24, 2015 at 15:09 | history | answered | Dan Smolinske | CC BY-SA 3.0 |