I mean the viewers of the video.

I know, but as a physical, mobile object as a camera is involved I imagine it’s much more vulnerable to man-in-the-middle attacks than today’s TLS certificates for sites. There are more moving parts / physical steps and the camera is probably not always online.

But in essence you are right, operating the camera the same way as a server should be possible of course. We need some basic trusted authorities that are as trusted as we have for our current TLS certificates.

What it will prove, is whether the video is actually of a specific camera certificate. Not who owns the camera, if it has been swapped or if the video footage is real.

But if you don’t actually check the physical camera and prove that key for yourself, then it can easily be faked by generating a key that is not coming from the camera and is used for the “proof” video and the fake video.

But how would one simple member of the audience easily determine if this whole chain of events is valid, when they don’t even get how it works or what to look out for?

You’d have to have a public key of trusted sources that people automatically check with their browser, but all the steps in between need to be trusted too. I can imagine it is too much of a hassle for most.

But then again, that has always been the case for most.

Who?

Also not a fan to say the least.

Well, in many other systems you have an overarching ruling layer that sets laws and is able to enforce them from a top level.

That is precisely the reason why those systems can be relatively stable. As you just have a very large group of people following the same set of rules.

I like the idea of anarchism, but I see it as more of an ideal world view than an actual stable reality.

To support this, every group member of every group must almost unanimously support the concept. When resources or safety in an area become scarce, it’s easy for some groups to evolve back into another power structure to take care of their own people.

It’s really difficult for me to imagine everybody on this planet getting along with this. But I’m certainly interested in other viewpoints.

Euthanasia should be available for anyone at any age. You don’t choose to be born, life has no inherent value, suffering is strictly personal. Suicide is a terrible option with lots of drama, an extremely high failure rate and lifelong treatments or medication that are seen as the solution by society is a conservative convulsion of keeping people alive under any circumstances.

We could set up three sessions with a therapist, to keep people from losing loved ones too fast. But honestly, to me that would feel patronizing. That other people find it important someone stays alive is their problem. If it hurts them too much they can do the same.

There is joy in life and that’s beautiful, but on a scale suffering has the possibility to be more intense. Let people die without drama, let them say goodbye if they want with a ceremony, let them choose.

That’s the next step in the mentality of a modern civilization. It will fix the drama of wars, hunger and pain as you always have a simple painless solution if the suffering gets too heavy. Just end it, peacefully, whenever you want.