@SpaceLifeForm > Immutability? Do you not know what content hashing is? I could refer you to a file on my site that is my original comment on this post ([82d7...](https://www.impossiblystupid.com/content/external/82d7fd848c9a35fdd77e0357f4df53ff36308dabcad319f23d37ff876d1f7baa), to be specific). You can easily verify that the file hash matches the file name, and that a hash of the comment text matches the hash in the file. None of the content can change without the hashes changing as well. > Ok, here is an experiment you can try. I'm not sure what you're trying to get at; please be specific on what you think the problem is. When you say things like "take the text you see on a site", you fundamentally don't seem to understand the process of verifying the content of a comment. The comment here is *not* the original. Yes, there are potentially text encoding issues as well as changes that happen when Markdown is converted to HTML. None of that matters one whit, though, because I can refer to the comment I wrote on my site, which can be verified to be materially identical to the comment here (i.e., nobody changed either the syntax or semantics). > That is exactly what troll farms do. Again, this makes me question if you fundamentally understand what a web of trust is. Why on earth would Bruce or anyone else place their trust in troll farms (or anyone that puts *their* trust in troll farms)? My point remains that communication metadata can be used to track and (pseudo-anonymously) identify users across sites. Big social media players already do this, but that power in the hands of individuals could actually be a good thing. d8de1a3f6c483233c6cd16aab54ac3bee08e5c3473d8b82d387ec96a9fcf7819