I get the sense, with the general failure of blockchain to live up to its hype beyond Bitcoin, that we'll see a lot of "crypto-" this and that nonsense, similar to how everything was "e-" this and that in 2000.
/me looks at his browser CA roots
Banksy does not, so you do have to contact “CA” every time.
Banksy is more secure than web browser crypto.
Anyone can produce a torn-in-half "Di-faced" fake banknote with Lady Diana's face on it, with a handwritten ID number across the bill.
Hell, I'll validate your Banksy pieces for £64.
Where's the authenticity coming from, and whats even the point of the torn note?
I don't see how this prevents someone with visual access to the note and the painting from creating a fake though. (The article mentions the tear is hard to reproduce but I doubt that.)
Additionally I don't see how this prevents anyone from distributing a valid note with a fake or wrong painting.
You would need to get Pest Control to keep issuing certificates for the same print, which they probably won't do.
There's always someone dumb enough in the art world or someone who wants the story and has far too much money.
I quite like Banksy, tbh, but overexposure is a thing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_fluids_in_art
Semen, due to the ability to sequence the DNA and difficulty obtaining a sample, is a fine genetic watermark.
(it only took on its modern meaning in a 16th century poem)
Sounds like a old joke with newfound currency to me.
