🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <934@bakerst.UUCP> kathy@bakerst.UUCP (Kathy Vincent) writes:
-In article <1329@se-sd.sandiego.NCR.COM> dennis@se-sd.sandiego.NCR.COM writes:
->In article <2411@calmasd.GE.COM> jnp@calmasd.GE.COM (John Pantone) writes:
->>One, commonly used, method for "proving" the date of invention is to
->>document the invention and mail it to yourself (postmark).
->Gosh, I think I'll mail myself some envelopes (unsealed of course) to
->get them postmarked today.  Then, when something comes along that I
->want to be the inventor of, I'll write a description of it and put it
->into one of the envelopes and seal it.
-...  The envelope would
-have to have be sealed.   And the mail has to be registered, and they
-stamp the heck out of the envelope - including the seal, as proof that
-the contents were in the envelope on the date the envelope was sealed,
-registered, and mailed.

During wartime (and perhaps at other times), censors regularly extract
the contents of envelopes sealed like this, examine them, and reinsert
them, without leaving noticeable evidence of their tampering.  You could
use similar techniques (which I won't describe, but they're simple) to
fake time-stamped registry via postal means; just insert the document
you want to be thought of as "old", like Dennis suggested.  There are
tests that could possibly detect the relative age of the paper and its
contents, but it's unlikely anyone would go that far in a challenge.

If there's a lot of money involved, and you can't trust a guy's word,
why should you trust his evidence?