Weirdly the article doesn’t mention steganography. Arguably it isn’t quite the same, because the aim of steganography isn’t typically to add an identification, but something like “steganomark” would seem to be fitting.
> something like “steganomark” would seem to be fitting.
Might be technically more accurate, but it’s an inscrutable name with no chance of proliferation beyond technical people. If the goal is to rally people to your position, you need a name people can identify.
layer8 · · focus · HN ↗
latexr · · focus · HN ↗
Might be technically more accurate, but it’s an inscrutable name with no chance of proliferation beyond technical people. If the goal is to rally people to your position, you need a name people can identify.