[A1kmm]

And you could even use SSS (Shamir's Secret Sharing - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shamir%27s_secret_sharing) to split the key to decrypt your confidential information across n people, such that some k (where k < n) of those people need to provide their share to get the key.

Then, for example, consider n = 5, k = 3 - if any 3 of 5 selected friends decide the trigger has been met, they can work together to decrypt the information. But a group of 2 of the 5 could not - reducing the chance of it leaking early if a key share is stolen / someone betrays or so on. It also reduces the chance of it not being released when it should, due someone refusing or being unable to act (in that case, up to 2 friends could be incapacitated, unwilling to follow the instructions, or whatever, and it could still be released).

[withinboredom]

Then you just make those friends a target. They only need to buy-off or kill 3. It is unlikely the general public would know of them, so it likely wouldn’t be reported on.

[crote]

Turn it around: require a 3/5 quorum to disarm the public-release deadman switch. Buying off 3 people whose friend you have just murdered isn't going to be trivial.

[abduhl]

You think that people will be less motivated to do what they’re told after someone has proven a willingness to kill?

[diggan]

I wonder if having some sort of public/semi-public organization of trading parts of SSS's could be done.

Right now, as an individual, you'd have pretty small number of trusted N's (from parents definition). With some organization, maybe you could get that number way up, so possibility of destroying the entire scheme could be close to impossible with rounding up large number of the population.

[withinboredom]

This reminds me of an idea to create a "global programmer's union"