707100+ entries in 0.335s
nanotube: fluffypony: well, we'd have
to discuss
the details of implementation first... and whether it's worth it at all. what exactly is
the source of your need for historical data?
fluffypony: ThickAsThieves: but
then we're back
to what davout said, solving a problem
that doesn't exist
ThickAsThieves: basically
the WoT is
to be
thought of as
the very incentive itself
mircea_popescu: ThickAsThieves> "Obviously, a criminal justice system
that punished only
those who volunteered for punishment was unworkable <<
this is what
the contemporary
thinks.
fluffypony: ThickAsThieves: well atm
the db is 3mb, so I don't see it growing massively - double-ish
that size if every single rating was updated:-P
HeySteve: the problem is imposing costs means you have
to set costs, meaning you can't avoid (dis)incentivisation
HeySteve: imposing costs for certain actions
turns
the WoT into something of a business, I'd favour
that way
to limit spam
ThickAsThieves: if db bloat is a real problem,
then
treat it like backups, 1 yearly, 1 monthly, 1 weekly, 1 daily
Apocalyptic: it's already rate-limited as commands
to gribble
fluffypony: nanotube: if I get a bit of
time I can make
the changes and submit a PR?
davout: fluffypony: also you're
trying
to solve a problem
that doesn't exist
fluffypony: ThickAsThieves, davout: why not? what's
the use-case for multiple changes a day?
Apocalyptic: "New York - La banque américaine JPMorgan Chase est en
train de fermer les comptes bancaires d'actuels et d'anciens dirigeants hauts placés non-américains et de diplomates, a-t-on appris mardi auprès d'une source proche du dossier"
HeySteve: spamming changes could bloat
the archive, it might be good
to have a
time limit or cost
fluffypony: nanotube: ok
then why not shift historical ratings into an archived rating
table?
that way
the main ratings
table doesn't bloat, but
the historical data is still around
nanotube: well, i have logs... but i didn't
think it would be useful
to bloat
the db with historical crud.
punkman: I remember seeing a link for dowloading
the data in bulk on -otc.com, was it deprecated?
fluffypony: we're struggling with
the lack of historical ratings when people change ratings
fluffypony: nanotube: why don't you insert ratings into
the
table instead of updating
them, and
then just use a subquery
to group by rated_user_id / rater_user_id when getting data?
ozbot: Silk Road 2.0 Now Larger
Than Silk Road Ever Was |
Techdirt
ThickAsThieves: "Obviously, a criminal justice system
that punished only
those who volunteered for punishment was unworkable
mircea_popescu: ThickAsThieves
technically his could have been correct
HeySteve: :D well here we don't quite agree, but yes it's a good debate
to have
mircea_popescu: HeySteve "certainly,
the welfare state sucks. it incentivizes behaviour."
HeySteve: certainly,
the welfare state sucks. it incentivizes behaviour which is harmful
to
the society
mircea_popescu: but anyway, since we're doing great covnersation : someone should write an essay on
the possibility - in principle - of distinguishing between "common good" and "groupthink". writer out criteria, give me a method, break
that shit up.
HeySteve: I understand, I am looking more for an economic reason why doing
things
that way leads
to failure
HeySteve: thus
the argument against central authority is less meaningful.
there are rules individuals agree
to abide by
mircea_popescu: HeySteve
the only reason i comment is because you seemed
to want
to know why i wouldn't use it.
mircea_popescu: merely pointing out how easily dysfunctional
this "common good" argument is.
HeySteve: hmm well, in
the context I propose incentivising certain behaviours and
taxing others,
there is no central authority doing it.
there is
the code which people are free
to use
mircea_popescu: hugely compelx anthropotopic,
this. and i am not actually arguing against clothes per se
davout: "2nd hand
textillic retinopathy" <<< nice
HeySteve: well,
there is a collective good. individuals function within social boundaries
mircea_popescu: what about my firm conviction
that you should go around naked ?
mircea_popescu: this is what bitcoin is here
to do : make it impossible for pompous assholes
to raise
taxes on cigarettes.
ThickAsThieves: one day you invent
the coupon, 20 years later you have an economy bent on quantity over quality
HeySteve: like raising
taxes on cigarettes
HeySteve: it's about leading individuals
to choices you consider
to be in
their best interest
HeySteve: maybe
the country is low on population growth for eg
mircea_popescu: for it
to be bad, it suffices
that
there is one case where it's bad.
mircea_popescu: HeySteve do you see why incentivising people
to marry is bad ?
HeySteve: I agree it has great application
to politics, yet I still don't see why incentivising people
to join
the WoT is bad
HeySteve: <DinoSaw> not vote for
them
today, giving
them free reign
to break
their promises and do wtf
they like / get paid
to do for
the next X years
HeySteve: <DinoSaw> people's influence should rise and fall in accordance with
their reputation, based on
their recent actions
mircea_popescu: it's been
the curse of
the humancondition,
this, for most
times and places most bipedal life forms were bios rather
than zoon
HeySteve: well, I was discussing
the failings of democracy elsewhere as it's SA election day
today
mircea_popescu: nobody;'s fault
the rest of
the bipedals aren't human.
mircea_popescu: to a large degree it already is, in
the offices
that matter anyway.
HeySteve: mircea_popescu, in
theory but in practical usage
today, it's mostly for
the Bitcoin community
mircea_popescu: HeySteve not
that narrow.
the wot holds all
trust in human society. all of it.
ThickAsThieves: couldnt it just be a separate WoT
that had one real WoT account for integration?
ThickAsThieves: ok, now i did mention
this metaWoT being handled by an independent party
HeySteve: perhaps Bitcoin
trade, no S would have been nearer
the mark
mircea_popescu: HeySteve i
think you misconstrue
the scope of
the wot.
ozbot: Web of
trust - Wikipedia,
the free encyclopedia
Apocalyptic: mircea, <HeySteve> another issue I forsee with rating of unregistered parties, is people extending
the scope of
the WoT beyond its intended purpose of recording Bitcoin
trades. people will use it
to downrate
TV characters from soap operas
Apocalyptic: since when is
the scope "recording Bitcoin
trades" only ?
Apocalyptic: " is people extending
the scope of
the WoT beyond its intended purpose of recording Bitcoin
trades"
HeySteve: yes, but what's
the specific objection?
HeySteve: ThickAsThieves, what if
to send Bitcoin
to a WoT-registered party cost less in
transaction fees
than sending it
to someone unregistered?
mircea_popescu: if no wot identity is involved,
the
thing's irrelevant economically, might as well be
two somalis
trading cowries
mircea_popescu: all purported economic activity
that's not
taking place between wot registered identities is deffective. if only one wot identity is involved,
the whoile
thing is in no substantial manner different from
the medieval relations between peon and his lord.
ThickAsThieves: surely
there are people
that dont know about or how
to WoT,
they we
trust
to be in our ecomonic sphere
mircea_popescu: ThickAsThieves are people who will sell you a house/car but not sign a contract also part of
the real estate/car markets
davout: chetty: deal with something on
the wot at your own risk
too!
mircea_popescu: next youi're going
to claim
the us is part of human culture, just, not
the elitist part of it.
mircea_popescu: ThickAsThieves
this is like saying women
that don't have sex are part of
the dating market, just not my elitist subsection of it
HeySteve: trusted nodes are appointed
that can do
things like register placeholder identities
mircea_popescu: ThickAsThieves so
then...
they aren't part of
the economy. lol
HeySteve: I'm
thinking
there's a whole raft of WoT-related improvements only possible with some degree of hierarchial organisation
mircea_popescu: force
them
to wot as part and parcel of doing business with
them, know
that
their refusal
to comply means
they're scammers.
chetty: deal with something not on
the wot at your own risk
mircea_popescu: anyweay davout's argument is souind : if
they had no wot
they were not part of
the economy in
the first place.
HeySteve: another issue I forsee with rating of unregistered parties, is people extending
the scope of
the WoT beyond its intended purpose of recording Bitcoin
trades. people will use it
to downrate
TV characters from soap operas
mircea_popescu: this is
the problem : clueless people are
trying
to mix forum into pg.