785600+ entries in 0.538s
herbijudlestoids: ThickAsThieves: i
think
the reputation ledger has value specifically because its business
transactions
ThickAsThieves: i vote my mate joe up because hes my mate joe! ---
this person will get rep with people
that value
that
mircea_popescu: herbijudlestoids you read mpoe-pr's post re wot and how
to use it ?
herbijudlestoids: ThickAsThieves: what im
trying
to say is, if
the reputation ledge is built on
the back of wotbook
then its just a social graph.
mircea_popescu: ThickAsThieves
the drivers of btctalk are scamming and derping.
herbijudlestoids: right now
the WoT is based on business
transactions, youre proposing something where people just build a social graph
ThickAsThieves: this isnt about
trying
to get people who already use wot
to use wot
herbijudlestoids: like if i bought some BTC off you one
time and rated you, now youre in my wotbook feed?
assbot: [HAVELOCK] [B.MINE] [PAID] 0.93429002 BTC
to 974 shares, 95923 satoshi per share
ThickAsThieves: as far as
the wot distribution problem, i
think i have an idea, outside services
that integrate with it
herbijudlestoids: mircea_popescu: hmmm
though ok... "ozwot guy" cant rate users
through gribble unless it has a rating...
mircea_popescu: the only drawback is
that it's not instantaneous, which makes it "unrevolutionary"
mircea_popescu: or else he won't, and if
the people hate it enough wot will die out
herbijudlestoids: so users of ozwot can query both local and -otc wot members (and any others in
the list i guess), but gribble users have
to query
two WoTs
to get
the same coverage
mircea_popescu: then once enough people actually want
to rate someone in ozwot
they'll keep bitching at nanotube who will eventually add a back flow.
mircea_popescu: no reason you want
that, really, i know it's a gateway, woting it is meaningless.
herbijudlestoids: right right, ok so gribble can at best assign
trust
to
the ozwot guy rather
than individuals within
mircea_popescu: and wot users who actually wish
to rate people in ozwot would
talk
to ozbot
mircea_popescu: herbijudlestoids gribble will see an "ozwot" guy, and
that "ozwot" guy will be rating people in wot
herbijudlestoids: so if
the -otc WoT goes down,
then users of my WoT can still rate other users in
the same web, and interrogate
the local cache of
the -otc WoT, but
they cant push ratings around
the graph (outside
the local WoT)
mircea_popescu: but i guess if you keep cloning
the wot you may display more or less in sync results independently
herbijudlestoids: so lets say i want
to run ozWoT, for cool oz kids like myself, and i clone
the code off github (or wherever it lives) and setup my own gribblesque bot, users
talking
to my bot should be able
to rate users
through gribble and vice versa
herbijudlestoids: but only gribble is
the arbiter for WoT right? like gribble connects
to same backend as -otc website?
mircea_popescu: gribble is
the bitcoin bot, run by nanotube, who's been kind enough
to add it here.
herbijudlestoids: so gribble is officially
the -otc bot right, not
the -assets bot?
mircea_popescu: herbijudlestoids well,
the aditional code would be
they need
to
talk
to gribble.
mircea_popescu: than
to have either world empire run by one man or world bureaucracy
mircea_popescu: much better
to have decentralised city-states run by one man
mircea_popescu: herbijudlestoids well,
technically,
they'd have
to
talk
to it, but yes.
mircea_popescu: the only
thing is... it has
to be done well, as opposed
to just done so someone can go
to conferences herpderping about 3d printed wots
mircea_popescu: a
trusted wot so far wins on practical grounds. not
that i
think it's a bad idea a proper distributed implementation should be made
Diablo-D3: you're just stating
the problem wrong
Diablo-D3: actually, it kind of is a
trivial problem
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform it's not a
trivial problem, a distributed wot.
herbijudlestoids: asciilifeform: but it sounds like
the existing WoT is already distributable
Diablo-D3: asciilifeform:
the easy way is
to just use pgp ;)
herbijudlestoids: yea, i was proposing some
things before mircea_popescu showed up, his log only starts from
there
herbijudlestoids: but no i dont necessarily want him
to
try it, i dont have some kind of dogma where everyone should
try drugs or whatever
herbijudlestoids: kakobrekla: well itd certainly make conversations about why people might
try it a little easier
herbijudlestoids: the message i
took away was
that
theres no real reason
to change from
the existing WoT, which i assumed wasnt distributed, because
ThickAsThieves said he wanted a more distributedy WoT
Diablo-D3: herbijudlestoids: you got
told. pretty sure.
herbijudlestoids: Diablo-D3: did i? lol i was in
the conversation, was
there a facet of me getting
told
that i missed
herbijudlestoids: Duffer1: i keep in contact with my ex boss...showed him some of
the logs from
this chan, he said and i quote "sounds like youve finally found some people who can keep you occupied"
herbijudlestoids: hehe i guess so. i feel like im getting what i want out of conversations (mostly) on
this chan, so happy for it
to be blogged or whatever
Duffer1: just an example of someone
that "got it bad"
Duffer1: oh i didn't mean
to imply it did
Duffer1: i would call
that getting it bad
herbijudlestoids: mircea_popescu: if
that's me "getting it bad"
then im happy
to get it so, i prefer
the discussion, or at
the very minimum
to be able
to hear and consider new viewpoints
Duffer1: oh i was referring
to
the
training process footnote hehe
kakobrekla: ah right, i commented just
the comments havent read
through
Duffer1: better
to learn before
than after
Duffer1: It’s just
that you’re new here and haven’t gone
through
the
training process.vi
ozbot: On periphery and
the peripheral. Ephemerides are also mentioned. pe
Trilema - Un blog de Mircea Pope