Bitcoin Forum
November 21, 2019, 10:37:08 AM *
News: 10th anniversary art contest
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 [3]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Working on an idea for simple web-based alternative to bitcoin-otc web of trust  (Read 2546 times)
CIYAM
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1003


Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer


View Profile WWW
March 09, 2013, 03:48:18 AM
 #41

I think you need to check the definition of a protocol, this is uniform way of doing trust at best.

As far I can see the OP is about creating a send of standard conforming tx's over the Bitcoin protocol that can be used to define a WoT system - if you have something other than terminology disputes or arguments about how easy GPG is or isn't to use that would be helpful to this thread otherwise your input is just coming across as trolling (if you think people should just use Bitcoin-OTC you are entitled to that opinion and I think you've already made that point here so can we keep OT please?).

With CIYAM anyone can create 100% generated C++ web applications in literally minutes.

GPG Public Key | 1ciyam3htJit1feGa26p2wQ4aw6KFTejU
1574332628
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1574332628

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1574332628
Reply with quote  #2

1574332628
Report to moderator
1574332628
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1574332628

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1574332628
Reply with quote  #2

1574332628
Report to moderator
1574332628
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1574332628

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1574332628
Reply with quote  #2

1574332628
Report to moderator
The Bitcoin Forum is turning 10 years old! Join the community in sharing and exploring the notable posts made over the years.
gweedo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274
Merit: 1000


View Profile
March 09, 2013, 03:51:57 AM
 #42

I think you need to check the definition of a protocol, this is uniform way of doing trust at best.

As far I can see the OP is about creating a send of standard conforming tx's over the Bitcoin protocol that can be used to define a WoT system - if you have something other than terminology disputes or arguments about how easy GPG is or isn't to use that would be helpful to this thread otherwise your input is just coming across as trolling (if you think people should just use Bitcoin-OTC you are entitled to that opinion and I think you've already made that point here so can we keep OT please?).

I am sorry you think I am trolling but if you look I am actually giving him good input... and sorry I am not open this idea like you Wink Didn't know that debating and pointing out some flaws was seen as trolling. Maybe you should look up trolling.
audenx
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 44
Merit: 0



View Profile
March 09, 2013, 03:55:30 AM
 #43

at least on the plus side, it would be nice to have a range (similar to the 5 star system).

I understand but IMO that just makes it easier to *game* the system (i.e. getting 10 +5 *fake* ratings is certainly going to be easier than getting 50 +1 *fake* ratings - I have the same problem with the "skill points" system I have implemented in CIYAM Open and am now thinking of changing it for just this reason).


Regarding the issue of scoring — my untested instinct is that flexibility in the scoring will be useful to users. There are plenty of types of highly structured or very simple trades that I can imagine where -1/0/+1 scoring would be totally appropriate. But for other types of trades that have multiple elements of trust (do I trust this person's ability to deliver on time? to deliver to spec? to communicate clearly? to be courteous in interactions?), more flexible scoring could allow for more nuanced interpretation.

If the protocol can support both, I imagine it will allow more widespread usage than if it rigidly supports a single scoring methodology.

This doesn't prevent any specific user or community — say CIYAM Open's community — from only considering +1/0/-1 scores for the purposes of its own, community-specific trust criteria.

Another untested instinct I have is that interpreting the trust data in the blockchain should be considered a separate process from getting that data into the blockchain (I put something to this effect in the FAQ section on my pitch). For users concerned about specific patterns of scoring that "game the system" (like your example of getting 10 +5 fake ratings versus 50 +1 fake ratings), those users can define what types of scoring data carry weight for their personal decision-making. Scoring histories that are acceptably trustworthy to some users might not be trustworthy to others. I think users should be expected to consider what algorithm/criteria they use to interpret the trust data; it keeps them responsible, rather than encouraging blind trust in a single number.
CIYAM
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1003


Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer


View Profile WWW
March 09, 2013, 03:56:23 AM
 #44

Maybe you should look up trolling.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  Why? When you've just showed us all a perfect example right there.

With CIYAM anyone can create 100% generated C++ web applications in literally minutes.

GPG Public Key | 1ciyam3htJit1feGa26p2wQ4aw6KFTejU
gweedo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274
Merit: 1000


View Profile
March 09, 2013, 04:00:10 AM
 #45

Maybe you should look up trolling.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  Why? When you've just showed us all a perfect example right there.

LMAO if you think I am trolling then you clearly have no idea what trolling is... and your being super mature when you do that Wink LMAO
CIYAM
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1003


Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer


View Profile WWW
March 09, 2013, 04:03:14 AM
 #46

About time for me to unwatch the thread - best of luck OP and PM for further discussion if interested.

With CIYAM anyone can create 100% generated C++ web applications in literally minutes.

GPG Public Key | 1ciyam3htJit1feGa26p2wQ4aw6KFTejU
audenx
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 44
Merit: 0



View Profile
March 09, 2013, 04:05:16 AM
 #47

About time for me to unwatch the thread - best of luck OP and PM for further discussion if interested.


Sorry to see you go, and thanks so much for your input! I'll PM you when I'm a bit further along.
gweedo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274
Merit: 1000


View Profile
March 09, 2013, 04:05:23 AM
 #48

About time for me to unwatch the thread - best of luck OP and PM for further discussion if interested.

Goodbye Grandpa LOL Maybe you should look up being mature next time cause you clearly not that yet your triple our age LOL
Pages: « 1 2 [3]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!