Bitcoin Forum
December 08, 2016, 04:25:06 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Distributed social networking + reputation systems  (Read 6800 times)
melvster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 341


View Profile
July 28, 2010, 10:41:47 PM
 #21

Id use FOAF and web of trust ...
1481214306
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481214306

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481214306
Reply with quote  #2

1481214306
Report to moderator
1481214306
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481214306

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481214306
Reply with quote  #2

1481214306
Report to moderator
1481214306
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481214306

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481214306
Reply with quote  #2

1481214306
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481214306
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481214306

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481214306
Reply with quote  #2

1481214306
Report to moderator
1481214306
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481214306

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481214306
Reply with quote  #2

1481214306
Report to moderator
Anonymous
Guest

July 29, 2010, 05:27:51 AM
 #22

Id use FOAF and web of trust ...

^^^

Is foaf added to the metadata of your site?

I like the web of trust idea because it provides a swarm backup for a review/rating site.Say you had a site like yelp where companies game the system by paying for positive reviews.If the reviews on the site were different to the reviews in the cloud it would raise red flags.It would be almost impossible to game both the swarm and the site if there was a big enough swarm.The company would have to hire more reviewers than the swarm contained to affect anything.Much like bitcoins....

If you had access to the data from the web of trust you could display it on your site as well which would make it open for anyone to compare the two immediately.
throughput
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 158


View Profile
July 29, 2010, 08:51:56 AM
 #23

Google have more resources than black SEOs will ever have. Google have thousand of engineers, testers, etc, at its disposal, and then they will just use YOU.  Good SEO people will work with Google, not trying to game Google.
Nope. Google is ONE, SEOs are huge horde. The more reputation Google collects,
the more effect is produced from fooling it, the more funding SEOs get.
Google have thousand of engineers, perhaps, no more than a several hundreeds work on improving the search engine.
SEOs are millions. Well, professional SEOs are no more than hundreed of thousands, perhaps.

Quote
Quote
By the way, have you asked yourself,
why can't you change the order of results, that Google provides to you? What if it's rating method
does not correlate with your's? Why you are not allowed to propose your own ordering?

Everytime you search, they use that data to make better ordering over time.
So? You are not allowed to change ordering to, say, date of last modification ordering.
To size of page ordering.
To total number of links in a page ordering.
To number of links, matching regexp ordering.
To number of links, pointing to this page ordering.
Etc, etc, etc...
You cannot enter your formula for rating the pages and sort them accordingly.
Just not allowed and that's it.
And it is no accident. It is policy. You get free search, but we rate and filter results at our will.
If every user had his own rating formula, SEOs will starve and die, since they are not targeting Google,
they are targeting it's formula, which is global among users yet.
Russian SEOs are forced to target both Google's and Yandex's rating algorithms, that is more complicated Grin.
So, internet search is not FREE, it is only unpaid by users.

Quote
Quote
And after all, I don't believe, that a machine will have a chance in separating informational noise from precious bits.
Well, I believe, that only a human may do that the best, but I can only trust results, that came from a trusted
human or trusted community.

I hope, I will find that I search  Roll Eyes.

Human intelligence has given us Google.
I don't believe, that NOW any machine or algorithm may become more intelligent, than a group of trused friends
in separating informational junk from meaningful information.
The problem is that the definition of sense is still discussed as a philosophical term only, there is no
successful mathematical models for sense, that work. It is only known, that sense is impossible without context.
Information search is a process of determining whether something makes sense about a subject of the search or not.
Machine can only determine, whether something is maybe about a subject of the search or not.

It does not care, whether that is a domain parking, that contains no sensiful information at all.
Well, It may be engineered to detect patterns of domain parking, that are in common now, but
the next step of SEOs will be to make their noise look ever more closer to useful pages.
But they will not add any sense to their parkings.
This struggle have no end, until machine start to understand the sense, which I believe is not yet possible in near future.

And google is easily told by the govs or by corporate to rate down some links. It is not trusted in any sense. It is single.

Quote
Look, if somebody thought they have something that could kill google, they would have won by now.
Do you work with Google, seriously?
If you trust it's search engine, then I may try to trust you and you may make a proxy from me to google search machine.
We can try that for some time and then, if something bad (like unwanted noisy advertising) happens, either you will distrust google search or I will distrust you for search results.
Sooner or later the network will either break to distrusting parts and die from isolation OR stabilize and become very low noise search engine.
That is the scheme I'm looking for.
Anonymous
Guest

July 30, 2010, 05:35:00 AM
 #24

Google have more resources than black SEOs will ever have. Google have thousand of engineers, testers, etc, at its disposal, and then they will just use YOU.  Good SEO people will work with Google, not trying to game Google.
Nope. Google is ONE, SEOs are huge horde. The more reputation Google collects,
the more effect is produced from fooling it, the more funding SEOs get.
Google have thousand of engineers, perhaps, no more than a several hundreeds work on improving the search engine.
SEOs are millions. Well, professional SEOs are no more than hundreed of thousands, perhaps.

Quote
Quote
By the way, have you asked yourself,
why can't you change the order of results, that Google provides to you? What if it's rating method
does not correlate with your's? Why you are not allowed to propose your own ordering?

Everytime you search, they use that data to make better ordering over time.
So? You are not allowed to change ordering to, say, date of last modification ordering.
To size of page ordering.
To total number of links in a page ordering.
To number of links, matching regexp ordering.
To number of links, pointing to this page ordering.
Etc, etc, etc...
You cannot enter your formula for rating the pages and sort them accordingly.
Just not allowed and that's it.
And it is no accident. It is policy. You get free search, but we rate and filter results at our will.
If every user had his own rating formula, SEOs will starve and die, since they are not targeting Google,
they are targeting it's formula, which is global among users yet.
Russian SEOs are forced to target both Google's and Yandex's rating algorithms, that is more complicated Grin.
So, internet search is not FREE, it is only unpaid by users.

Quote
Quote
And after all, I don't believe, that a machine will have a chance in separating informational noise from precious bits.
Well, I believe, that only a human may do that the best, but I can only trust results, that came from a trusted
human or trusted community.

I hope, I will find that I search  Roll Eyes.

Human intelligence has given us Google.
I don't believe, that NOW any machine or algorithm may become more intelligent, than a group of trused friends
in separating informational junk from meaningful information.
The problem is that the definition of sense is still discussed as a philosophical term only, there is no
successful mathematical models for sense, that work. It is only known, that sense is impossible without context.
Information search is a process of determining whether something makes sense about a subject of the search or not.
Machine can only determine, whether something is maybe about a subject of the search or not.

It does not care, whether that is a domain parking, that contains no sensiful information at all.
Well, It may be engineered to detect patterns of domain parking, that are in common now, but
the next step of SEOs will be to make their noise look ever more closer to useful pages.
But they will not add any sense to their parkings.
This struggle have no end, until machine start to understand the sense, which I believe is not yet possible in near future.

And google is easily told by the govs or by corporate to rate down some links. It is not trusted in any sense. It is single.

Quote
Look, if somebody thought they have something that could kill google, they would have won by now.
Do you work with Google, seriously?
If you trust it's search engine, then I may try to trust you and you may make a proxy from me to google search machine.
We can try that for some time and then, if something bad (like unwanted noisy advertising) happens, either you will distrust google search or I will distrust you for search results.
Sooner or later the network will either break to distrusting parts and die from isolation OR stabilize and become very low noise search engine.
That is the scheme I'm looking for.

The cyberpolice are going to backtrace you an the consequences will never be the same  Tongue
melvster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 341


View Profile
July 30, 2010, 02:54:30 PM
 #25

Id use FOAF and web of trust ...

^^^

Is foaf added to the metadata of your site?

I like the web of trust idea because it provides a swarm backup for a review/rating site.Say you had a site like yelp where companies game the system by paying for positive reviews.If the reviews on the site were different to the reviews in the cloud it would raise red flags.It would be almost impossible to game both the swarm and the site if there was a big enough swarm.The company would have to hire more reviewers than the swarm contained to affect anything.Much like bitcoins....

If you had access to the data from the web of trust you could display it on your site as well which would make it open for anyone to compare the two immediately.


Lots of ways to add the meta data, in html tags, in meta tags, or in a separate document linked in (like a stylesheet).  I use foaf in my webpages, and also link to my bitcoin address.  e.g. the semantics would be me hasAddress "1DeNqFwDSooBxSDYHSDA3CvnhjA84wfdFz"

You can then say things about yourself, your accounts, your public key and your relationships.

It's quite simplistic really, just a data typed version of the hyperlink, which links documents, instead here you are linking people, accounts and other info.  so a basic web of trust is built in, but we can do smarter things ... with time ...
throughput
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 158


View Profile
August 02, 2010, 02:30:36 PM
 #26

...
That is the scheme I'm looking for.

The cyberpolice are going to backtrace you an the consequences will never be the same  Tongue
You sending a Robocop to target me?
Anonymous
Guest

August 03, 2010, 09:45:39 AM
 #27

...
That is the scheme I'm looking for.

The cyberpolice are going to backtrace you an the consequences will never be the same  Tongue
You sending a Robocop to target me?


lol
mizerydearia
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 574



View Profile
August 16, 2010, 12:05:47 AM
 #28

irc.freenode.net #foaf

Quote
mizery: I am new to FOAF and would like to learn/understand if it is possible to use FOAF to allow individuals to rate or indicate the level of trustworthiness, reliability and other factors of a particular business, company or entity in regards to a transaction or sale.  Is FOAF a project that can offer this kind of information?
... awaiting feedback ...

Otherly, I contemplated a kind of idea for providing a measure of trust, reliability using p2p.  Here is an example written illustration:

entity A is me
entity B is bitcoinmonopoly.com
entity C is trustworthybitcoinllc.com
entity D is Satoshi
entity E is theymos
entity F is bitcoinscam.com

entity A rates entity B 0.25 (e.g. 25%)
entity A rates entity C 1.0 (100%)
entity A rates entity D 1.0
entity A rates entity E 1.0
entity A rates entity E 1.0
entity A rates entity F 0.0
entity B doesn't need to rate anything because it is not a user
entity C same o/
entity D rates entity B 1.0
entity D rates entity C 0.0
entity D rates entity F 1.0 (for example, they are associated with individuals responsible for scam site)
entity E rates entity A 1.0
entity E rates entity D 0.1

With this data:
Entity A, since it has specifically rated entity F as 0.0, it will evaluate rating as 0.0.
Entity D, since it has specifically rated entity F as 1.0, it will evaluate rating as 1.0.
entity E, since it has not rated entity F, it will calculate such a rating through its peers.
-- Entity E peer of entity A rated entity F as 0.0 and entity E rated entity A as 1.0.  So 0.0 * 1.0 == 0.0
-- Entity E peer of entity D rated entity F as 1.0 and entity E rated entity D as 0.1.  So 1.0 * 0.1 == 0.1
-- Therefore entity E will rate entity F as ((0.0 + 0.1) / 2) == 0.05

Does this make sense?  Is there somethnig that exists that can offer this type of rating mechanism and perhaps for more than one type of rating instead of just one used in this example?
throughput
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 158


View Profile
August 16, 2010, 03:52:19 PM
 #29

Does this make sense?  Is there somethnig that exists that can offer this type of rating mechanism and perhaps for more than one type of rating instead of just one used in this example?

I think, that trust rating is the statistical probability of taking someone into account in the process of making the decision.
And since there are a lot of different decision types, there should be different ratings.

At least, one trust rating value is for trusting <someone> to do <something> (perhaps that is a function of <something>),
and the other rating value is for trusting his own trust on the others.

And you should operate on that values properly, since they are probabilities.
That also means there cannot be negative ratings, noone can downrate you below zero.
FreeMoney
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


Strength in numbers


View Profile WWW
August 22, 2010, 11:11:08 AM
 #30


By the way, have you asked yourself,
why can't you change the order of results, that Google provides to you? What if it's rating method
does not correlate with your's? Why you are not allowed to propose your own ordering?


Wow, throughput, did you ask google why?

Because it looks like they did it.

http://www.google.com/search?q=google+search+info&hl=en&prmdo=1&tbs=rltm:1&source=lnt&sa=X&ei=8wNxTKaTIYL6swP9pbmPCw&ved=0CAcQpwU#hl=en&prmdo=1&tbs=rltm%3A1&q=bitcoin&aq=f&aqi=g10&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=a602d8652b4f7ca

Play Bitcoin Poker at sealswithclubs.eu. We're active and open to everyone.
spndr7
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1021



View Profile WWW
September 13, 2010, 09:31:17 AM
 #31

This distributed social networking may be build comlpletely decentrailized in a p2p model ,using distributed storage of user data at different peers  such that the  data may be accessed by only those peers who are authorized by the p2p network/creators of the data set .This may be developed as separate application like Ares Galaxy instead of a website which can also have bitcoin as a payment system within the trusted network .

Pages: « 1 [2]  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!