Bitcoin Forum
January 22, 2019, 03:15:41 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.17.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 »
  Print  
Author Topic: DefaultTrust changes  (Read 14586 times)
Zin-Zang
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 10

Killing Lightning Network with a 51% Ignore attack


View Profile
January 11, 2019, 06:59:47 PM
 #441

Your sweet-talk seems fake, shoo retard.
Ah, you are so correct! I shan't have a contrary position against only theymos. The true path towards a fair system is for every reply to be of dissent, rejection and to throw the pittance of virtue signalling out of this existence! Our qualms needn't be sullied by the burden of agreement, nay, reality demands contradiction. It demands chaos!

So I declare unto you: no. I disagree with your opinion.

I expect nothing else from one of lauda's bitches.

Anyone else also know you are vod?

 Cool

I was Red Tagged because Lauda Blows Theymos to get back on DT
The rest are just lauda's personal butt monkeys=> Hhampuz , Vod, TMAN , achow101
1548126941
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1548126941

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1548126941
Reply with quote  #2

1548126941
Report to moderator
1548126941
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1548126941

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1548126941
Reply with quote  #2

1548126941
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1548126941
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1548126941

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1548126941
Reply with quote  #2

1548126941
Report to moderator
1548126941
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1548126941

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1548126941
Reply with quote  #2

1548126941
Report to moderator
bill gator
Copper Member
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Activity: 952
Merit: 904



View Profile
January 11, 2019, 07:30:02 PM
Merited by Lesbian Cow (1)
 #442

I would be willing to bet a couple BTC that Vod and actmyname are not the same person.

You called Hhampuz an ass-kisser for enjoying the change in Default Trust, which is baffling to me; everyone who approves of the change is an ass-kisser?
It's easy to make a monster out of the person calling you on your nonsense, but in reality (where the rest of us are) it's more likely than not something about your behavior and personality that is accumulating so much distaste. You're experiencing something along the lines of delusional referencing.

Similar to a young man that is unable to get laid, it's not everybody else, so let's stop pretending.

KingZee
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 348


Make winning bets on sports with Sportsbet.io!


View Profile
January 11, 2019, 07:40:38 PM
 #443

@theymos No comment on this suggestion? I have a nice graph too


---

That's why you need to read the ratings and/or use custom trust lists.

If you don't like the trust system, set your own trust list. I still haven't done it, because I prefer to see users as most people see them. But feel free to start promoting custom trust lists, if enough people agree, DT will become less powerful.

It's a good idea but a shame that so many people promote custom trust lists to solve a problem that shouldn't exist in the first place.

If the majority agrees that DT is a select group of people that might not reflect the true list of actual most trusted people in the forum, then doesn't keeping DT as it is make it even more of a problem? Custom lists might look like they're solving the problem, but they're really not because the majority of the forum uses default trust. So in the end you're going to be living in your own echo chamber by removing default trust from your list, because you're completely oblivious to how everyone else actually sees you.

I'd say it depends on the situation. I've received some positive trust for being helpful. I don't think that's "worse" than someone who receives positive trust  after a few small trades with DT-members. In fact, it took me many years to get this (and I appreciate the appreciation), while it's quite easy to gain trust by doing a few trades.

This can easily be fixed if the risked amount is also taken into account (Why is it there in the first place if it's not?). In my opinion, someone with a few trades is more trusted than someone who posts all day on the forums, because at the end of the day, someone who had money risked through their hands means that they're not tempted to scam at least that much. Of course, account rank also comes into play, because a legendary hero wouldn't scam someone off a few dozen bucks simply because their account is worth more through sig campaigns.

Actually, using just 3 variables :
1. Account rank
2. Account current trust
3. Amount risked

I can come up with a system that won't depend on a centralized default trust, and at the same time gets updated in real time depending on member's trust over time :



If any of these 3 members get negative trust, then all their network is going to have less trust points because that person becomes shady.
If User 1 has biased vendetta against User 2, because there's a risked amount variable then baseless claims will have little effect.
This can't be spammed using multiple accounts because newbie ranks and risked amounts are too little to matter.

So in the end the only issue becomes actually verifying that the trust, risked amounts, and if the trades actually happened. Which wouldn't be a hard task because you'd only need to check people with a suspiciously high amount of trust.

This cliché of me pitching up ideas is getting rather old, is btctalk hiring? Cheesy

   ▄▄██████▄▄
  ████████████
███▄▄
 ██████████████▀▀▀██▄
████████████████   ▀██▄
████████████████     ▀██
██████████████       ██▌
██████████████        ▐██
██▌▀▀██████▀▀         ▐██
▐██                   ██▌
 ██▄                 ▄██
  ▀██▄             ▄██▀
    ▀██▄▄▄     ▄▄▄██▀
      ▀▀█████████▀▀





███████████████████████████
███████████▀▀         ▀▀███
████████▀   ▄▄██▄  ▀█▄  ▀██
██████▀  ▄████████▄  ▀█  ██
████▀  ▄██████▄▀  ██▄    ██
███▀  ██████▄▀  ▄▀████▄  ██
██▀  █████▄▀  ▄▀██████  ▄██
██  ▀███▄▀  ▄▀███████  ▄███
██    ▀██▄▄▀███████▀  ▄████
██  █▄  ▀████████▀  ▄██████
██▄  ▀█▄  ▀██▀▀   ▄████████
███▄▄         ▄▄███████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
████████▀▀       ▀▀████████
█████▀   ▄ ▀███▀ ▄   ▀█████
████  ▄████▄ ▀ ▄████▄  ████
███  ▄ ▀███▀ ▄ ▀███▀ ▄  ███
██  ▄██ ▀▀ ▄███▄ ▀▀ ██▄  ██
██  █▀ ▄█ ███████ █▄ ▀█  ██
██   ▄███▄ █████ ▄███▄   ██
███  ████▀ ▄▄▄▄▄ ▀████  ███
████  ▀ ▄ ▀█████▀ ▄ ▀  ████
█████▄  ▀▀▄ ███ ▄▀▀  ▄█████
████████▄▄       ▄▄████████
███████████████████████████
████████     INDUSTRY LEADING BITCOIN SPORTSBOOK     ████████
LIVE
STREAMING
DAILY PRICE
BOOSTS
LIVE DEALER
CASINO
FAST & SECURE
PAYMENTS
███████████████████████████
████████▀▀       ▀▀████████
█████▀  ▄█▄  ▀  ▄▄   ▀█████
████  ▄  ▀    ▀█████▄  ████
███  ▀█▀   ▀█▄   ▀▀██▄  ███
██  ▄    █▄  ▀██▄▄  ▀█▄  ██
██  █▀ ▄  ▀█▄  ▀███▄  ▀  ██
██    ▄██  ▀██▄  ▀███▄   ██
███  ▀████  ▀███▄  ▀█▀  ███
████  ▀████  ▀████▄    ████
█████▄   ▀▀█▄  ▀▀▀   ▄█████
████████▄▄       ▄▄████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
████████▀▀ █████ ▀▀████████
█████▀    ▄█████▄    ▀█████
██████▄▄█▀▀ ▄▄▄ ▀▀█▄▄██████
███▀███▀ ▄███▀███▄ ▀███▀███
██   █ ▄██▀     ▀██▄ █   ██
██   █ ██         ██ █   ██
██   █ ▀██▄▄█ █▄▄██▀ █   ██
███▄███▄ ▀██▄▄▄██▀ ▄███▄███
██████▀▀█▄▄ ▀▀▀ ▄▄█▀▀██████
█████▄    ▀█████▀    ▄█████
████████▄▄ █████ ▄▄████████
███████████████████████████





[.
WIN WITH US!
]
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100
Merit: 1741


GUNBOT Licenses up to 50% OFF - 'GrumpyKitty'.


View Profile WWW
January 11, 2019, 07:47:46 PM
Merited by Foxpup (3)
 #444

@theymos No comment on this suggestion? I have a nice graph too
-snip-
Using amount risked in any calculation does not work for several reasons:

1) It can't be verified, thus it can be easily abused.
2) Sometimes users want to keep amounts private.
3) Positive trust for reasons other than trading.

.FORTUNE.JACK.
      ▄▄███████▄▄
   ▄████▀▀ ▄ ██████▄
  ████ ▄▄███ ████████
 █████▌▐███▌ ▀▄ ▀█████
███████▄██▀▀▀▀▄████████
█████▀▄▄▄▄█████████████
████▄▄▄▄ █████████████
 ██████▌ ███▀████████
  ███████▄▀▄████████
   ▀█████▀▀███████▀
      ▀▀██████▀▀
         
         █
...FortuneJack.com                                             
...THE BIGGEST BITCOIN GAMBLING SITE
       ▄▄█████████▄▄
    ▄█████████████████▄
  ▄█████████████████████▄
 ▄██
█████████▀███████████▄
██████████▀   ▀██████████
█████████▀       ▀█████████
████████           ████████
████████▄   ▄ ▄   ▄████████
██████████▀   ▀██████████
 ▀██
█████████████████████▀
  ▀██
███████████████████▀
    ▀█████████████████▀
       ▀▀█████████▀▀
#JACKMATE
WIN 1 BTC
▄█████████████████████████▄
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
██████████▀█████▀██████████
███████▀░░▀░░░░░▀░░▀███████
██████▌░░░░░░░░░░░░░▐██████
██████░░░░██░░░██░░░░██████
█████▌░░░░▀▀░░░▀▀░░░░▐█████
██████▄░░▄▄▄░░░▄▄▄░░▄██████
████████▄▄███████▄▄████████

███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
▀█████████████████████████▀
Zin-Zang
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 10

Killing Lightning Network with a 51% Ignore attack


View Profile
January 11, 2019, 07:52:52 PM
 #445

I would be willing to bet a couple BTC that Vod and actmyname are not the same person.

You called Hhampuz an ass-kisser for enjoying the change in Default Trust, which is baffling to me; everyone who approves of the change is an ass-kisser?
It's easy to make a monster out of the person calling you on your nonsense, but in reality (where the rest of us are) it's more likely than not something about your behavior and personality that is accumulating so much distaste. You're experiencing something along the lines of delusional referencing.

Similar to a young man that is unable to get laid, it's not everybody else, so let's stop pretending.

Well you lose that BTC, because actmyname=vod

Dude, you have no idea of my true mindset, so keep your bad dime store shrink analyses to yourself, because frankly you're not very good at it.



 Cool


I was Red Tagged because Lauda Blows Theymos to get back on DT
The rest are just lauda's personal butt monkeys=> Hhampuz , Vod, TMAN , achow101
Hhampuz
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 924
Merit: 1062


http://bit.do/Hhampuz


View Profile
January 11, 2019, 07:55:39 PM
 #446

I would be willing to bet a couple BTC that Vod and actmyname are not the same person.

You called Hhampuz an ass-kisser for enjoying the change in Default Trust, which is baffling to me; everyone who approves of the change is an ass-kisser?
It's easy to make a monster out of the person calling you on your nonsense, but in reality (where the rest of us are) it's more likely than not something about your behavior and personality that is accumulating so much distaste. You're experiencing something along the lines of delusional referencing.

Similar to a young man that is unable to get laid, it's not everybody else, so let's stop pretending.

Well you lose that BTC, because actmyname=vod

Dude, you have no idea of my true mindset, so keep your bad dime store shrink analyses to yourself, because frankly you're not very good at it.



 Cool



Could you link your other accounts, please? I won't do anything, pinkyswear!

.FORTUNE.JACK.
      ▄▄███████▄▄
   ▄████▀▀ ▄ ██████▄
  ████ ▄▄███ ████████
 █████▌▐███▌ ▀▄ ▀█████
███████▄██▀▀▀▀▄████████
█████▀▄▄▄▄█████████████
████▄▄▄▄ █████████████
 ██████▌ ███▀████████
  ███████▄▀▄████████
   ▀█████▀▀███████▀
      ▀▀██████▀▀
         
         █
...FortuneJack.com                                             
...THE BIGGEST BITCOIN GAMBLING SITE
       ▄▄█████████▄▄
    ▄█████████████████▄
  ▄█████████████████████▄
 ▄██
█████████▀███████████▄
██████████▀   ▀██████████
█████████▀       ▀█████████
████████           ████████
████████▄   ▄ ▄   ▄████████
██████████▀   ▀██████████
 ▀██
█████████████████████▀
  ▀██
███████████████████▀
    ▀█████████████████▀
       ▀▀█████████▀▀
#JACKMATE
WIN 1 BTC
▄█████████████████████████▄
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
██████████▀█████▀██████████
███████▀░░▀░░░░░▀░░▀███████
██████▌░░░░░░░░░░░░░▐██████
██████░░░░██░░░██░░░░██████
█████▌░░░░▀▀░░░▀▀░░░░▐█████
██████▄░░▄▄▄░░░▄▄▄░░▄██████
████████▄▄███████▄▄████████

███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
▀█████████████████████████▀
Zin-Zang
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 10

Killing Lightning Network with a 51% Ignore attack


View Profile
January 11, 2019, 07:57:47 PM
 #447

I would be willing to bet a couple BTC that Vod and actmyname are not the same person.

You called Hhampuz an ass-kisser for enjoying the change in Default Trust, which is baffling to me; everyone who approves of the change is an ass-kisser?
It's easy to make a monster out of the person calling you on your nonsense, but in reality (where the rest of us are) it's more likely than not something about your behavior and personality that is accumulating so much distaste. You're experiencing something along the lines of delusional referencing.

Similar to a young man that is unable to get laid, it's not everybody else, so let's stop pretending.

Well you lose that BTC, because actmyname=vod

Dude, you have no idea of my true mindset, so keep your bad dime store shrink analyses to yourself, because frankly you're not very good at it.



 Cool



Could you link your other accounts, please? I won't do anything, pinkyswear!


Sure

ZIN - ZANG

There you go dumbass.  Cheesy

You think I would have been as peeved, if I was using multiple account like all of you lauda bitches.
Doubtful.
I would have just dropped this one and used the others.
But since I am not cheating and stealing from people like you guys, one account name to speak my mind was all I needed.

 Cool

I was Red Tagged because Lauda Blows Theymos to get back on DT
The rest are just lauda's personal butt monkeys=> Hhampuz , Vod, TMAN , achow101
Johny Depp
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 195
Merit: 114

busting the bastards


View Profile
January 11, 2019, 07:57:55 PM
 #448

This appears to be a fundamental change in DT. I'd love to see how it plays out against scammers in the long run.

Exposing frauds since 2014
suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834
Merit: 2395


takav mrak


View Profile
January 11, 2019, 08:03:54 PM
 #449

I thought that I had a good idea for limiting each individual truster when handling the last two criteria: set it up as a circulation problem as below, and then find the maximum flow. The "user tX"s through whom flow passes would be the DT1s selected.

https://i.imgur.com/JFDH3Qg.png

(The orders of the users would be randomized on each run.)

There are efficient algorithms for maximizing the flow in problems similar to this, which is why thinking about it in this way occurred to me. However, it turns out that the "exactly 0 or exactly 10" requirement on the rightmost edges makes finding an exact solution too difficult.

I might try to write an algorithm for finding an approximate solution to this, but I probably won't get to it in the near future. Anyone else want to give it a try? You might also be able to structure it as a knapsack problem or something else, but I haven't gotten around to thinking about that yet.

Crap, I wish I had paid more attention in my CS classes. No recollection of max flow whatsoever. Google is extremely unhelpful. So what's the range for X and how does it depend on merit? Can it be negative? How big is N - that's only users who have custom trust lists, right? I feel like I'm missing something obvious here.

KingZee
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 348


Make winning bets on sports with Sportsbet.io!


View Profile
January 11, 2019, 08:12:28 PM
Last edit: January 11, 2019, 08:24:02 PM by KingZee
 #450

@theymos No comment on this suggestion? I have a nice graph too
-snip-
Using amount risked in any calculation does not work for several reasons:

1) It can't be verified, thus it can be easily abused.
2) Sometimes users want to keep amounts private.


It CAN be verified manually. You speak as if in the current state, you can verify anything at all in trust ratings? It's impossible to fix that problem, people can just neg/positively trust each other and unless there's another person that verifies that trust behind the scenes it may as well go undetected. And I quote from that exact same post :

Quote
So in the end the only issue becomes actually verifying that the trust, risked amounts, and if the trades actually happened. Which wouldn't be a hard task because you'd only need to check people with a suspiciously high amount of trust.

3) Positive trust for reasons other than trading.

Is that really a bad thing? Name one reason where you would want to red tag someone without bias, that doesn't involve money.

It can easily be fixed by setting a default non-zero number for trust ratings that don't involve risked amounts, which is completely fine imo because any trust rating that isn't exactly this : "How much money I trust this user with", is honestly just a biased opinion that is the whole cause of why the first trust system is being binned.

EDIT : Regardless of how important I think risked amounts are, if @theymos would rather start with a less complex system first then you might as well just remove risked amounts, my system is still solid. The concept is similar to what he wants to do but won't require an exponential amount of time to calculate compared to the intractability of the current way on how he wants to calculate trust. If the list starts to have numbers in the triple digits, Trust will actually stop being updated instantly just because of the time needed to calculate propagation through the tree.

   ▄▄██████▄▄
  ████████████
███▄▄
 ██████████████▀▀▀██▄
████████████████   ▀██▄
████████████████     ▀██
██████████████       ██▌
██████████████        ▐██
██▌▀▀██████▀▀         ▐██
▐██                   ██▌
 ██▄                 ▄██
  ▀██▄             ▄██▀
    ▀██▄▄▄     ▄▄▄██▀
      ▀▀█████████▀▀





███████████████████████████
███████████▀▀         ▀▀███
████████▀   ▄▄██▄  ▀█▄  ▀██
██████▀  ▄████████▄  ▀█  ██
████▀  ▄██████▄▀  ██▄    ██
███▀  ██████▄▀  ▄▀████▄  ██
██▀  █████▄▀  ▄▀██████  ▄██
██  ▀███▄▀  ▄▀███████  ▄███
██    ▀██▄▄▀███████▀  ▄████
██  █▄  ▀████████▀  ▄██████
██▄  ▀█▄  ▀██▀▀   ▄████████
███▄▄         ▄▄███████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
████████▀▀       ▀▀████████
█████▀   ▄ ▀███▀ ▄   ▀█████
████  ▄████▄ ▀ ▄████▄  ████
███  ▄ ▀███▀ ▄ ▀███▀ ▄  ███
██  ▄██ ▀▀ ▄███▄ ▀▀ ██▄  ██
██  █▀ ▄█ ███████ █▄ ▀█  ██
██   ▄███▄ █████ ▄███▄   ██
███  ████▀ ▄▄▄▄▄ ▀████  ███
████  ▀ ▄ ▀█████▀ ▄ ▀  ████
█████▄  ▀▀▄ ███ ▄▀▀  ▄█████
████████▄▄       ▄▄████████
███████████████████████████
████████     INDUSTRY LEADING BITCOIN SPORTSBOOK     ████████
LIVE
STREAMING
DAILY PRICE
BOOSTS
LIVE DEALER
CASINO
FAST & SECURE
PAYMENTS
███████████████████████████
████████▀▀       ▀▀████████
█████▀  ▄█▄  ▀  ▄▄   ▀█████
████  ▄  ▀    ▀█████▄  ████
███  ▀█▀   ▀█▄   ▀▀██▄  ███
██  ▄    █▄  ▀██▄▄  ▀█▄  ██
██  █▀ ▄  ▀█▄  ▀███▄  ▀  ██
██    ▄██  ▀██▄  ▀███▄   ██
███  ▀████  ▀███▄  ▀█▀  ███
████  ▀████  ▀████▄    ████
█████▄   ▀▀█▄  ▀▀▀   ▄█████
████████▄▄       ▄▄████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
████████▀▀ █████ ▀▀████████
█████▀    ▄█████▄    ▀█████
██████▄▄█▀▀ ▄▄▄ ▀▀█▄▄██████
███▀███▀ ▄███▀███▄ ▀███▀███
██   █ ▄██▀     ▀██▄ █   ██
██   █ ██         ██ █   ██
██   █ ▀██▄▄█ █▄▄██▀ █   ██
███▄███▄ ▀██▄▄▄██▀ ▄███▄███
██████▀▀█▄▄ ▀▀▀ ▄▄█▀▀██████
█████▄    ▀█████▀    ▄█████
████████▄▄ █████ ▄▄████████
███████████████████████████





[.
WIN WITH US!
]
suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834
Merit: 2395


takav mrak


View Profile
January 11, 2019, 09:11:37 PM
 #451

It CAN be verified manually.

How?

You speak as if in the current state, you can verify anything at all in trust ratings?

You can check the reference link and other proof presented in the feedback and everyone can decide on their own what level of verification is needed/acceptable.

theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3276
Merit: 4692


View Profile
January 11, 2019, 09:32:54 PM
 #452

@theymos No comment on this suggestion? I have a nice graph too

It's an interesting idea, but I think that trust ratings and trust lists are fundamentally different concepts which shouldn't be mixed. Just because you had a good trade with someone doesn't mean that you trust their judgement generally. For example, your system would tend to strongly amplify long cons like pirateat40, I think.

Also, we're not going to moderate things like "did a trade actually occur, and with x value?".

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
eddie13
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036
Merit: 822


BTC or BUST


View Profile
January 11, 2019, 09:35:48 PM
 #453

I am still unsure of the workings of exclusions, or want to clarify my understanding..

From what I think I understand exclusions do absolutely nothing for anything other than your own personal view unless you are on DT1?
An exclusion does not have effect on anyone's trust view other than your own?

Example: Suchmoon adds me to his list and I add member1. Member1 has added member2 but I think member2 has bad ratings so I exclude member2 from my DT1 view..

Member1 is my DT0 and is Suchmoon's DT1
Member2 is my DT1 and is Suchmoon's DT2  Excluded from my view but not from Suchmoon's view?

I exclude member2 to take his bad ratings off of my DT1 view but my exclusion of member2 does not exclude member2 from Suchmoon's DT2 view?


I think this is how this is working but I think it would work better if my exclusion from my view worked up the chain and also excluded member2 from Suchmoon's view..

If not, my work weeding out the bad ratings that slip through only fix my view, but Suchmoon's view of DT2 is still going to look like crap from my "subordinates" that I have actually excluded but still look included to Suchmoon, and therefore my trust list to him still looks like crap.. Right?
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100
Merit: 1741


GUNBOT Licenses up to 50% OFF - 'GrumpyKitty'.


View Profile WWW
January 11, 2019, 09:39:01 PM
 #454

From what I think I understand exclusions do absolutely nothing for anything other than your own personal view unless you are on DT1?
An exclusion does not have effect on anyone's trust view other than your own?
Partially correct. It also affects the people that have added you to their list.

Example: Suchmoon adds me to his list and I add member1. Member1 has added member2 but I think member2 has bad ratings so I exclude member2 from my DT1 view..

Member1 is my DT0 and is Suchmoon's DT1
Member2 is my DT1 and is Suchmoon's DT2  Excluded from my view but not from Suchmoon's view?
If you exclude him, he'd be excluded from suchmoon's view (assuming nobody else has inclusions).

I exclude member2 to take his bad ratings off of my DT1 view but my exclusion of member2 does not exclude member2 from Suchmoon's DT2 view?
It does.

.FORTUNE.JACK.
      ▄▄███████▄▄
   ▄████▀▀ ▄ ██████▄
  ████ ▄▄███ ████████
 █████▌▐███▌ ▀▄ ▀█████
███████▄██▀▀▀▀▄████████
█████▀▄▄▄▄█████████████
████▄▄▄▄ █████████████
 ██████▌ ███▀████████
  ███████▄▀▄████████
   ▀█████▀▀███████▀
      ▀▀██████▀▀
         
         █
...FortuneJack.com                                             
...THE BIGGEST BITCOIN GAMBLING SITE
       ▄▄█████████▄▄
    ▄█████████████████▄
  ▄█████████████████████▄
 ▄██
█████████▀███████████▄
██████████▀   ▀██████████
█████████▀       ▀█████████
████████           ████████
████████▄   ▄ ▄   ▄████████
██████████▀   ▀██████████
 ▀██
█████████████████████▀
  ▀██
███████████████████▀
    ▀█████████████████▀
       ▀▀█████████▀▀
#JACKMATE
WIN 1 BTC
▄█████████████████████████▄
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
██████████▀█████▀██████████
███████▀░░▀░░░░░▀░░▀███████
██████▌░░░░░░░░░░░░░▐██████
██████░░░░██░░░██░░░░██████
█████▌░░░░▀▀░░░▀▀░░░░▐█████
██████▄░░▄▄▄░░░▄▄▄░░▄██████
████████▄▄███████▄▄████████

███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
▀█████████████████████████▀
theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3276
Merit: 4692


View Profile
January 11, 2019, 09:42:50 PM
Last edit: January 14, 2019, 12:37:31 AM by theymos
 #455

Crap, I wish I had paid more attention in my CS classes. No recollection of max flow whatsoever. Google is extremely unhelpful. So what's the range for X and how does it depend on merit? Can it be negative? How big is N - that's only users who have custom trust lists, right? I feel like I'm missing something obvious here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_flow
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmonds%E2%80%93Karp_algorithm

Note that you can require a "minimum flow" per edge and still be the same problem, but that refers to requiring that much flow, where 0 is not allowed.

My intuition is that with my "0 or 10" requirement, it becomes the (NP-hard) knapsack problem. There are good approximations for that, though.



I was thinking that X = earned_merit intdiv (10 or 250), but I'm not sure.

N = all users who match the current truster criteria, either 10 or 250 earned merit. The "excluding merit sent by the trustee" thing couldn't be added here AFAICT, and would have to just limit users allowed into this step. M = the number of distinct users trusted by the users on the left side.

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834
Merit: 2395


takav mrak


View Profile
January 11, 2019, 09:57:16 PM
 #456

I am still unsure of the workings of exclusions, or want to clarify my understanding..

From what I think I understand exclusions do absolutely nothing for anything other than your own personal view unless you are on DT1?
An exclusion does not have effect on anyone's trust view other than your own?

Example: Suchmoon adds me to his list and I add member1. Member1 has added member2 but I think member2 has bad ratings so I exclude member2 from my DT1 view..

Member1 is my DT0 and is Suchmoon's DT1
Member2 is my DT1 and is Suchmoon's DT2  Excluded from my view but not from Suchmoon's view?

I exclude member2 to take his bad ratings off of my DT1 view but my exclusion of member2 does not exclude member2 from Suchmoon's DT2 view?


I think this is how this is working but I think it would work better if my exclusion from my view worked up the chain and also excluded member2 from Suchmoon's view..

If not, my work weeding out the bad ratings that slip through only fix my view, but Suchmoon's view of DT2 is still going to look like crap from my "subordinates" that I have actually excluded but still look included to Suchmoon, and therefore my trust list to him still looks like crap.. Right?

My understanding is that it does work up the chain as you're expecting. I'll see member2 striked out unless someone else includes them, and even in this latter case I can still see that YOU excluded member2, which is all that really matters as far as crappiness (or not) of your list.

Besides my depth setting is 1 so it ends at your direct includes and I don't plan to care any deeper.

For DT purposes, member2 would be in DT4, very unlikely to matter to anyone. Even if you get into DT1, member2 would be DT3, still not particularly important.

KingZee
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 348


Make winning bets on sports with Sportsbet.io!


View Profile
January 11, 2019, 10:02:47 PM
Last edit: January 11, 2019, 10:19:34 PM by KingZee
 #457

It CAN be verified manually.

How?

You speak as if in the current state, you can verify anything at all in trust ratings?

You can check the reference link and other proof presented in the feedback and everyone can decide on their own what level of verification is needed/acceptable.

It's still a manual verification. Just like you can red-tag someone caught posting a fake trust rating, you can red-tag someone who posted a trade with an amount that never happened. I really don't see how such a detail fundamentally changes anything. Every single part of information written in a trust rating cannot be automatically verified.

@theymos No comment on this suggestion? I have a nice graph too

It's an interesting idea, but I think that trust ratings and trust lists are fundamentally different concepts which shouldn't be mixed. Just because you had a good trade with someone doesn't mean that you trust their judgement generally. For example, your system would tend to strongly amplify long cons like pirateat40, I think.

Also, we're not going to moderate things like "did a trade actually occur, and with x value?".

Like I posted in that post, custom lists arent a solution. You can't just set a custom trust list and live in your own world, so that's why my suggestion forces a decentralized common trust list for everyone. Custom trust lists already mean nothing because only the person using them sees them.

Moderating the trust ratings also becomes the burden of the network itself. Newbies will have little to no weight compared to legendary members, and legendary members also have only a share of contribution compared to trusted legendary members. I honestly think it's possible for the network to calibrate itself. If someone is abusing trust, he's going to be red tagged. If someone is legitimate, he's going to be more and more influencive on the rest of the network and so-on. No centralized trust list needed. If someone's position changes, and he becomes trusted/untrusted after being otherwise, all the ratings specific to this account are going to propagate depending on the change.

Still, I can see that it might be a drastic change and not easy to implement compared to the current solution of updating and reworking the default trust list. Would be fair enough to wait for its results before judging.

   ▄▄██████▄▄
  ████████████
███▄▄
 ██████████████▀▀▀██▄
████████████████   ▀██▄
████████████████     ▀██
██████████████       ██▌
██████████████        ▐██
██▌▀▀██████▀▀         ▐██
▐██                   ██▌
 ██▄                 ▄██
  ▀██▄             ▄██▀
    ▀██▄▄▄     ▄▄▄██▀
      ▀▀█████████▀▀





███████████████████████████
███████████▀▀         ▀▀███
████████▀   ▄▄██▄  ▀█▄  ▀██
██████▀  ▄████████▄  ▀█  ██
████▀  ▄██████▄▀  ██▄    ██
███▀  ██████▄▀  ▄▀████▄  ██
██▀  █████▄▀  ▄▀██████  ▄██
██  ▀███▄▀  ▄▀███████  ▄███
██    ▀██▄▄▀███████▀  ▄████
██  █▄  ▀████████▀  ▄██████
██▄  ▀█▄  ▀██▀▀   ▄████████
███▄▄         ▄▄███████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
████████▀▀       ▀▀████████
█████▀   ▄ ▀███▀ ▄   ▀█████
████  ▄████▄ ▀ ▄████▄  ████
███  ▄ ▀███▀ ▄ ▀███▀ ▄  ███
██  ▄██ ▀▀ ▄███▄ ▀▀ ██▄  ██
██  █▀ ▄█ ███████ █▄ ▀█  ██
██   ▄███▄ █████ ▄███▄   ██
███  ████▀ ▄▄▄▄▄ ▀████  ███
████  ▀ ▄ ▀█████▀ ▄ ▀  ████
█████▄  ▀▀▄ ███ ▄▀▀  ▄█████
████████▄▄       ▄▄████████
███████████████████████████
████████     INDUSTRY LEADING BITCOIN SPORTSBOOK     ████████
LIVE
STREAMING
DAILY PRICE
BOOSTS
LIVE DEALER
CASINO
FAST & SECURE
PAYMENTS
███████████████████████████
████████▀▀       ▀▀████████
█████▀  ▄█▄  ▀  ▄▄   ▀█████
████  ▄  ▀    ▀█████▄  ████
███  ▀█▀   ▀█▄   ▀▀██▄  ███
██  ▄    █▄  ▀██▄▄  ▀█▄  ██
██  █▀ ▄  ▀█▄  ▀███▄  ▀  ██
██    ▄██  ▀██▄  ▀███▄   ██
███  ▀████  ▀███▄  ▀█▀  ███
████  ▀████  ▀████▄    ████
█████▄   ▀▀█▄  ▀▀▀   ▄█████
████████▄▄       ▄▄████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
████████▀▀ █████ ▀▀████████
█████▀    ▄█████▄    ▀█████
██████▄▄█▀▀ ▄▄▄ ▀▀█▄▄██████
███▀███▀ ▄███▀███▄ ▀███▀███
██   █ ▄██▀     ▀██▄ █   ██
██   █ ██         ██ █   ██
██   █ ▀██▄▄█ █▄▄██▀ █   ██
███▄███▄ ▀██▄▄▄██▀ ▄███▄███
██████▀▀█▄▄ ▀▀▀ ▄▄█▀▀██████
█████▄    ▀█████▀    ▄█████
████████▄▄ █████ ▄▄████████
███████████████████████████





[.
WIN WITH US!
]
eddie13
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036
Merit: 822


BTC or BUST


View Profile
January 11, 2019, 10:06:35 PM
 #458

It does.

Ok good..  

I was confused because I was still seeing someone that was excluded under me coming in and out of my DT view a couple times.
I guess some person(s) higher than the exclusion must have included them and has since excluded them again, maybe a couple times...

It gave me the impression that my sub's exclusions weren't working for my view and must have missed what changes were going on above me at the time.
suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834
Merit: 2395


takav mrak


View Profile
January 11, 2019, 10:22:36 PM
 #459

~

Thanks! I'm slowly starting to grasp this. Not that I'm likely to contribute anything useful, BFS/DFS is about as far as I ever got in search algorithms.

It's still a manual verification. Just like you can red-tag someone caught posting a fake trust rating, you can red-tag someone who posted a trade with an amount that never happened. I really don't see how such a detail fundamentally changes anything. Every single part of information written in a trust rating cannot be automatically verified.

Right, but now any DT rating has the same weight in the score. You're suggesting to amplify weight based on a potentially fake number (risked amount). I think the ability to game your system is higher, even if temporarily until being caught.

EcuaMobi
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666
Merit: 1228


https://Ecua.Mobi


View Profile WWW
January 11, 2019, 11:22:12 PM
Merited by suchmoon (7), cryptodevil (6), Avirunes (3), DooMAD (2), LoyceV (2)
 #460

I've just seen this and I'm liking both the idea and the effects to the DT1 list.

Just one thought: since DT1 can change every month so can the DT2 list, so now it makes more sense for several DT1/DT2 members to tag scammers, just in case any tagger stops being DT2 for a few months (I know the idea is for everyone to customize their trust list, but most newbies will still rely on default trust).

And I want to insist on my suggestion regarding trust: guest should see some trust. Default trust would make sense but any trust. Non registered users are still being scammed by known scammers because they don't see the tags.

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Bitcointalk.org is not available or authorized for sale. Do not believe any fake listings.
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!