On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 8:56 PM, John Leslie <john(_at_)jlc(_dot_)net> wrote:
!
But that isn't really reputation in the traditional sense of the word.
I suppose when you use a word, you are entitled to mean "just what I
choose it to mean -- neither more nor less." Nonetheless, I contend
this is, exactly, "prediction of the likelihood of near-future behavior."
In the Internet, reputation can change in a few milliseconds.
And this goes straight to one of the big issues with any discussion
that uses the term "reputation". I'm going to disagree with you John
when you argue that everyone gets to define what reputation is in
their own way. If this were the case then any discussion of reputation
is meaningless. We need a common definition. Do you get to choose what
you mean when you say IP Address?
What you or anyone else gets to define for yourself are the attributes
that surround your use of the word reputation. That is, the
implementation that utilizes reputation.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg