On Thu, Sep 16, 2004 at 08:07:01PM -0700, Mark C. Langston wrote:
|
| 3) A centralized reputation system is not the only solution to the
| problem of obtaining reputaiton information, in the same way that a
| centralized routing table or name service wasn't the solution to
| providing that data. Centralized reputation systems also shift the
| burden of trust to the ones controlling the centralized system. I'd
| STRONGLY recommend a decentralized system -- not because I'm working on
| GOSSiP, but because I believe deeply that trusting a single entity or
| small, finite set of entities with reputation information is a poor
| decision, and will ultimately benefit only those making money from it.
Karma.com is not meant to be centralized in the same way
that credit bureaux output a single risk score.
It is meant to be centralized in the same way that
rottentomatoes.com is centralized. A plurality (to use the
term du jour) of input feeds will be represented through the
aggregator, in the same way that a stock exchange represents
a variety of individual stocks.