[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
reputations talk notes
These are the notes from my talk at the last meeting.
They may only be parsable by people who saw the talk,
but I'm interested in all comments.
Thanks to Mark Miller and Eric Drexler who helped me put
together these notes the first time.
The need for reputations:
single Prisoner's Dilemna incentive for defecting
iterated Prisoner's dilemna incentive for cooperating
reps put each person in an iterated situation with the group
better reputations reduce reputation float (see below)
Spreading reputations makes them better at encouraging cooperation
Uses of reputations:
sorting
filtering - this is just bad sorting
collateral - for business and important trust issues
let me add that reputation appication is largely on the receiving side
Negative reputations:
don't work with anonymity because you just make another identity
don't spread for psychological and legal reasons
many people won't reveal negative opinions about others people
primarily support filtering and collateral
Positive reputations:
are safer to reveal and spread
allow sorting
can handle anonymous pseudonyms
Anonymity:
reduces perceived and actual accountability
breaks many of our trained intutions for trusting others
implicit but unrevealed assets aren't at risk
trade names are examples of non-anon. pseudonyms
Reputations systems for sorting mail are less of an issues than
reputations systems for actual business because there is less at risk.
Gaming of a reputation system depends on how much is at risk.
Brilliant Pennies: randomly generated reputations
the con game:
start with 1000 pennies
flip them every day. head the stock market goes up, tails it goes down
throw out pennies that 'guessed' wrong
at the end of ten days you have a penny with a 'reputation'
for predicting the stock market
sell the penny anonymously :-)
inconsistent positive reputations are better than perfect reputations
can explain away first several mistakes
Assets that support an identity
recoverable assets
anything that can be recovered in the even of a defection
bank accounts, goods, factories, etc.
pseudonyms typically won't have recoverable assets
pseudonyms could keep recoverable assets in a non-anonymous escrow
can be anonymously and privately committed to more than one party in the
event of a defection, so value can't properly be assessed
unrecoverable assets
Sunk costs
time, money spent building a reputation
solves the Brilliant Penny problem:
random rep requires huge investment
a 30day coin-flipping rep requires more pennies than exist
notarized money-destruction service:
proves investment with no route for kickbacks to the investor
demonstrates the comparative cost of running an anon. service
our intuitions about sunk costs can be very wrong here
we're used to sunk costs at least looking recoverable (liquidation)
we're used to eventual personal accountability of decision maker
sunk costs enable kill files again
you can only afford so many pseudonyms
this is relates to the Brilliant Penny solution
reputation capital (perceived value of reputation)
customer good will, market share, shelf space, customer mind-space, etc.
priority settings in receivers's mail handlers (filters, sorters)
future sales potential
based on the net present value of the reputation
perceived differently by different individuals (customers/producer)
based on discount rate (subjective value of money now vs. money later?)
perception of discount rate can change radically
you are told you have 6 months to live
Reputation Float:
latency between use of a reputation and the effect on the value of the reputation
how long can you ride on past glory?
this includes the amount of goods, etc. against which the reputation is collateral
existing trade-names collateralize the quality of existing goods (i.e. cars)
estimating reputation float is a public goods problem
why should I reveal the goods I have outstanding if I can get the info anyway
insurance (Idea Futures) doesn't help
the anonymous could collect both from defaulting and from insurance
our intuitions screw up at estimating this
we're not used to untraceable transactions
Miscellaneous:
filtering/sorting reputations should be wrt to topics
This generalizes to other criteria
individuals have different levels of expertise in different areas
synthesized reputations are reputations composed from multiple reputations
chaining remailers composes their reputations for security
voting among key providers composes their uncompromisability reputations