Re: Need PGP-awareness in common utilities

[bryce@digicash.com]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Lucky wrote something like:
>
> As has been discussed in numberous previous threads on this topic, even a
> passive rating system is very hard to implement. The computer doesn't know
> if you hit delete because the post was garbage or because you are running
> late on some project.


What's the difference?  All practical measure of value is in 
comparison to competing objects.  This _does_ mean that your
"approvalness" coefficient goes up and down as your situation
changes, but it doesn't mean that your rating becomes
meaningless.  Hm.  If it happened that a bunch of prolific
raters got busy, ratings across the board would go down.  (Seems
statistically unlikely, but still...)  Then when they went back
up there would be a "burst of activity" effect.  :-)


Possibly what I like most about ratings and micropayments is how
the quantify previously unquantified human behavior.  We've all
seen the "burst of activity" on a mailing list or at a party, or
on a stock market, right?  Well that is just people's ratings
all pushing each other up!


> An active rating system is virtually impossible to
> implement, given the added workload on the readers.


Which is where the small payments to ratings producers from
ratings consumers comes in.  Again this is just the
quantification of a phenomena that we all take for granted.
(Namely, that people who produce quality ratings are producing a
value and trading/contributing it to others.)


("'Just' the quantification", I said !!  That might seem like a
hilarious understatement someday.)


Bryce



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2i
Comment: Auto-signed under Unix with 'BAP' Easy-PGP v1.1b2

iQB1AwUBMd8FO0jbHy8sKZitAQEBoQMAmMtQg0cTrdXpHf07p1sYVUPAnJq+Jp1v
/g6CqYu/YwIRHmnHyLmCehqB74xYJ6sjOLmKaYXd12f1oFUJL9rsx2LAEiPNeAMb
gSClZhpUu++CE+PfH8GlOZ1E/75ZcIx0
=V0z6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----