2024-05-19 02:28:31
by npub1u5n…ldq3
I know that several clients calculate #WoT scores and use them to filter content. #wikifreedia, for example, allows me to turn on a WoT filter which currently reduces the number of entries from 503 to 180, with 323 not visible bc they’ve been filtered out.
Is anyone using the WoT scores to stratify content? For example, wikifreedia shows me 11 articles on “nostr” by 11 different authors. Are there plans @npub18a5…pzjs to arrange those in order from the highest to the lowest WoT score? Seems like that’s the next step.
Is anyone else already doing anything like this? (For any content, not just wiki.)
2024-05-19 02:12:02
- reply
by npub1u5n…ldq3
For some reason I can see your reply in primal and nostrudel but not in damus. In fact I can't see any of your notes in damus.
Are you asking whether we should categorize the WoT or categorize lists? The answer is the categorize all the things.
Of course, there will be no universal, all encompasing hierarcy or schema or ontology or whatever you call it that everyone will be required to agree upon. Any attempt to do so is ill-advised and doomed to failure. You will maintain your own hierarchy about the things you care about, ignoring anything you don't care about (limited by the amount of memory you wish to dedicate to this endeavor), and your WoT will assist you in maintaining the hierarchy. And it the same hierarchy will serve multiple purposes: your trust attestation will make reference to a context, a WoT score might make reference to the same context, etc.
Not unlike how the brain works.
2024-05-19 00:02:26
by npub1u5n…ldq3
One of the things that makes Elon a role model is his ability to take a big goal, like getting to Mars, and break it down into baby steps, like figure out how to make efficient batteries at scale. He then figures out how to ensure each baby step succeeds, even if it seems like a distraction from the primary goal. “Succeeds” means that all of the incentives (mostly economic, but non-economic ones too, including political) are in place to ensure all relevant actors are motivated to take whatever steps are necessary for the baby step to succeed. Importantly, there can be no expectation for said actors to believe in or even know about the grand vision. All that it takes is a small cadre of leaders like Elon to nudge the rest of us in the right direction.
This takes a lot of work, because there are a lot of baby steps, and a lot of relevant actors for each step, and a lot of relevant incentives for each actor for each step. Most people are quite capable of thinking this all the way through, but are unfortunately too fucking lazy and self-indulgent.
And so it is with decentralized web of trust.
We have to stop being too fucking lazy, and we need to think it all the way through, and then we need to make it happen. An overarching vision including all the moving parts needed for WoT to work, but with baby steps that will get us there, where each baby step is actually gonna fucking happen. Each baby step being one that devs will actually build and users will actually use even when the majority of devs and the majority of users don’t know or give a shit about the grand vision.
If we don’t do this, no one will, and the world will go up in flames.
So c’mon people, let’s get off our collective ass, and LFG.
#WoT
2024-05-14 23:34:02
- reply
by npub1u5n…ldq3
I suspect it’s always been this way throughout all of history. Probably fluctuates how bad it gets for a variety of reasons. But I think of it as a variation on the idea of proof of work: if you want to be accepted by the tribe, you have to virtue signal, where virtue signaling = public demonstration that you’ve internalized the tribal narrative fiction (the “current thing”), where fiction = a combo of delusion + hypocrisy. Delusion + hypocrisy are a requisite part of this PoW process bc they take cognitive effort to internalize.
As we have witnessed over the past 5-10-20 years, the amount of virtue signaling expected by the tribe can fluctuate over time. Which is not unlike bitcoin’s difficulty adjustment. The comparison between virtue signaling and bitcoin runs deep!
Going down the rabbit hole = a rebellion against the psychological mandate to virtue signal. But it’s not as simple as it sounds. Proof of work serves a very real purpose: leaderless consensus. No one should understand that better than bitcoiners.
The question becomes: how to do what needs to be done with a minimum of damage. Bitcoin’s PoW is costly, but is MUCH less costly and damaging than fiat forever wars and is therefore the preferable consensus mechanism. In the analogy, today’s postmodernist / virtue signaling / delusional / hypocritical / logical fallacy method of tribal consensus is the most pathologic option available. We must show the world there is a better way.
Which is why I am working on #WoT.
2024-05-14 20:21:22
- reply
by npub1u5n…ldq3
Yes, I think that is precisely the truth that Radiohead is conveying to us.
Some of the greatest art is art that reveals how the mind works. Specifically, those aspects of the mind that we are hard wired to pretend don’t exist.
In my mind, going down the rabbit hole = defiance of the societal mandate to maintain pretense. The trick is to understand, from a scientific perspective, why the mandate to pretend exists in the first place. If you’re going to rebel against a rule, it helps if you first understand how and why the rule came into existence.
2024-05-14 19:51:43
by npub1u5n…ldq3
Nice.
I know I love a song when I churn its meaning over and over in my mind
“Karma police, I’ve given all I can, but we’re still on the payroll” = he’s still subservient to and an agent of the tribal narrative, despite its hypocrisy.
So I’m thinking of the song, and perhaps Radiohead’s entire existence, as a critique of the rotten core of postmodernism, critical constructivism, whatever you want to call it. #note1qay…jeeq