3 ms·
A better wikipedia. One where every article is cryptographically signed by the author and there is only ONE author. Articles are then user moderated up or down
by falsdf20293 19y ago
A better wikipedia. One where every article is cryptographically signed by the author and there is only ONE author. Articles are then user moderated up or down like here.
I also wouldn't exclude anything and would allow articles of any length and detail.
I imagine the end result would be something very much like wikipedia as the community would vote wikipedia-like articles to the top.
But vandalism would be impossible and every encyclopedia style article could link into a much longer article on the same subject. Known authors could sign their articles. So Linus could write something about Git, but the community could still vote some git's article higher then Linus.
- derefr 19y agoAs long as there can be group and "public/everyone" keys, I'm sold. That is, one "user" could in fact be a single user, or it could represent a collaboration between any number of known or unknown users. (Even if you don't like it, people would still manage to do it this way somehow. May as well make it easy to exchange/publish keys to other users on the site.) Alternately, one could sign a modification of an article rather than the article itself, allowing for one of the greatest benefits of Wikipedia: the three thousand pedants correcting everyone else's spelling, grammar, punctuation and word usage.