5 ms·

I think the tough part is deciding who should be the arbiter or whether information is intentionally malicious. Censorship can be a real issue. For the DIRT pr

I think the tough part is deciding who should be the arbiter or whether information is intentionally malicious. Censorship can be a real issue. For the DIRT protocol, if want to remove information, you also need to deposit tokens and put forth evidence to convince voters in the network to side with you. If you lose the vote, then you would also lose tokens. We put forth an economic penalty for being inaccurate.

mcny 8y ago
Firstly, congratulations on launching! > For the DIRT protocol, if want to remove information, you also need to deposit tokens and put forth evidence to convince voters in the network to side with you. If you lose the vote, then you would also tokens. We put forth an economic for being malicious. Sorry if this is a stupid question but if I lose a vote, can I bring it up for a vote again? I think that should be ok, right? Even if I get some fact removed by some kind of trickery where I sneak in a vote it should be OK because if the fact belongs there, maybe someone else can add it again? I think this works well for facts like Robert Kennedy as a matter of fact did NOT kill John F Kennedy. However, some things are not objectively clear. What happens when people keep adding "fake news" that is not obviously/patently false? Does someone need to pay to have it removed? How often do I do that? Every time someone adds it? Now again the flip side is troublesome. We can't require identification for anyone to post facts, right? I mean I think that would be unthinkable, right? As such, how do we "rate limit" "fake news"? Sorry if all of these have obvious answers. I just couldn't think of it...
- yinyinwu 8y ago
  Thanks! Great question. 1. Repeat votes - If you lose the vote, you can vote again. DIRT works not only for correcting intentionally misleading data, but also for fixing out of data information. It's similar to a bug bounty for data. 2. Cycle of challenges - Each time misinformation re-surfaces, you would have to challenge and vote down the data. However, every time you are successful in your challenge, you earn tokens for your efforts. 3. Fake news - Subjective information can be harder to adjudicate with DIRT and that will not be our initial market. As an engineer, I would love to believe that the blockchain can solve fake news. However, a lot of research shows it is not the lack of data that the issue, but rather perspective. People believe what they want to believe.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
Aeolun 8y ago
I think the EU is going to put forth an economic penalty for the network to retain personal information when someone doesn't want it to. Just because everyone else on the network votes that it should stay there doesn't mean the law agrees.
fake-name 8y ago
A.K.A. A abusers paradise. You HAVE to have moderation facilities.

mcny 8y ago

Firstly, congratulations on launching! > For the DIRT protocol, if want to remove information, you also need to deposit tokens and put forth evidence to convince voters in the network to side with you. If you lose the vote, then you would also tokens. We put forth an economic for being malicious. Sorry if this is a stupid question but if I lose a vote, can I bring it up for a vote again? I think that should be ok, right? Even if I get some fact removed by some kind of trickery where I sneak in a vote it should be OK because if the fact belongs there, maybe someone else can add it again? I think this works well for facts like Robert Kennedy as a matter of fact did NOT kill John F Kennedy. However, some things are not objectively clear. What happens when people keep adding "fake news" that is not obviously/patently false? Does someone need to pay to have it removed? How often do I do that? Every time someone adds it? Now again the flip side is troublesome. We can't require identification for anyone to post facts, right? I mean I think that would be unthinkable, right? As such, how do we "rate limit" "fake news"? Sorry if all of these have obvious answers. I just couldn't think of it...

yinyinwu 8y ago
Thanks! Great question. 1. Repeat votes - If you lose the vote, you can vote again. DIRT works not only for correcting intentionally misleading data, but also for fixing out of data information. It's similar to a bug bounty for data. 2. Cycle of challenges - Each time misinformation re-surfaces, you would have to challenge and vote down the data. However, every time you are successful in your challenge, you earn tokens for your efforts. 3. Fake news - Subjective information can be harder to adjudicate with DIRT and that will not be our initial market. As an engineer, I would love to believe that the blockchain can solve fake news. However, a lot of research shows it is not the lack of data that the issue, but rather perspective. People believe what they want to believe.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

Aeolun 8y ago

I think the EU is going to put forth an economic penalty for the network to retain personal information when someone doesn't want it to. Just because everyone else on the network votes that it should stay there doesn't mean the law agrees.

fake-name 8y ago

A.K.A. A abusers paradise. You HAVE to have moderation facilities.