3 ms·
Problem (1) can likely be addressed by restricting the number of iterations to some small constant, like 3 to 6 (which they suggest in the article). You can als
by wanderingbit 3y ago
Problem (1) can likely be addressed by restricting the number of iterations to some small constant, like 3 to 6 (which they suggest in the article). You can also restrict the number of peers-of-peers you fetch during each iteration to a small random subset. So if we only iterate 6 times and choose 10 peers for each iterations, we’ll get 1 million (10^6) trust scores needing to be pulled to calculate a trust score. That is an upper bound and will likely be less because it assumes each peer is distinct. At 32-bit floating points, that’s 32 million bits or 4 MB necessary to be fetched.
I can imagine this being reduced by at least a factor of 10 without much impact on the trust score. But note the “random subset” means different people will have different trust scores for the same peer :shrug:
For (2) yeah we probably need to lower our expectations on privacy for the time being; it’s a masters thesis and privacy in open distributed systems is very tricky.
- _heimdall 3y ago> For (2) yeah we probably need to lower our expectations on privacy for the time being; it’s a masters thesis and privacy in open distributed systems is very tricky. If we do care about privacy, any moderation system should first be designed to meet that goal. Its not worth designing a moderation system if we don't first know it will work with one of the core requirements.