3 ms·

Author here, not of the post, but the linked article, making the case for bridging-based ranking, https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/bridging-based-rankin

by avivo 3y ago

Author here, not of the post, but the linked article, making the case for bridging-based ranking, https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/bridging-based-ranking https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/bridging-based-rank... and the related https://bridging.systems/ https://bridging.systems/ which lays out a set of open problems and approaches. It's great to see this exploration. Those interested might also want to check out https://vitalik.eth.limo/general/2023/08/16/communitynotes.html https://vitalik.eth.limo/general/2023/08/16/communitynotes.h... and https://knightcolumbia.org/content/the-algorithmic-management-of-polarization-and-violence-on-social-media https://knightcolumbia.org/content/the-algorithmic-managemen... (and how aspects of this might be applied to AI governance https://reimagine.aviv.me/p/governance-of-ai-with-ai-through https://reimagine.aviv.me/p/governance-of-ai-with-ai-through ).

PeterStuer 3y ago
At first glance it feels like the most effective way to game this system is to grind user credit through aggregate low polarization support on fairly neutral low impact posts, then strategically 'spend' on higher profile polerizing posts. Is that a fair 'red teaming' observation?
- jwarden 3y ago
  Yes I think this actually could work. Community Notes has a basic reputation system: users need to "Earn In" by rating notes as "Helpful" that are ultimately classified by the algorithm as helpful. Once enough attackers earn in, they can totally break the algorithm. Breaking it is not as simple upvoting a lot of, say, right-wing or left-wing posts though. The algorithm will simply classify all the attackers as having a very positive or negative polarization factor, and decide that their votes can be explained by this factor. What would work is upvoting *unhelpful* posts. I have actually simulated this attack using synthetic data and sure enough it totally breaks the algorithm. I write about it in this article: https://jonathanwarden.com/improving-bridge-based-ranking/ https://jonathanwarden.com/improving-bridge-based-ranking/
esafak 3y ago
Are there any good books on algorithmically-supported collective intelligence?
- jwarden 3y ago
  Note that I am aware of. But me and some colleagues at social-protoclols.org have have written a number of articles on the subject. For example, here's an article on using Mechanism Design to solve the problem of dishonesty and promote "truthtelling" in social networks: https://social-protocols.org/truthtelling-games/ https://social-protocols.org/truthtelling-games/ And here's a writeup on our "Global Brain" algorithm: https://social-protocols.org/global-brain/ https://social-protocols.org/global-brain/
- PeterStuer 3y ago
  It is fairly old but I remember "Building web reputation systems" being a decent introduction. https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/building-web-reputation/9781449382193/ https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/building-web-reputation...
jwarden 3y ago
Hi Aviv, thanks for replying and for the additional links. I think this work is so important. I'll also add a link to some work I and some colleagues are doing on designing social algorithms that promote collective intelligence. https://social-protocols.org https://social-protocols.org
- patcon 3y ago
  Oh hey, I came across your Social Protocols groups while doing my regular rounds for Polis-related projects a few months ago, when I found Propolis! Was trying to figure out why your name was familiar-ish :) I've got you in this spreadsheet that I share around quite regularly, in case you're curious: https://link.g0v.network/pug-resources https://link.g0v.network/pug-resources There's also a Polis User Group discord: https://link.g0v.network/pug-discord https://link.g0v.network/pug-discord It's pretty low-key lately, but high density of potentially-aligned ppl. I am hoping to restart the weekly open calls for prospective Polis facilitators and self-hosters, in case you're interested to log in. Thanks for your posts by the way! I am jealous of your output -- I tend to have a few calls/meetings about Polis per week, but am not so great at producing clean artifacts like this :)
  - manx 3y ago
    GitHub link to propolis: https://github.com/social-protocols/propolis https://github.com/social-protocols/propolis We stopped working on it in favor of https://github.com/social-protocols/social-network https://github.com/social-protocols/social-network (We should mention that on the website, I guess) The reasoning was: coming up with (and answering) yes-no questions is more effort and a higher entry barrier for participation than just posting anything and having up/downvotes - like in a social network. Requiring this formalization of all content on a platform creates an entry barrier, e.g. people need to formulate what they want to post as a yes-no question. At the same time, it disallows content, which does not fit the yes-no question model. Our big insight was: We can drastically simplify the user interaction and allow arbitrary content, but keep the collective intelligence aspect. That's achieved by introducing a concept similar to community notes, but in a recursive way: Every reply to a post can become a note. And replies can have more replies, which in turn can act as notes for the reply. Notes are AB-tested if, when shown below a post, change the voting behavior on the post. If a reply changes the voting behavior, it must have added some information, which voters were not aware of before, like a good argument. For more details, see the global brain algorithm: https://social-protocols.org/global-brain/ https://social-protocols.org/global-brain/

by avivo 3y ago

PeterStuer 3y ago

At first glance it feels like the most effective way to game this system is to grind user credit through aggregate low polarization support on fairly neutral low impact posts, then strategically 'spend' on higher profile polerizing posts. Is that a fair 'red teaming' observation?

jwarden 3y ago
Yes I think this actually could work. Community Notes has a basic reputation system: users need to "Earn In" by rating notes as "Helpful" that are ultimately classified by the algorithm as helpful. Once enough attackers earn in, they can totally break the algorithm. Breaking it is not as simple upvoting a lot of, say, right-wing or left-wing posts though. The algorithm will simply classify all the attackers as having a very positive or negative polarization factor, and decide that their votes can be explained by this factor. What would work is upvoting *unhelpful* posts. I have actually simulated this attack using synthetic data and sure enough it totally breaks the algorithm. I write about it in this article: https://jonathanwarden.com/improving-bridge-based-ranking/ https://jonathanwarden.com/improving-bridge-based-ranking/

esafak 3y ago

Are there any good books on algorithmically-supported collective intelligence?

jwarden 3y ago
Note that I am aware of. But me and some colleagues at social-protoclols.org have have written a number of articles on the subject. For example, here's an article on using Mechanism Design to solve the problem of dishonesty and promote "truthtelling" in social networks: https://social-protocols.org/truthtelling-games/ https://social-protocols.org/truthtelling-games/ And here's a writeup on our "Global Brain" algorithm: https://social-protocols.org/global-brain/ https://social-protocols.org/global-brain/
PeterStuer 3y ago
It is fairly old but I remember "Building web reputation systems" being a decent introduction. https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/building-web-reputation/9781449382193/ https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/building-web-reputation...

jwarden 3y ago

Hi Aviv, thanks for replying and for the additional links. I think this work is so important. I'll also add a link to some work I and some colleagues are doing on designing social algorithms that promote collective intelligence. https://social-protocols.org https://social-protocols.org

patcon 3y ago
Oh hey, I came across your Social Protocols groups while doing my regular rounds for Polis-related projects a few months ago, when I found Propolis! Was trying to figure out why your name was familiar-ish :) I've got you in this spreadsheet that I share around quite regularly, in case you're curious: https://link.g0v.network/pug-resources https://link.g0v.network/pug-resources There's also a Polis User Group discord: https://link.g0v.network/pug-discord https://link.g0v.network/pug-discord It's pretty low-key lately, but high density of potentially-aligned ppl. I am hoping to restart the weekly open calls for prospective Polis facilitators and self-hosters, in case you're interested to log in. Thanks for your posts by the way! I am jealous of your output -- I tend to have a few calls/meetings about Polis per week, but am not so great at producing clean artifacts like this :)
- manx 3y ago
  GitHub link to propolis: https://github.com/social-protocols/propolis https://github.com/social-protocols/propolis We stopped working on it in favor of https://github.com/social-protocols/social-network https://github.com/social-protocols/social-network (We should mention that on the website, I guess) The reasoning was: coming up with (and answering) yes-no questions is more effort and a higher entry barrier for participation than just posting anything and having up/downvotes - like in a social network. Requiring this formalization of all content on a platform creates an entry barrier, e.g. people need to formulate what they want to post as a yes-no question. At the same time, it disallows content, which does not fit the yes-no question model. Our big insight was: We can drastically simplify the user interaction and allow arbitrary content, but keep the collective intelligence aspect. That's achieved by introducing a concept similar to community notes, but in a recursive way: Every reply to a post can become a note. And replies can have more replies, which in turn can act as notes for the reply. Notes are AB-tested if, when shown below a post, change the voting behavior on the post. If a reply changes the voting behavior, it must have added some information, which voters were not aware of before, like a good argument. For more details, see the global brain algorithm: https://social-protocols.org/global-brain/ https://social-protocols.org/global-brain/