4 ms·
Just as an exercise in 20/20 hindsight, it seems to me that the easiest change to make is to not trust every player implicitly. In other words, you enforce some
by Jemaclus 12y ago
Just as an exercise in 20/20 hindsight, it seems to me that the easiest change to make is to not trust every player implicitly. In other words, you enforce some level of duplication in the work. If enough people agree that this piece goes there, then it goes there, and if not, then it doesn't. A single attacker is unlikely to be able to undo the work of dozens of supporters, even if it takes less time and effort to undermine the truth.
I believe Foursquare did something like this with regards to their recommendations. They'd ask questions about locations (e.g., pick a beautiful picture, is this place classy?, is it loud?, etc), and only when enough people agreed would they use the information in recommendations.
- hobs 12y agoYeah that is what I immediately thought, that you would want to do some processing on the changes before presenting it to the users, and not make it live, just asking them to make a change and asking others to rate the change. That would be a system that you would need a large number of users to manipulate. The downside of this idea is that their website is clearly about an interactive experience where you move things around and get the feel of others doing the same thing, I dont know if that kind of thing would be compatible with y/our idea without a lot of tricks.