macieklaskus

Glad you like it! The family tree graph idea is interesting, but one problem I see with this is that it would quickly branch out so much that it may be unreadable. Do you have a specific use case in mind?

It's a neat idea, where do you see this project going?

Very cool! It's already useful, but you could make it even more so by enabling to sort by smaller time ranges (e.g. 1 year).

It would also be interesting to see a version of this list weighted by karma scores of users who posted the links.

Edit: even better, use your own h-index ranking https://github.com/antontarasenko/smq/blob/master/reports/ha...

This, plus who knows how long we can rely on the Turing test.

No, Sovrin does not provide a source of scarcity. If you need to do KYC it's not SSI.

The problem is that the more successful the system becomes (i.e. it's used for more valuable use cases) the more incentive there is to attack it. There needs to be a dynamic analogous to Bitcoin where the resources that go into securing the network grow along with the value of the network.

This paper is really about solving a fundamental problem in decentralized identity, which is to combine the characteristics of self-sovereignty, privacy and Sbil-resistance, which seems to exclude each other.

I previously proposed formalizing this problem as Decentralized Identity Trilemma (http://maciek.blog/dit).

This could be a real product if it sourced from specific clusters. For example, NBA Twitter.

There are other solutions to this problem that don't require 3rd party intervention. For example, users could follow each other's block lists.

If Bob spams thousands of accounts he'd quickly get on multiple block lists.

I'm not sure if using the word "narcissism" is helpful in this context. We are all self-absorbed to some extent and it's good to maintain a practice that keeps this at bay.

I found these two things particularly helpful:

1) Developing a practice of meditation

This helps to notice the self-absorbed thoughts and recognize them for what they are. I'd recommend in particular attending a silent retreat in Vipassana tradition https://www.dhamma.org/

These retreats are organized all over the world and are donation-based, so you can afford them regardless of your financial means. It only takes time and dedication.

2) Developing interest in other people

I was surprised that this can be learned, but it certainly can. I've often heard things like "assume everybody knows something you don't know" or "everybody can teach you something". I've found this advice to not be particularly helpful. It didn't offer a process for developing this interest.

The advice here offers a more practical approach: https://www.quora.com/How-do-I-become-genuinely-interested-i... (tdlr; it's an exercise of writing down things that you appreciated about the people you've encountered).

My personal experience with this practice: a) I notice what I appreciate and find interesting about the person I am speaking to more frequently and sooner into the conversation. b) I notice afterwards that I derived far more satisfaction from conversations in which I was interested in the other person rather than when others were interested in me. However, during the conversation I still crave attention. I am starting to notice these cravings as they happen. It's a little like eating a healthy meal vs. eating a cookie.

True, my bad.

I don't understand why the article does not link to the paper it discusses. Here is the paper: https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2019.068...

Interesting idea, thanks for the link.

I think the direction is right -- the solution probably lies in deriving scarcity from intelligence unique to the brain (for now).

Both brains and computers can perform pattern recognition. Computers are better at this task because they can be scaled and brains cannot. Therefore, this form of intelligence lies in the domain of financial capital. It can be abstracted through the cost of performing arithmetic operations (Proof-of-Work).

Brains can perform abstract thinking (answering the question why), computers cannot. If we could create a metric tied to the ability, it would be nested in the human capital.

I'm skeptical in regards to the practical application proposed in the thread. Even if this is robust, it'd be incredibly wasteful. The whole point of PoW is that it's moving computation from the brain onto a chip. This would go the other way around.

An unintended side-effect of this stunt is that it showed how strong convictions ICO experts hold about their recommendations: https://twitter.com/SatoshiAnswers/status/986645861655633920

Thanks! We're working on it.

Are you using Firefox? We're working on fixing that right now. It should work fine in other browsers - Chrome or Safari.

Nonviolent Communication

I was sceptical about this - where does the value come from? - until I read the part about mapping the social trust.

There is value in mapping these relationships. Trust enables lowering the cost of transacting. Low cost of transacting enables creation of powerful ecosystems.

It's the first proposal that I am aware of that introduces an economic incentive on an individual level for mapping trust. The system seems potentially very robust: 1) I add people I trust in order to increase the value of my coins 2) If I make a mistake and add an actor who turned out to be untrustworthy I am penalized by losing some value from my coins

Thanks to this dynamic, there is both an incentive to expand the network and eliminate bad actors on an individual level.