Cyphernomicon Top
Cyphernomicon 15.3

Reputations and Credentials:
The Nature of Reputations


   15.3.1. The claim by many of us that "reputations" will take care of
            many problems in crypto anarchic markets is disputed by some
            (notably Eric Hughes). To be sure, it will not be a trivial
            issue. Institutions take years or decades to evolve.
   15.3.2. However, think of how often we use reputations: friends,
            books, movies, restaurants, etc
   15.3.3. Reputations and other institutions will take time to evolve.
            Saying "the market will talke care of things" may be true,
            but this may take time. The "invisible hand" doesn't
            necessarily move swiftly.
   15.3.4. "What are 'reputations' and why are they so important?"
           - a vague concept related to degree of believability, of
              trust, etc.
           + "we know it when we see it"
             - (sorry for the cop out, but I don't have a good
                definition handy....James Donald says studying reputatons
                is "nominalist hot air" [1994-09-02], but I think it's
                quite important)
           + obvious, in ordinary life, but in the cyberspatial context
             - reputation-based systems
             - escrow, expectations
             - "reputation capital"
             - like book or music recommendations
             - web of trust (is different than just "trust"---tensor,
                rather than scalar)
           + Actually very common: how most of us deal with our friends,
              our enemies, the books we read, the restaurants we
              frequent, etc.
             - we mentally downcheck and upcheck on the basis of
                experience; we learn
           - Are there examples?
           - Eric's objections
   15.3.5. "How are reputations acquired, ruined, transferred, etc.?"
           + First, reputations are not "owned" by the person to whom
              they are attached by others
             + the algebra is tricky...maybe Eric Hughes or one of the
                other pure math types can help straighten out the
                "calculus of reputations"
               - reputations are not symmetric: just because Alice
                  esteems Bob does mean the reverse is so
               - reputations are not transitive, though they are
                  partially transitive: if Alice esteems Bob and Bob
                  esteems Charles, this may cause Alice to be somewhat
                  more esteemful of Charles.
               - a tensor matrix?
               - a graph?
           + Any holder of a reputation can "spend" some of his
              reputation capital
             - in praise or criticism of another agent
             - in reviews (think of Siskel and Ebert "spending" some of
                their reputation capital in the praise of a movie, and
                how their own reptutations will go up and down as a
                function of many things, including especially how much
                the viewing audience agrees with them)
   15.3.6. "Are they foolproof? Are all the questions answered?"
           - Of course not.
           - And Eric Hughes has in the past said that too much
              importance is being invested in this idea of reputations,
              though many or even most of us (who comment on the matter)
              clearly think otherwise.
           - In any case, much more study is needed. Hal Finney and I
              have debated this a couple of times (first on the
              Extropians list, then a couple or more times on the
              Cypherpunks list), and we are mostly in agreement that this
              area is very promising and is deserving of much more
              thought--and even experimentation. (One of my interests in
              crypto simulations, in "protocol ecologies," is to simulate
              agents which play games involving reputations, spoofing,
              transfers of reputations, etc.)
   15.3.7. Reputations have many aspects
           + the trading firm which runs others people's money is
              probably less "reputable" in an important sense than the
              trading firm in which partners have their own personal
              fortunes riding....or at least I know which one I'd trust!
             - (But how to guarantee one isn't being fooled, by a spoof,
                a sham? Hard to say. Perhaps the "encrypted open books"
                protocol Eric Hughes is working on will be of use here.)
 

Next Page: 15.4 Reputations, Institutions
Previous Page: 15.2 SUMMARY: Reputations and Credentials

By Tim May, see README

HTML by Jonathan Rochkind