On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 16 May 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
>> On Tue, 2017-05-16 at 09:14 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> > That said, if an officer figures out a way for some transactions to be 
>> > truly
>> > automated (e.g. enter a transaction on a website and it gets logged and 
>> > sent
>> > to the PF), I'm all for that.
>>
>> I've long thought that if an action has a sufficiently well-defined
>> format, we should define a machine-readable format for it and have that
>> action taken by posting that machine-readable string to a PF, rather
>> than by announcement; this is mostly to make it unambiguous whether or
>> not there's an attempt to take the action. That way, you could use a
>> computer program to handle office reports and the like.
>
> Not that I want to add an Office, but this could be done through a maintained
> specification:  "The Automator maintains a document that contains a list of
> synonyms for actions; thse can be changed by (whatever method)".  Any
> part of a public message enclosed in &%&%&% is taken to apply that 
> translation.
>
> Example entry on a synonym list:
>     A statement reading "TRANSFER,Currency,name1,name2,N"
>     is a synonym for "I transfer N units of Currency from name1 to name2".
>
> An issue I see is things like fluidity of translation; it would require that 
> we
> be VERY strict on things like nicknames.  If someone entered something like 
> that
> but left the period off my nickname (G instead of G.), it would be clear and
> transparent to any human but would break a machine.  I don't think we'd want
> to be that strict, so the expectation would be that a machine could scan and
> find these transactions, but the human would always have to monitor and 
> confirm/
> edit each entry.

I'm a tad worried that this idea is getting close to an entirely
automated system. Anything we come up with has to be opt in only, with
no penalty for not joining. It can't even become a standard
expectation, otherwise we may go the way of B Nomic, or turn into
something else like Blog Nomic. I want our nomic to be run by people,
not computers. It keeps things interesting, and maintains the original
spirit of the game.

-Aris

Reply via email to