On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 10:00:22PM -0500, thelema wrote: > On Sun, 03 Jun 2001, Ian Clarke wrote: > > > On Sun, Jun 03, 2001 at 05:03:29PM -0400, Benjamin Coates wrote: > > > >From ian at hawk.freenetproject.org (Ian Clarke) > > > >> This system will certainly require > > > >> some kind of web of trust rankings system to provide useful search > > > >> results. > > > >Not nescessarily, both Gnutella and Napster get along without them. > > > I was under the impression that spam was a rather serious problem on > > > gnutella, > > > despite it being a non-anonymous protocol where spammers can be > > > filtered/retailiated against, and have to invest a fair amount of > > > bandwidth. > > > > Not in my experience, however through implementation of my "unrequest" > > idea for searches could combat that problem by permitting collaborative > > filtering on search reply quality. > > > > Ian. > > The problem I have with unrequests is a question of when to use them. > Say I make a request and I get back some good answers and some bad > answers. Should I unrequest to make sure the bad don't propogate at the > expense of keeping the good results from propogating as well? What if > there's only one bad answer? "one bad apple..." If people were trying > to spam the searching, I could reasonably expect bad responses in all > but the most specific, obscure searches. Then the only way to stop bad > metadata would stop good metadata as well.
It sounds like the "unrequest" is just a vaguely defined first step towards a web of trust based ranking/filtering system. Why not just bite the bullet.. it's already been pointed out that this system would have application far beyond finding Freenet keys anyway. -- # tavin cole # # "Technology is a way of organizing the universe so that # man doesn't have to experience it." # # - Max Frisch _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
