Mckiev

Karma: 32

Whistleblowing Twitter Bot

Mckiev26 Dec 2024 4:09 UTC

19 points

3 comments2 min readLW link

Mckiev 1 Dec 2024 4:46 UTC
9 points
−4
on: (The) Lightcone is nothing without its people: LW + Lighthaven’s big fundraiser
Regarding donor recognition, I think online recognition makes a lot of sense, e.g. colored nickname on the forum, or a badge of some sorts (like the one GWWC encourages).
Thank you for clearly laying out the arguments for donating to the Lightcone. I will!

Mckiev 17 Aug 2023 11:03 UTC
1 point
0
on: Mckiev’s Shortform
Zero Knowledge Proofs allow proving that you are a part of a certain group without revealing who exactly. This can allow credible whistleblowing. For example, if some ML company issues a list of it’s employees linked to ethereum wallets (or any other cryptographic key pair of choice), then any of it’s employees would have an option to whistleblow on unsafe practices, while being 100% sure it’s impossible to know who made this post.
This seem awesome to me and I wonder if anyone else shares my fascination and think this could be useful

Mckiev’s Shortform

Mckiev17 Aug 2023 11:03 UTC

1 point

1 comment1 min readLW link

Mckiev 9 Jul 2023 22:25 UTC
3 points
0
on: Quick proposal: Decision market regrantor using manifund (please improve)
One idea for the metric would be to elicit pairwise comparison between projects continuously, and derive ELO rating from it. The biggest advantage of this system is that it requires much less time to compare two projects rather then give some form of rating to it like: X reduction of p(Doom)

Mckiev 13 Feb 2023 12:40 UTC
1 point
0
in reply to: plex’s comment on: EigenKarma: trust at scale
Would it be possible to make an opt-in EigenKarma layer on top of twitter (but independent from it)? I can imagine parsing say 100k most popular twitter accounts plus all of personal tweets and likes of people who opted in to the EigenKarma layer, and then building a customised twitter feed for them

Mckiev 9 Feb 2023 17:56 UTC
6 points
0
on: EigenKarma: trust at scale
What’s great about the current setup is it doesn’t produce any additional friction for users since it’s built on top of an existing post-voting system. However, one downside is that number of my given upvotes doesn’t perfectly tracks the trust I assign to the user. E.g. as pointed out by previous commenters, prolific posters could post more often and collect more likes than they intuitively “deserve.” This particular issue can be mitigated by capping the effective number of upvotes to a given user by certain defined number.
The most popular Russian speaking poker forum uses a karma system, where everyone can explicitly assign karma to each other in a range [-100:100]. It served as an analog of google map reviews for users, and I personally found it super useful, since it helped distinguish trustworthy people and helped establishing financial relations (like lending or staking each other). I should say it worked pretty well!
I think displaying the eigenvector of this karma matrix, would be even more useful. EigenKarma would also allow making anonymous ratings while being resistant to botnets.

Mckiev 10 May 2022 8:34 UTC
1 point
in reply to: Mckiev’s comment on: ACX/EA Lisbon May 2022 Meetup
Sorry, I’m not coming, decided to go to EAGx Prague

Mckiev 11 Apr 2022 23:34 UTC
1 point
on: ACX/EA Lisbon May 2022 Meetup
I’d love to come for a chat!