Platform certification trumps reputation and real world... Doh!

Not good…

Click through for slide image.

Not sure I understand your point here, @happybeing.

Did you see the slide? That sums it up well I think.

Yes, and I just took a much closer look. I guess I’m missing a bit of context and a clear definition of what “platform certification” encompasses in this usage. (Unless your title includes a “Doh!” as in Homer Simpson by mistake, rather than a “Duh!” as in valley girl–thus the my uncertainty as to what you’re pointing out.)

I definitely get that Safespace will need to develop some trusted “certifiers” that people tend to trust regarding sites and apps, etc.

Or am I still adrift?

Also, it is a bit hard to make out details of what’s on the image, so maybe there’s something about it I’m missing.


I wasn’t clear sorry. Definitely Homer!

I’m discouraged that people prefer centralised certification, than something based on reality and say crowdsourced reputation.

Certification can be forged, bought and sold, pumped and dumped etc. It’s banks. It’s establishment paedophiles. It’s corrupt government. All based on “trust us” because of this or that label, rather than an objective mathematical process, such as the decentralised constantly monitored reputation of nodes in SAFE.

I’d like to see us build on the principles of decentralised systems to create reputation systems for other purposes, such as sources of information (think news, Wikipedia, published research etc), trading platforms, and so on.

But if people actually trust certification more, and the slide suggests, a lot more, well doh! Or, in the words of a famous fictional Scot (from UK TV), “Weral doooomed”. :wink:


Thanks. I generally agree.

But things such a certification are not an inherently bad thing, only when they stem from undue influence.

You, yourself, (I’m pretty sure) on another thread made the point that Wikileaks vetting of data leaks was what made the leaking valuable, as opposed to unevaluated, unverified data dumps. That’s a form of certification.

People confuse the concept of “authority” as in trusted expert, with “authority” as in governments, parents, gods, etc., that threaten force, shame or eternal damnation as the source of their stature.

The SAFE network has a huge need for establishment (by experience and reputation) of the former, while the latter will be at risk in the enviromment, more than even with the current internet (which is eroding force-and-lies-based authority like a gully-washer as it is).

I think this is one function that SAFE Pods will naturally find on their plate to some degree, at least to the point of safety and security of apps, platforms, etc. Other types will naturally spring up and prove out or be discredited.

Anyway, your point is well taken, but it’s a new age and people will have no choice but to adapt, I think, however uncomfortable it might seem. I’m not discouraged.

Rather than fight the authorities that are based on force, fraud and superstition, we just need to become the authorities, based on knowledge, wisdom and proven trustworthiness.

Well, that’s my mouthful.

My view is that we use “certification” where necessary, but better methods whenever possible. Yes I still have a bank account, but one day hopefully I won’t need to.

I don’t see Wikileaks is certification really. Banks are certified ok by a regulator, Wikileaks is trusted based purely on its track record. Nothing it has published has turned out to be fake AFAIK. That’s no guarantee, but I can’t see Assange being persuaded to compromise for money or freedom - just look at what he’s endured. So for now, yes I trust Wikileaks, never 100%, but more than anyone who hasn’t got cast iron evidence against the authenticity of their output.

If Wikileaks started a franchise selling certification to commercial news organisations I wouldn’t trust those certificates at all.

I agree.

I think the scene is that we’re encountering so much that we don’t really have the knowledge or resources (including time) to verify ourselves, so we really do have to lean on others for comfort in what to use, etc.

Certification is actually just an extension of reputation. It’s the corrupt system and incentives that are in place that makes it a problem. The SAFE network should help change the scene, I think.