Some weeks ago, I received an email from Stefano Mizzaro asking my opinion about his paper Quality Control in Scholarly Publishing: A New Proposal (pdf). In the meantime he came to Trento and we discussed face to face but I want to share here some quick comments I wrote on my wiki about the paper. I liked it, it is very clearly presented, it addresses a real problem and a more and more important one. The math is very clear, sound and makes sense. [Yes he found me because of the blog and not because of my papers and this keeps telling me something]. Read the comments to the paper.
Continue reading
Tag Archives: Trust and Reputation
Eclipse trust framework
I found on SocialPhysics Wiki a very interesting proposal: Eclipse Trust Framework (ETF).
The goal of the ETF Project is to provide an open source framework to support the creation of applications on the Eclipse platform that manage a person’s online context (profile) and identity from the person’s or their agent’s perspective. (Eclipse is one of the most used tool for writing Java code, it is open source and funded mainly by IBM).
Continue reading
My first couchsurfing host
During past week I hosted in my house a russian girl I didn’t know before. Why? She asked hospitality through CouchSurfing. I subscribed few months ago to CouchSurfing when I was looking for free hosting in Cyprus. In the meantime I also arranged to find hospitality in Paris. And of course I was very happy to host her (Anna is her name and here is her couchsurfing profile). Feel free to contact me if you pass near Trento, Italy (here is my CouchSurfing profile and it should be easy to find my email address around).
And as an example of how much information you leave behind yourself surfing the web, here you can see a map of places Anna has logged in from.
One evening she asked me to use Internet and I saw she was typing livejournal.com, and yes, she has a blog, though it is in Russian and I cannot understand it.
[CouchSurfing can be interesting also from a research point of view, see much below in the following text]
Continue reading
What is “Tag Spam”? Or better, Tag Spam exists?
Leigh asks So any signs that “tag spam” has started yet? (found because he uses “trust metrics” a keyword to which I’m subscribed in a number of service). Here I ask the same question. It seems very unlikely that web spammers (they called themselves “search engine optimizer”) cannot see in seconds the value of getting the wanted URL (of the to-be-busted book, movie, …) or photo (of to-be-busted movie, product, …) under my eyes. Afterwards, we are in the attention economy, aren’t we? Getting attention of some humans (or aggregators and, as a consequence, of many humans) on your item is the first step towards you getting reputation (and possibly money). [by the way, the same is true for this blog post].
However, if you look it from a biodiversity point of view, spam is good because forces you to evolve, to differentiate, to invent new solutions.
So, any signs of “tag spam”? If you find something, write it on wikipedia pages Spam or Spamdexing (there is nothing at the moment about this) or ask Britannica to insert it in the next version (hope you get the difference…).
But first, how to define “tag spam”? A bot is always a spammer? If you genuinely think that microsoft.com could be tagged as crap, then this is not spam? But if you tag something just in order to capture attention of other people, then this is spam? If I tag on del.icio.us this post as “folksonomy“, is this spam? If I tag my papers on CiteULike as “Cool” is this tag spam?
Rebecca pointed out that someone tagged on flickr an antisemite protest sign as “MLK” (Martin Luther King). Is this tag spam? She says “community standards” do not, indeed, can not defend against abuse of the system–only design can do that. Off the top of my head, there are several simple things Technorati could do to prevent this sort of thing from happening in the future:
And in fact, Rebecca is already starting to provide anti-spam techniques:
* Technorati could design their system not to publish any photo Flickr users have tagged “Might be offensive”.
* Technorati could create their own tagging system, and not publish any photo Technorati users tagged “Might be offensive”.
* Technorati could provide an email address so that users could alert staff if a photo was offensive or inappropriate, and then the staff could go in and tag the inappropriate photo so that it would not appear on Technorati’s site–or hand-select an appropriate one.
And in fact David Weinberger’s (implicitly) also suggesting to use a trust metric when he says
“Tags work because they’re so simple and because they are so connected to the human semantic context, but having billions of tags won’t work because they’re so simple and connected to the human semantic context. Will we be able to triangulate tags with other data – especially social data – so that we can get more out of them than we put in? It doesn’t seem impossible to me – simply knowing who created a tag lets you get more out of the tag than the person put in – but it’s not up to me to invent the stuff.”
Let me make a strong point here: “Tag Spam does not exist. What does exist are different ways of viewing stuff in the world (and I hope there will always be!). What does exist are also incentives to get attention of other people”. How can we take the most out of decentralized tagging? I think that using trust metrics we can choose to consider only tags provided by sources we deem trustworthy and exclude all the rest. There is the risk of DailyMe here: that is you will see only world classifications of people you already agree with and you will never ever get exposed to different way of thinking. I was speculating about it some time ago and leave this topic for next time.
Ok, I started with “trust metrics” and, having closed the circle, here I stop.
UPDATE: you can never stop. While I was writing 2 posts on Corante appeared that are very relevant.
In “issues of culture in ethnoclassification/folksonomy” danah argues that tagging is culture dependent. The great example about the book “Women, Fire and Dangerous Things” tells us that if someone (of a the culture described in the book) tags a picture of a woman under “danger”, this is not at all tag spam but simply a different point of view on world, a different culture (not a better or worst one).
And in Folksonomy is better for cultural values Clay replies that the same problems applies to ontologies but exacerbated and that “The aggregate good of tags is not that they create consensus or accuracy; they observably don�t, and this is very observability is much of their value.” He also reports that “But the relativity can also be interesting when crossed-tabbed with the identity of the tagger; I don�t want �toread� or �funny� generally, but I do want Liz�s �toread� tags, and Matt Webb�s �funny� links.” In my Jargon, he is here expressing a trust statement (I trust as 1/1 Liz in the context of “toberead” tag). What I propose is to use this information to automatically discover the identities trusted by Liz in the context of “toberead” context and automatically suggest them to Clay. The balance between “i keep a small and direct and controllable social network of people i really know” or” i use also automated tools that can infer, based on the global social network, how much i could trust unknown users” should be an user option in my opinion. The first is more controllable, the second is more prone to serendipity, exposure to something new and new persons but also less controllable and under risk of social attacks.
Since I’m here, there are other interesting posts I found later on navigating some of the links. They are here below:
Cheap Eats at the Semantic Web Caf�
Folksonomy Notes: Considering the Downsides, Behavioral Trends, and Adaptation
The Politically Correct Police (PCP) are making lots of noise about how “This isn’t right and SOMETHING SHOULD BE DONE”.
Technorati Tags Set for Abuse who is tagged as “Nude Celebrities” just to prouve the concept
Shapes of knowledge, word for poodles
Making use of tags and tagsonomies
Controlled Vocabularies and Folksonomies: Why Change is Good.
Social consequences of social tagging
and i guess you will find all of them on del.icio.us’s “folksonomy” tag
Trust in Games
Over at Terranova, nathan is thinking about trust in games. One of the reasoning lines goes along “more powerful characters can be less trusting of the world around them than the weaker”. Interesting, it seems that the weak is obliged to risk by trusting other unknown users while the strong can rely on herself, at least in part.
Anyway, I think virtual worlds are definetely a good playground for studying how social relationships evolve over time. Do you know of any MMORPG that is making available (possibly anonimized) data about characters’ interactions? Or do you know of a powerful and open-source framework for quickly creating an appealing online environment in which it would be possible to study those dynamics?
Controversial books: patenting the obvious?
Interesting NYTimes’s article (if you don’t want to register, use BugMeNot where you can find shared login and password pairs). Mikhail Gronas discovers that “reviewers gave more five-star reviews than two-star reviews, creating an upward sloping curve”. (…) “But the most telling variable is the one star rating. Professor Gronas found that books high on what he called the “controversiality index” are given almost as many one-star as five-star ratings, creating a horseshoe-shaped curve. As it turns out, these books also tend to have high sales.”
I’ve found these patterns analyzing Epinions.com ratings and trust statements (chech the graphs’ on the paper (pdf)) but actually I don’t think they are that surprising: they seem pretty obvious and I just reported them passing by.
What is really depressing is that Dartmouth is now in the process of patenting software that will be used to determine the “controversiality index”.
I’m happy that in Europe we are still fighting against a so-stupid-policy of being able to patent everything, no matter how trivial it is. In this case the controversiality level of a book is something like “if a book received as much 5 ratings as 1 and if the 5 and 1 ratings together are the vast majority of ratings and if the number of received ratings is over a threshold (probably depending on release time), then the book is controversial” (putting it in formula that produces a controversiality value would require 10 minutes at most).
By the way, I’m currently working on the concept of controversiality of users and hopefully a paper is on the way. Controversial users are users who are trusted by many and distrusted by many. (Bush is a good example, but this can happen to highly visible persons in general). The idea is that Local Trust Metrics make sense expecially for highly controversial users (for example, users who are trusted by more than 200 users and DIStrusted by more than 200 users in the community). For those users, it does not make sense to predict a trust value of 0.5 saying that you should trust this user as 0.5 but, instead, to predict you should trust this controversial user as 1 if, for example, all your friends trust her and 0 if all your friends distrust her.
School and Workshop on Structure and Function of Complex Networks
School and Workshop on Structure and Function of Complex Networks. 16 – 28 May 2005 at Abdus Salam ICTP – Trieste – Italy.
Even if the dealine for the application is already passed, it seems there are still some places. Check the poster (pdf): the invited speakers are just great! Note that “Although the main purpose of the Centre is to help research workers from developing countries, a limited number of students and post-doctoral scientists from developed countries are also welcome to attend.” and “There is no registration fee to be paid” (via an email on SOCNET mailinglist of INSNA).
Continue reading
HTML tag <A> gets a new attribute: nofollow
I read on News.com that Google is promoting a new attribute for the html tag <A> for preventing comment spam.
Example: Visit my <a href=”http://www.example.com/” rel="nofollow">discount pharmaceuticals</a> site.
Google will not follow such a link (because of the nofollow attribute) and hence the linked site will not get Pagerank. This should give less incentives to blogspammers in automatically commenting your blog with spam messagges. I think it will not work but this is just a try for tacking spam and hence worthwhile.
What is more interesting is the “decentralized” evolution of (HTML) language. The new attribute is just a proposal from Google to extend a standard language but Google has a so high reputation that many people will follow this suggestion and this means Google has the power to change HTML language. Technorati did something similar proposing rel="tag"
just few days ago. Technorati proposed also VoteLink with rel="vote-for"
and rel="vote-against"
and XFN with rel="friend met"
and others relationships-related tags.
Actually everyone can propose a change in HTML language (or whatever language/protocol) but it is of course difficult to have it accepted by a significant number of players/content creators.
It will also be interesting to see if this language evolution will produce different linking behaviours.
Reputation and Trust class
I would love to attend the Reputation and Trust class of Understanding Online Interaction course by david wiley! It seems he always writes down a short funny story for introducing the weekly topic (and the assignment…). I might borrow the idea if I’ll ever teach a class. Unluckly, from Italy, Utah is a bit too far away.
And since he releases the content of his blog under a Creative Commons Attribution – Share Alike license and i do the same for content of this blog, I happily and legally post here all his post, of course giving credit.
Reputation and Trust
B. Have you ever bought anything from Amazon.com?
A. Sure.
B. And you felt comfortable giving them your credit card information because…
A. [incredulously] Because they’re Amazon.com!
B. But what about before they were “Amazon.com”?
A. Are you going to talk about walking uphill both ways through deep snow?
B. No, no. That would take us in the wrong direction. [thinking] How about Ebay? Ever buy anything from Ebay?
A. Sure.
B. [with delight] A ha! Caught you in my little trap! You’ve actually never bought anything *from* Ebay. You’ve bought things from sellers who used Ebay as a front for their goods.
A. [unimpressed] Fair enough.
Continue reading
Using social software for good: car pooling
Paul Resnick is researching on “ride sharing services that dynamically match riders with rides”. Read the very interesting and clear SocioTechnical Support for Ride Sharing scenario document. The idea is to make car pooling easier using ICT. If your interests contain trust, recommender systems and making the earth a better place, you should definitely read the paper. Maybe I’ll try to put up a project and submit to the local government, there was a car pooling project in Trento but it seems dead. Contact me if you are interested! [My impression is that often research does not produce useful and real benefit for society, this is a case in which we can put our brain activity for creating something useful and that can make a difference].
Continue reading