W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-webid@w3.org > May 2011

Re: webid trust model, one or multiple?

From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 13:44:21 +0200
Message-ID: <BANLkTikybVDJa3r920t0LBz0_h+WyyU2kQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: peter williams <home_pw@msn.com>
Cc: WebID Incubator Group WG <public-xg-webid@w3.org>
On 1 May 2011 20:37, peter williams <home_pw@msn.com> wrote:
> Is there one webid trust model, or are there to be multiple – because the IX
> about standardizing “a framework” for trust overlays? If it’s a framework, I
> see value in using logical description “enabling” trust metrics,
> generically. These can drive link chain discovery, as usual. It’s criteria
> based search.
>
>
>
> Im trying to decide where to spend my time in the next three months. There
> is no point me being involved in something I don’t believe will ever work
> (standardize a single trust metric). I might as well get out the way, if
> this is the group’s mission.
>
>
>
> If it helps motivate the decision, a realworld user story of handling
> macro-trust issues – at national scale - may be applicable.
>
>
>
> There is just no way I can impose a trust metric on my very local,
> de-centralized customer base – as they network using the social web. They
> will quickly slap me down for even trying, let alone agree with any given
> proposal. They SEEK local variance in trust etc. It’s what distinguishes
> their value, in the subtle “business social networking” scene found in
> selling real-estate to migratory populations, or as folks change lifestyle
> with age, income brackets, etc.
>
>
>
> The that scene, one sells trust in “gated communities” to one person, and
> one sells “iron bars on the windows” to another. Some communities measure
> trust in the absence of broken cars in the street, or absence of side-walks
> in country streets; and the realtor will project that value system. Trust,
> safety, confidence, and assurance are all variant terms, that get bandied
> around.
>
>
>
> Others communities have more divisive trust measures, often obliquely stated
> or enforced. Somehow the independent realtor as trusted agent has to mediate
> even these issues (which obviously requires  ALOT of social finesse).

I think this paper is an excellent model

http://www.cdm.lcs.mit.edu/ftp/lmui/computational%20models%20of%20trust%20and%20reputation.pdf

It basically says there's an element of trust that is subjective and
an element that is observed

Trust is per individual and per group

Observed trust can be direct through interaction or observed, or
indirect through reputation of a individual or group, either prior or
propagated

It's a relatively complex model, but then trust is a hard thing to
model and can get very complex.

One reason I'm excited about WebID is that it's possible (longer term)
to model complex concepts such as trust as data and ontologies develop
Received on Monday, 2 May 2011 11:44:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 2 May 2011 11:44:49 GMT