Re: Single model or framework for reputation/trust

der Mouse wrote:
> 
> >> Reputation (or past behavior) is a strong indicator of future
> >> behavior.  It shouldn't be ignored.
> > Of course not.  But take a looks at banks: they never lend money
> > based on reputation as a strong indicator.
> 
> Really?  What do you think a credit report is?

The single most important item of a credit report is how much
you have in assets that the bank can get in case of a default,
including job income. Banks are notorious for lending to potentially
weak payers just because they have good assets to seize. The 
second most important item is how much of your credit lines are 
you using. Having a good credit reputation will not help you if 
you are above 80%, for example. Reputation is secondary to 
liability, which is secondary to assets. 

In the cyber-world things get more complicated. There are no 
assets to seize, no liability to measure. Reputation alone will 
not correspond to the models we use in the real-world and will
not have the recourse mechanisms we need. Think of that farmer and
chicken example by the noted logician Russel: the reputation 
model fails for the chicken. The trust model would give the
chicken the right information, though: you can't trust the farmer.

Cheers,
Ed Gerck