You are viewing a single comment's thread:

RE: Is Hive Watcher's doing a good job?

This is a matter I have struggled with for a long time. Before @ned did us dirty he gave several talks on how to use oracles and 1a1v to eliminate bots, which greatly encouraged me at the time. There are several identity mechanisms that have been proposed claiming to be able to prove an account is run by a single human being, to identify that single human such that they cannot have multiple accounts, and as far as 1a1v on Hive, I am not willing to limit such democratic voting by any other metric than that.

I particularly find plutocracy vexing, despite knowing that merely having money doesn't establish one is a vile thief (I only know this because I have good friends that are less poor than me). There are too many examples of highly staked persons with execrable moral and ethical standards, insert your favorite villains here. However, in fact folks with substantial stake have a lot of capability to impact matters, and obvious reasons to be extremely dedicated to ensuring things aren't off the chain - or, conversely, to skew things in their favor. It seems then that folks with substantial stake have more basis for influencing matters than me, who has little stake to risk.

This is true even in non-monetary economies, such as the Potlatch economies of the PNW natives in which a chief is availed the authority to parcel out resources to the tribe. I can but console myself that I cannot be expected to answer your question definitively, but that doesn't resolve the matter either.

0.00014649 BEE
1 comments
(edited)

There are several identity mechanisms that have been proposed claiming to be able to prove an account is run by a single human being, to identify that single human such that they cannot have multiple accounts, and as far as 1a1v on Hive, I am not willing to limit such democratic voting by any other metric than that.

I was addressing exactly this issue years ago with one of the witnesses, and was told that such identifying function was either not doable or could be tricked, as well. I am not sure any more what exactly was said but the overall message was "no".

0.00000181 BEE