<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 9:24 AM, flawer <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:flawer@shareful.be" target="_blank">flawer@shareful.be</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im"><br>
> the visualization of past transactions as a form of reputation ,<br>
> or of currently described contexts and suggestions, can speak for<br>
> itself :)<br>
><br>
> I guess, very much like on e-bay or couchsurfing<br>
<br>
</div>i tend to dislike these models.. people forced me to comment in cs and<br>
i am browsing too much of a overhappied load, but i admit that it works<br>
for the majority. �i prefer the 'no news are good news', archive bad<br>
reputation only, and then having a little of bad reputation could be a<br>
wished reputation �(it is better some visible reputation than no visible<br>
reputation, maybe :).<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>It was only to make a parallel... with concepts / approaches to reputation online.</div><div><br></div><div>the way I imagine it, there would be no need to comment, or add stars, or whatever...</div>
<div><br></div><div>Transactions would happen, and based on the privacy levels people choose, they are�publicly�available or not...</div><div><br></div><div>hence people can understand interdependencies and choose to interact based on past, present, and future actions or suggestions... �</div>
<div><br></div><div>The past, present and future are defined in this introduction :</div><div><br></div><div><a href="http://www.netention.org/intro/">http://www.netention.org/intro/</a></div><div><br></div><div><a href="https://docs.google.com/file/d/0ByfmjEDwh_feV1hsX1o1OVFXTlE/preview" style="margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;font-size:14px;vertical-align:baseline;outline:none;color:rgb(15,54,71);font-family:'Open Sans',Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;line-height:24px;background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0.85098)">(Watch in full-screen)</a></div>
<div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im"><br>
<br>
> � i guess this depends on the<br>
> �owner of the ontology, the relations he allowed that concept to be<br>
</div>> �transferable with.[...]<br>
<div class="im">> yes, ideally ontologies would be free to use... �<br>
<br>
</div>but not that much free to relate to other ontologies (concept creator<br>
moderate its semantics, altough it could be crowdsourcedly inputed or<br>
reviewed too).. or it's pure folksonomy.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>as I see it, combination of the two... ontologies and folksonomies...�</div><div>+ people can use the tool to define their own meaning / ontologies</div>
<div><br></div><div>when combined with tags, I imagine that bridges can be made, through emergence and patterns evolving out of it, between a potential diversity of ontologies used ?</div><div>�</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im"><br>
> one would need to convene to use the same ontologies...<br>
> though perhaps som<br>
><br>
</div>> meaning giving ?<br>
<br>
through the defining, and the adding of (reviewable, crwodsourced)<br>
hints for developing for the concept (i.e. coward) and +1s for those..<br>
is how i initially thought this karmic wealth (coward, etc points) to be<br>
generated. It can be used for relating material resources transactions<br>
<div class="im"><br>
>> Or natural language processing... but perhaps that becomes more<br>
>> complex, and I do no<br>
<br>
</div>uhm... let's start by trying to find universalizable meaningful sets of<br>
things:<br>
<br>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colour" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colour</a><br>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromatic" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromatic</a><br>
human values maybe....<br>
<br>
or play with just verbs or just nouns for defining other things..<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>or we can start simply with units such as apples and pears ( such as within a collaborative consumption and/or shareable approach )</div>
<div><br></div><div>and also express the conditions related to such transactions,</div><div><br></div><div>and then add / experiment with any other algorithms later ?</div><div>�</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
or go back to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onomatopeia" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onomatopeia</a> (although it has<br>
some dialects by longitude and latitude :)<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>:)</div><div>�</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
P2P Foundation - Mailing list<br>
<a href="http://www.p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://www.p2pfoundation.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation" target="_blank">https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>