>Dude, you don't know what you're talking about Reputation was supposed to work on-chain with random nodes selection, none of that off chain 3rd party rep providers BS with a list of nodes to choose from. May as well call it oracles market place then not a decentralized oracles network.
There's some truth to this but it makes more sense with the approach now because I think they have an idea of the type of large, quality businesses that will be running nodes. You'll be able to pick your level of decentralization. Banks to banks won't want to trust some NEET in his mom's basement and that's what complete random node selection enables. No serious big financial player will go for that.
>you don't evne know the difference between consensus mechanism and reputation and you have the audacity to call someone a retard?
Not sure what you are getting at here. How consensus is agreed upon is one thing. Reputation is another thing. Consensus can be universally recognized, but reputation can be stretched in different directions. How could a node have just one relevant reputation score that serves both the financial market and law? Especially when that node can host several different APIs...
Noah Howard
Yeah I agree with you and this is why they are leaving reputation up to 3rd parties.
Robert Stewart
20k? a single token? im a link marine but that's preposterous.
>How could a node have just one relevant reputation score that serves both the financial market and law? Especially when that node can host several different APIs... and what do you think is reputation? it's a mix of uptime, answer correctness, average answer time an things like that, who cares what industry it is?
Someone here came up with this stupid idea of different reputation contracts for different industries and everyone's repeating it like a brainlet without even thinking about it for a second.
The only thing that would make sense in terms of different industries needs, is the consensus mechanism or answer aggregation mechanism whatever you want to call it, different parameters are important for different needs
they themselves still need to write the reputation contract (uptime, correctness, average reponse time, amount of link, whatever) on chain and create a listing service to bootstrap the network. People keep repeating this "hurr durrrr 3rd parties, mainnet next week" BS, but they are finishing service agreements now, then reputation, then the listing service, whether and how fast are other reputation providers gonna come out that's another story
>The only thing that would make sense in terms of different industries needs, is the consensus mechanism or answer aggregation mechanism whatever you want to call it, different parameters are important for different needs.
Dude. This is why different industries need separate reputation scores. You just answered it yourself.
>"hurr durrrr 3rd parties, mainnet next week" BS, but they are finishing service agreements now, then reputation, then the listing service, whether and how fast are other reputation providers gonna come out that's another story
I agree. I don't think we are really that close to mainnet yet. There's a lot to be done. We haven't heard a peep from these supposed 3rd party reputation providers anyway. There hasn't been ANYONE that has come out and said they are planning on working on that aspect of things.
Liam Smith
It doesn't matter what industry or purpose you use it for, you will always be working in strings, numbers, or booleans. You can adjust the rigor of the consensus, but the actual content of what's being processed doesn't matter. Context shouldn't matter.
Evan Martin
>Dude. This is why different industries need separate reputation scores. You just answered it yourself. that doesn't make any sense. I already told you what reputation will consist of, it's even in the whitepaper as far as I remember, uptime, corectness, link amount etc, how would that need to be any different based on industry? even in 1 industry some customers could value some things more than others and that's why they will probably be able to sort the nodes by different parameters but the reputation contract itself stays the same. Those parameters for reputation will be the same in every node listing service since they all pull that data from the on-chain reputation contract
