Slashdot Mirror

Now, here's something to think about. The number one security issue is not attacks, trolls and grits lovers. The number one security issue are human mistakes. Most of our security policy revolves around soft security, as it is better to leave community concerns to the community and not to a powerful few. And over time we will only improve the community with simple systems like KeptPages.

Unfortunately, an online community is about communication. It's easier to communicate with 100 people than the 200 000. In fact, you compsci folk already understand the connected graph squaring problem. Sucks, eh?

But, I think, I think that the way out is to use the graph density against itself. If you give people the freedom to manage the system, I think a good community structure will emerge. Moderation systems imposed by the site seem disjunctive, not driving the members to solve problems collectively. This is bad. The community must build itself.

Anyway, as always this is a technology solution vs. community solution dilemma. And I'll bet that you're wrong, Signal11. I'll bet that if you let the whole community help itself, there are a lot more people interested in making it work than don't.

Now, here's something to think about. The number one security issue is not attacks, trolls and grits lovers. The number one security issue are human mistakes. Most of our security policy revolves around soft security, as it is better to leave community concerns to the community and not to a powerful few. And over time we will only improve the community with simple systems like KeptPages.

Unfortunately, an online community is about communication. It's easier to communicate with 100 people than the 200 000. In fact, you compsci folk already understand the connected graph squaring problem. Sucks, eh?

But, I think, I think that the way out is to use the graph density against itself. If you give people the freedom to manage the system, I think a good community structure will emerge. Moderation systems imposed by the site seem disjunctive, not driving the members to solve problems collectively. This is bad. The community must build itself.

Anyway, as always this is a technology solution vs. community solution dilemma. And I'll bet that you're wrong, Signal11. I'll bet that if you let the whole community help itself, there are a lot more people interested in making it work than don't.

Now, here's something to think about. The number one security issue is not attacks, trolls and grits lovers. The number one security issue are human mistakes. Most of our security policy revolves around soft security, as it is better to leave community concerns to the community and not to a powerful few. And over time we will only improve the community with simple systems like KeptPages.

Unfortunately, an online community is about communication. It's easier to communicate with 100 people than the 200 000. In fact, you compsci folk already understand the connected graph squaring problem. Sucks, eh?

But, I think, I think that the way out is to use the graph density against itself. If you give people the freedom to manage the system, I think a good community structure will emerge. Moderation systems imposed by the site seem disjunctive, not driving the members to solve problems collectively. This is bad. The community must build itself.

Anyway, as always this is a technology solution vs. community solution dilemma. And I'll bet that you're wrong, Signal11. I'll bet that if you let the whole community help itself, there are a lot more people interested in making it work than don't.

Now, here's something to think about. The number one security issue is not attacks, trolls and grits lovers. The number one security issue are human mistakes. Most of our security policy revolves around soft security, as it is better to leave community concerns to the community and not to a powerful few. And over time we will only improve the community with simple systems like KeptPages.

Unfortunately, an online community is about communication. It's easier to communicate with 100 people than the 200 000. In fact, you compsci folk already understand the connected graph squaring problem. Sucks, eh?

But, I think, I think that the way out is to use the graph density against itself. If you give people the freedom to manage the system, I think a good community structure will emerge. Moderation systems imposed by the site seem disjunctive, not driving the members to solve problems collectively. This is bad. The community must build itself.

Anyway, as always this is a technology solution vs. community solution dilemma. And I'll bet that you're wrong, Signal11. I'll bet that if you let the whole community help itself, there are a lot more people interested in making it work than don't.

Now, here's something to think about. The number one security issue is not attacks, trolls and grits lovers. The number one security issue are human mistakes. Most of our security policy revolves around soft security, as it is better to leave community concerns to the community and not to a powerful few. And over time we will only improve the community with simple systems like KeptPages.

Unfortunately, an online community is about communication. It's easier to communicate with 100 people than the 200 000. In fact, you compsci folk already understand the connected graph squaring problem. Sucks, eh?

But, I think, I think that the way out is to use the graph density against itself. If you give people the freedom to manage the system, I think a good community structure will emerge. Moderation systems imposed by the site seem disjunctive, not driving the members to solve problems collectively. This is bad. The community must build itself.

Anyway, as always this is a technology solution vs. community solution dilemma. And I'll bet that you're wrong, Signal11. I'll bet that if you let the whole community help itself, there are a lot more people interested in making it work than don't.

Now, here's something to think about. The number one security issue is not attacks, trolls and grits lovers. The number one security issue are human mistakes. Most of our security policy revolves around soft security, as it is better to leave community concerns to the community and not to a powerful few. And over time we will only improve the community with simple systems like KeptPages.

Unfortunately, an online community is about communication. It's easier to communicate with 100 people than the 200 000. In fact, you compsci folk already understand the connected graph squaring problem. Sucks, eh?

But, I think, I think that the way out is to use the graph density against itself. If you give people the freedom to manage the system, I think a good community structure will emerge. Moderation systems imposed by the site seem disjunctive, not driving the members to solve problems collectively. This is bad. The community must build itself.

Anyway, as always this is a technology solution vs. community solution dilemma. And I'll bet that you're wrong, Signal11. I'll bet that if you let the whole community help itself, there are a lot more people interested in making it work than don't.

Now, here's something to think about. The number one security issue is not attacks, trolls and grits lovers. The number one security issue are human mistakes. Most of our security policy revolves around soft security, as it is better to leave community concerns to the community and not to a powerful few. And over time we will only improve the community with simple systems like KeptPages.

Unfortunately, an online community is about communication. It's easier to communicate with 100 people than the 200 000. In fact, you compsci folk already understand the connected graph squaring problem. Sucks, eh?

But, I think, I think that the way out is to use the graph density against itself. If you give people the freedom to manage the system, I think a good community structure will emerge. Moderation systems imposed by the site seem disjunctive, not driving the members to solve problems collectively. This is bad. The community must build itself.

Anyway, as always this is a technology solution vs. community solution dilemma. And I'll bet that you're wrong, Signal11. I'll bet that if you let the whole community help itself, there are a lot more people interested in making it work than don't.

Now, here's something to think about. The number one security issue is not attacks, trolls and grits lovers. The number one security issue are human mistakes. Most of our security policy revolves around soft security, as it is better to leave community concerns to the community and not to a powerful few. And over time we will only improve the community with simple systems like KeptPages.

Unfortunately, an online community is about communication. It's easier to communicate with 100 people than the 200 000. In fact, you compsci folk already understand the connected graph squaring problem. Sucks, eh?

But, I think, I think that the way out is to use the graph density against itself. If you give people the freedom to manage the system, I think a good community structure will emerge. Moderation systems imposed by the site seem disjunctive, not driving the members to solve problems collectively. This is bad. The community must build itself.

Anyway, as always this is a technology solution vs. community solution dilemma. And I'll bet that you're wrong, Signal11. I'll bet that if you let the whole community help itself, there are a lot more people interested in making it work than don't.

Accessibility is tough, but Lynx friendliness takes you a long way there in a simple, straightforward manner.

It also has the advantage of being more accessible (for people and cellphones), easier to lint and easier to write.

I have written more--plus some tips--on MeatballWiki.

As a computer scientist, I'm sure you're aware that the government doesn't need to make public every piece of information it knows about you in order to authenticate you. Indeed, all they have to do is map an instance in their identity database to one "instance" of a person (er, you).

Even then, with a shadow identity, it would be trivial for you to choose what authenticated information to send. You just ask the government database to authenticate you to the foreign site and send with the ticket some information about you. Naturally, it will be encrypted--for whatever protection that gives you.

However, perhaps this problem could be alleviated with a government backed authentication scheme. This may sound like sci fi (and it is), but it's essentially a digital analogy of your driver's license or social insurance number, but for each and every citizen. It has to be government backed in order to be trustable and to ensure each person has an digital identity. Plus, the government already tracks information like who is the child of whom.

Then, whenever a site needed to verify that a person is either over the age of 13 or that his or her parent consented, the end user can authenticate him or herself.

A shadow identity may also be an interesting twist on this.

However, perhaps this problem could be alleviated with a government backed authentication scheme. This may sound like sci fi (and it is), but it's essentially a digital analogy of your driver's license or social insurance number, but for each and every citizen. It has to be government backed in order to be trustable and to ensure each person has an digital identity. Plus, the government already tracks information like who is the child of whom.

Then, whenever a site needed to verify that a person is either over the age of 13 or that his or her parent consented, the end user can authenticate him or herself.

A shadow identity may also be an interesting twist on this.

I've written some rough hints on how to license music for your own website. I haven't tried it yet, but it should point you in the right direction.