Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DIRT Protocol raises $3M to build a Wikipedia for structured data

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 95 posts

Re: DIRT Protocol raises $3M to build a Wikipedia for structured data

#41

Post by [deleted] »

yinyinwu wrote: post #28
mcny wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firstly, congratulations on launching! > For the DIRT protocol, if want to remove information, you also need to deposit tokens and put forth evidence to convince voters in the network to side with you. If you lose the vote, then you would also tokens. We put forth an economic for being malicious. Sorry if this is a stupid question but if I lose a vote, can I bring it up for a vote again? I think that should be ok, ri…

Thanks! Great question. 1. Repeat votes - If you lose the vote, you can vote again. DIRT works not only for correcting intentionally misleading data, but also for fixing out of data information. It's similar to a bug bounty for data. 2. Cycle of challenges - Each time misinformation re-surfaces, you would have to challenge and vote down the data. However, every time you are successful in your challenge, you earn toke…

[deleted]

Re: DIRT Protocol raises $3M to build a Wikipedia for structured data

#42

Post by yinyinwu »

ram_rar wrote: post #35

Firstly, Congratulations for launching DIRT. >If the data is incorrect, anyone can challenge the data and earn tokens for identifying these inaccurate facts. How do you moderate censorship or conflicting information ? if someone uploads my personal info, without my consent. How do I get to purge it ? From the current model, it seems like I ll have to pay money to "request" purging my own data.

Thanks! DIRT is a fundamentally different approach because it removes the middleman and there is no central moderator. Our goal is to move the trust from a central party to a system of rules that anyone can participate in.

I think verified identity could be a registry on DIRT. Adding reputation on top of voting is something we're exploring.

Re: DIRT Protocol raises $3M to build a Wikipedia for structured data

#43

Post by hobofan »

eindiran wrote: post #2

Can someone explain how exactly DIRT protocol will do moderation? From their site [1] it seems like they do some sort of moderating of crowd-sourced structured data. But this is where I am a bit confused: "DIRT maintains accuracy because every contributor needs to deposit tokens to write data. If the data is correct, it is freely shared. If the data is incorrect, anyone can challenge the data and earn tokens for iden…

We are building something very similar to this with Rlay[0], though we usually don't frame it with the Wikipedia/Wikidata story. One of the factors that incentivices contribution of data in the first place, is that if you deposit tokens for a propositon earlier, you will be rewarded higher than if you do that later. Thus participants try to be the first ones to submit a certain piece of information.

[0]: https://rlay.com/

Re: DIRT Protocol raises $3M to build a Wikipedia for structured data

#44

Post by progval »

darawk wrote: post #36
progval wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how would someone check for the prestige/track record of such a list?

The same way you know the prestige of say, the NY times. Just reputation, developed by consistently meeting certain standards.

The NYT works as a trusted third-party, because it curates a lot of information. That does not work for a narrow-focused piece of information like a jewelry list

Re: DIRT Protocol raises $3M to build a Wikipedia for structured data

#45

Post by yinyinwu »

TekMol wrote: post #39

My feeling is that this is either an illusion ("it will work out somehow") or a sham ("let's milk the crypto craze"). No answer to the question why selling votes should result in more accuracy. Buzzword Bingo. An overly broad approach. Lot's of social proof but thin on content. This reminds me of all those ICOs we see these days. Looking forward to read the whitepaper. But somehow I have the feeling it will either ne…

Before Wikipedia, the idea that an openly edited online journal would be better and more accurate alternative to Encyclopedia Brittanica would be surprising to most people.

There's two parts of the design that leads to more accuracy for DIRT:

1. Skin in the game - a token deposit to write encourages accuracy because you can lose the deposit if you are incorrect.

2. Encouraging moderation - moderators can earn tokens. If you vote and challenge correctly, you can earn tokens. This creates an economic reward for moderators that can protects the data accuracy in the long term.

We're posting the whitepaper and more importantly, launching the protocol with a first application in the coming months. Stay tuned!

Re: DIRT Protocol raises $3M to build a Wikipedia for structured data

#46

Post by progval »

dang wrote: post #38
progval wrote: post #18

So it's Wikidata but with "blockchain" stamped on it to raise more money?

"Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Sorry, I should have put more thought into how my comment would be received by others. Thank you for the reminder

Re: DIRT Protocol raises $3M to build a Wikipedia for structured data

#47

Post by yinyinwu »

sometimesijust wrote: post #26

Seems like a pretty great way to remove the middleman from populist infotainment consumption. Can't be worse than what we already have and by making it explicitly richest party wins it makes the process more transparent. It might not be the Truth but at least it is Honest.

Thanks for the comment!

Transparency would be the third benefit. With the blockchain, you can see the entire history of votes. Every transaction is recorded. Today, if a website accepts bribes for reviews, visitors to the site do not know that this happened. With DIRT, if a wealthy token holder had a lot of tokens and tries to throw a vote, you can see the attack happening.

Re: DIRT Protocol raises $3M to build a Wikipedia for structured data

#48

Post by TekMol »

yinyinwu wrote: post #45
TekMol wrote: post #39

My feeling is that this is either an illusion ("it will work out somehow") or a sham ("let's milk the crypto craze"). No answer to the question why selling votes should result in more accuracy. Buzzword Bingo. An overly broad approach. Lot's of social proof but thin on content. This reminds me of all those ICOs we see these days. Looking forward to read the whitepaper. But somehow I have the feeling it will either ne…

Before Wikipedia, the idea that an openly edited online journal would be better and more accurate alternative to Encyclopedia Brittanica would be surprising to most people. There's two parts of the design that leads to more accuracy for DIRT: 1. Skin in the game - a token deposit to write encourages accuracy because you can lose the deposit if you are incorrect. 2. Encouraging moderation - moderators can earn tokens.…

    you can lose the deposit if you are incorrect
How would the system know which side is correct and which side is incorrect? From what you wrote so far, it just counts which side put in more money.

Re: DIRT Protocol raises $3M to build a Wikipedia for structured data

#49

Post by NegativeLatency »

yinyinwu wrote: post #42
ram_rar wrote: post #35

Firstly, Congratulations for launching DIRT. >If the data is incorrect, anyone can challenge the data and earn tokens for identifying these inaccurate facts. How do you moderate censorship or conflicting information ? if someone uploads my personal info, without my consent. How do I get to purge it ? From the current model, it seems like I ll have to pay money to "request" purging my own data.

Thanks! DIRT is a fundamentally different approach because it removes the middleman and there is no central moderator. Our goal is to move the trust from a central party to a system of rules that anyone can participate in. I think verified identity could be a registry on DIRT. Adding reputation on top of voting is something we're exploring.

I don't understand your answer. Can you explain more clearly what the process would be for removing personal info?

Re: DIRT Protocol raises $3M to build a Wikipedia for structured data

#50

Post by yinyinwu »

abcc8 wrote: post #20
yinyinwu wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks! What we have for v1 of the protocol is really the starting point. There are also other extensions that could support subjective information. For example, it could be similar to Reddit's upvoting system. You can stake 100 tokens to say Domino's has the best pizza, and I can counter with 200 tokens to say Papa John's is better. Items are ranked on the list based on the token stake. There would be no challenges…

What prevents entities who can afford to lose the most tokens from establishing what is listed as 'correct'? What mechanisms are there to prevent those with the greatest token number from establishing what is accurate?

Two parts:

1. Economic - you stand to lose the tokens. Similar to mining on bitcoin, the cost to spam the network is proportional to the value of the network. If there are a lot of users, the value of the token is higher and it will be more expensive to acquire the tokens needed to game the system. Even if you are well funded, this will hurt.

2. Reader disinterest - There is the negative feedback loop where users of the information will stop using the information, and the incentive to game the system will drop.

Post reply on HN