1994-09-06 - Re: "Reputations" are more than just nominalist hot air

Header Data

From: Hal <hfinney@shell.portal.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 34f62f1dc9ca819356d05eed1bb7604aa23e7708547e651f339d8b52c9f9bfc7
Message ID: <199409060041.RAA15683@jobe.shell.portal.com>
Reply To: <199409041853.LAA17023@netcom7.netcom.com>
UTC Datetime: 1994-09-06 00:41:48 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 5 Sep 94 17:41:48 PDT

Raw message

From: Hal <hfinney@shell.portal.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 94 17:41:48 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: \"Reputations\" are more than just nominalist hot air
In-Reply-To: <199409041853.LAA17023@netcom7.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199409060041.RAA15683@jobe.shell.portal.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


jamesd@netcom.com (James A. Donald) writes:

>Hal seems to be asking questions which implicitly define
>a reputation to be some kind of credential.

I tried to post something on this last night, but Toad apparently
hiccupped and lost it.  My suggestion was that we do not discuss
"reputations", where I think James is right that the term already
refers to an opinion someone holds in his mind, but rather "reputation
capital" or perhaps "reputation credentials", which are information
structures which may be used to establish or support a reputation.
The example I used last night was that "reputation capital" is not 
"reputation" any more than the "liberty bell" is "liberty".

Then perhaps we can avoid arguing about what a reputation is, and instead
focus on the interesting issue of what the role of cryptography will be
in establishing reputations in a possibly-pseudonymous business network.

Hal





Thread