Yakov Shafranovich wrote: > So the bottom line is that we lack trust. Depends how you define trust. In my view, the bottom line is that trust depends on corroboration with multiple channels while today we have neither (a) the multiple channels nor (b) the corroboration mechanisms. So, we lack trust because we can't communicate it. It's an even more basic limitation than just lacking it ;-) > How would introducing trust help with the spam problem? By allowing trust to be earned between humans and machines, and to each other. Machines can then become our agents also in terms of trust decisions. > Would the cost > of doing so perhaps would be so prohibitive that we will not be able to > do so? Anything else will be more expensive because there is no other solution. Trust is that which provides meaning to information (Shannon: information is that which you do not expect, information is surprise). Without trust, all we have is a string of bits. Let me give you some examples. 1. If I ask you whether the expression in quotes "1=1" is true or false, what would you say? Looks simple enough, no? HINT: Your answer depends on the meaning you assign to the expression "1=1", which depends on what you rely upon (i.e., what you trust) when you evaluate it. The same process is reflected in software when that expression is evaluated to true or false. For example, the above expression is incorrect in C. 2. if I tell you I'll send you a GIFT, can you tell me what you think I'll send: (a) a present (b) a poison (c) anything HINT: To answer this question, you also need to assign a meaning to the word GIFT, which depends on what you rely upon (i.e., trust) in regard to me (since I formulated the question). Again, the same process is reflected in software when a tag is evaluated in a protocol. In English, (a) is correct. In German, (b) is correct. > Is it really possible to introduce trust that will actually work? It works every day. Otherwise we would not be able to cook, earn money or even talk. We just have to transpose this knowledge from our wetware to the software. Cheers, Ed Gerck