On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 11:20:15PM +0100, Thomas Morton wrote:
On 11 October 2011 21:51, Kim Bruning kim@bruning.xs4all.nl wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 09:55:46PM +0100, WereSpielChequers wrote:
OK in a spirit of compromise I have designed an Image filter which should meet most of the needs that people have expressed and resolve most of the objections that I'm aware of. Just as importantly it should actually
work.
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:WereSpielChequers/filter
Hmm, how would it fare against a marblecake attack? ;-)
http://musicmachinery.com/2009/04/15/inside-the-precision-hack/
I agree on the one hand that anything is potentially gameable but:
a) Wikipedia is notoriously gameable and yet, fingers crossed, we have not had a mass Anon. attack.
Actually, we've had all kinds of attacks. Anonymous is essentially our friend though. The folks going after us are <name suppressed to protect the guilty>.
Thanks to our anti-gaming policy (aka IAR), they don't often succeed }:-)>
b) The Time "hack" was rudimentary at every step - no matter how the media (or this blog) portray it. The root cause of the hack was a technical ineptness at a several levels in the Time poll which allowed it to be maninpulated on a number of levels.
Quite so. This means that we should learn from their ineptness, rather than -say- copying it ;-)
On the face of it any such system might be gameable; but no specific implementation details have been laid out (beyond the basic framework). So the concern "it might be hacked to force a certain result" is one of the most easily addressed :)
General rule of thumb: If you leak value preferences between users, with no intermediate (soft) security, your system might be game-able.
More problematic with your blithe dismissal
I didn't dismiss anything, I asked how it would fare against a marblecake attack!
is that the proposed implementation is inherently not all that gameable. This is because, as described, working out the filter for any individual is a P=NP (travelling salesman) problem.
And this is an interesting and constructive answer to that question. \o/
:-)
sincerely, Kim Bruning