Default Trust Visualisation [Picture Heavy!!!] [14th Sept] - page 3.

tspacepilot

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 1078

I may write code in exchange for bitcoins.

Quote from: dogie on September 14, 2015, 02:08:36 PM

Quote from: tspacepilot on September 14, 2015, 02:05:33 PM

Quote from: dogie on September 14, 2015, 01:40:46 PM

Updated entire trust network versions to the OP, including new variants.

Cool!

I'm curious what software you're using to draw these thingies (they look great, btw). I only really know how to do some very unsophistcated things using PS-tricks (post-script, I use it .tex documents from time to time) and graphviz. I'd love to know more.

I'm using Gephi which is free and what most researchers will use for pretty pictures up to a few 100,000 nodes. Its quite an outdated program and in need of a rewrite but it still works. My setup is near default + 32GB of RAM, preprocessing the data on Excel.

Thanks for the link. Bookmarked to look at the details later. I have terrible hardware, but it's good to know what packages are worth using because I can get access to better computers when I need them. Cheers!

dogie

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1183

dogiecoin.com

Quote from: tspacepilot on September 14, 2015, 02:05:33 PM

Quote from: dogie on September 14, 2015, 01:40:46 PM

Updated entire trust network versions to the OP, including new variants.

Cool!

I'm curious what software you're using to draw these thingies (they look great, btw). I only really know how to do some very unsophistcated things using PS-tricks (post-script, I use it .tex documents from time to time) and graphviz. I'd love to know more.

I'm using Gephi which is free and what most researchers will use for pretty pictures up to a few 100,000 nodes. Its quite an outdated program and in need of a rewrite but it still works. My setup is near default + 32GB of RAM, preprocessing the data on Excel.

tspacepilot

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 1078

I may write code in exchange for bitcoins.

Quote from: dogie on September 14, 2015, 01:40:46 PM

Updated entire trust network versions to the OP, including new variants.

Cool!

I'm curious what software you're using to draw these thingies (they look great, btw). I only really know how to do some very unsophistcated things using PS-tricks (post-script, I use it .tex documents from time to time) and graphviz. I'd love to know more.

dogie

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1183

dogiecoin.com

Updated entire trust network versions to the OP, including new variants.

Notes:

Full images are 30-70MB, click at your peril! These may or may not load depending on your browser, although they're now JPEGs instead of PNGs to help browsers not die [uncompressed]. I still recommend you right click and "save link as" to download.
This network is constructed from all trust ratings, and are centred around DefaultTrust rather than filtering down.
Approximately 500 users and 400 trusts are excluded because they can't be linked back to the rest of the network by any route. They would appear as unconnected nodes, or some chains of free floating nodes and represent people who removed DefaultTrust and added very unconventional accounts.
Trusts representing users trusting DefaultTrust are removed, as they come from 99% of users and fills the entire screen with lines.
No negative ratings are taken into account as they are impossible to visually represent in this type of diagram. Because of this, there isn't a way to see if someone may actually be excluded.
Node sizes are based on how many people trust them. It does not filter or weight ANY ratings, nor take into account if the rater is in DefaultTrust's depth 1 or 10. Consider it entirely a popularity contest and not greatly useful.
DefaultTrust is manually set as the largest node.
If you can't find yourself, I can give you directions to your location. I'll need to know which graph you want though.
Node colors correspond to the shortest route to get to DefaultTrust, and so roughly correspond to different trust levels according to the following scale. Depths 5-7 and 8-10 are a spectrum.

Depth 0 = pink (Only the DefaultTrust account)
Depth 1 = purple
Depth 2 = dark blue
Depth 3 = light blue
Depth 4 = green
Depth 5 = ~
Depth 6 = ~
Depth 7 = yellow
Depth 8 = yellow
Depth 9 = ~
Depth 10 = ~
Depth 11 = red

BadBear

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 1127

Quote from: Muhammed Zakir on June 04, 2015, 04:31:45 AM

CITM added most of the persons who he traded with and especially people who left him feedback.

Under the old algorithm at the time, his trust score was maxed and adding people that left him feedback had no effect on it.

Only problem with him, was that he wasn't proactive enough about fixing issues that arose.

Muhammed Zakir

hero member

Activity: 560

Merit: 506

I prefer Zakir over Muhammed when mentioning me!

Quote from: dogie on June 04, 2015, 03:34:19 AM

Quote from: BadBear on June 03, 2015, 05:36:00 PM

Quote from: Lauda on June 03, 2015, 03:53:36 PM

We just can't forget the situation that Canary had created with the vast amount of people being in Depth 2.

CITM's trust list was very large when he was originally added to default trust, it's part of the reason he was added. That itself isn't a problem.

Quote from: Quickseller on June 03, 2015, 06:29:33 PM

This is what happened with several people on CITM's trust list. In fact IIRC, every person that used their default trust status nefariously was in CITM's trust list.

His trust list being very large was a problem itself because it comprised of entirely arbitrary people. It would be as if you (BB) just copy pasta'ed a list of 300 people from the members list entirely at random. And then it'd be worse, because those entirely random and non verified or evaluated members would have paid you for the add. THEN when confronted about it, you refused to do anything about it, continued and excluded anyone who call you out about it from your Depth 0 position.

CITM added most of the persons who he traded with and especially people who left him feedback.

Quote from: Dogie

{...} and excluded anyone who call you out about it from your Depth 0 position.

Depth 1 position.

dogie

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1183

dogiecoin.com

Quote from: BadBear on June 03, 2015, 05:36:00 PM

Quote from: Lauda on June 03, 2015, 03:53:36 PM

We just can't forget the situation that Canary had created with the vast amount of people being in Depth 2.

CITM's trust list was very large when he was originally added to default trust, it's part of the reason he was added. That itself isn't a problem.

Quote from: Quickseller on June 03, 2015, 06:29:33 PM

This is what happened with several people on CITM's trust list. In fact IIRC, every person that used their default trust status nefariously was in CITM's trust list.

His trust list being very large was a problem itself because it comprised of entirely arbitrary people. It would be as if you (BB) just copy pasta'ed a list of 300 people from the members list entirely at random. And then it'd be worse, because those entirely random and non verified or evaluated members would have paid you for the add. THEN when confronted about it, you refused to do anything about it, continued and excluded anyone who call you out about it from your Depth 1 position.

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2870

Merit: 2298

Quote from: BadBear on June 03, 2015, 01:51:15 PM

A lot of people are really resistant to default trust being expanded. I remember when philipma was added, there was immediately a thread in meta about how he needed to cull his list because some weren't worthy, and he consented. But he was added with that trust list already in place, so it obviously wasn't seen as a problem.

I think the reason that many people had an issue with phillipma's trust list was that it compromised of a lot of people who had little trade experience and were overall not trustworthy. (They weren't scammers, but people would also likely hesitate to send first when trading with them).

Although the primary criteria to add someone to your trust list should be that you trust their ratings and have a good trust list, you also should trust them as it would be possible to give fake feedback which could result in the people the fake feedback is given to appear more trustworthy then what is most likely appropriate. This kind of fake feedback is often very difficult to detect by outsiders.

If someone is not overall trustworthy then why should they be trusted to be in the the default trust network? If you are not trustworthy then the chances are that their position will be used for nefarious purposes. This is what happened with several people on CITM's trust list. In fact IIRC, every person that used their default trust status nefariously was in CITM's trust list.

BadBear

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 1127

Quote from: Lauda on June 03, 2015, 03:53:36 PM

We just can't forget the situation that Canary had created with the vast amount of people being in Depth 2.

CITM's trust list was very large when he was originally added to default trust, it's part of the reason he was added. That itself isn't a problem.

Quote from: Muhammed Zakir on June 03, 2015, 01:54:10 PM

Quote from: BadBear on June 03, 2015, 01:51:15 PM

A lot of people are really resistant to default trust being expanded. I remember when philipma was added, there was immediately a thread in meta about how he needed to cull his list because some weren't worthy, and he consented. But he was added with that trust list already in place, so it obviously wasn't seen as a problem.

Well, philipma took the time to review his trust list and he pruned it. That was a good thing. I think he didn't know about trust system before being added on default trust list.

Again, his original trust list is a large reason why he was added to default trust in the first place. As for not knowing about the trust system, theymos is the one who added him, and I'm pretty sure he knew what he was doing.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: dogie on June 03, 2015, 02:00:25 PM

-snip-
Head towards 5 o'clock from DefaultTrust down to DannyHamilton and Mitchell. You're in the centre of a triangle made up of those 2 and haploid23 further down.

There is always an adjustment period when people are added into DefaultTrust. Many users would add people more liberally to their trust lists if not in DefaultTrust, and so cut down their lists when added. It makes sense because outside DefaultTrust you just have to decide if you want to see that person's ratings or not, but in DefaultTrust you have to decide if you're going to vouch for that person's ratings or not. Tldr, I think its more of an expected step rather than a problem.

Yeah, thank you, but I already have found myself just as I made the first post.
I would think that whoever gets picked for Depth 1 would have to be willing to cooperate. We can't have random people being in Depth 2 because it would be prone to abuse. We just can't forget the situation that Canary had created with the vast amount of people being in Depth 2.

Quote from: BadBear on June 03, 2015, 01:51:15 PM

A lot of people are really resistant to default trust being expanded. I remember when philipma was added, there was immediately a thread in meta about how he needed to cull his list because some weren't worthy, and he consented. But he was added with that trust list already in place, so it obviously wasn't seen as a problem.

I'm going to assume that a lot of those people are ones that have been here for a while. Some members just don't realize how easy it would be to abuse these positions. We have had too many scams without DefaultTrust being abused as it is.

dogie

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1183

dogiecoin.com

Quote from: Taras on June 03, 2015, 10:12:12 AM

I spent a few minutes trying to find my name in the big chart

You're directly above the T in the giant DefaultTrust.

Quote from: Lauda on June 03, 2015, 12:32:58 PM

Well I was just curious about my position on Depth 3 since there were quite a number of people there.

Head towards 5 o'clock from DefaultTrust down to DannyHamilton and Mitchell. You're in the centre of a triangle made up of those 2 and haploid23 further down.

Quote from: BadBear on June 03, 2015, 01:51:15 PM

A lot of people are really resistant to default trust being expanded. I remember when philipma was added, there was immediately a thread in meta about how he needed to cull his list because some weren't worthy, and he consented. But he was added with that trust list already in place, so it obviously wasn't seen as a problem.

There is always an adjustment period when people are added into DefaultTrust. Many users would add people more liberally to their trust lists if not in DefaultTrust, and so cut down their lists when added. It makes sense because outside DefaultTrust you just have to decide if you want to see that person's ratings or not, but in DefaultTrust you have to decide if you're going to vouch for that person's ratings or not. Tldr, I think its more of an expected step rather than a problem.

Muhammed Zakir

hero member

Activity: 560

Merit: 506

I prefer Zakir over Muhammed when mentioning me!

Quote from: BadBear on June 03, 2015, 01:51:15 PM

A lot of people are really resistant to default trust being expanded. I remember when philipma was added, there was immediately a thread in meta about how he needed to cull his list because some weren't worthy, and he consented. But he was added with that trust list already in place, so it obviously wasn't seen as a problem.

Well, philipma took the time to review his trust list and he pruned it. That was a good thing. I think he didn't know about trust system before being added on default trust list.

BadBear

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 1127

A lot of people are really resistant to default trust being expanded. I remember when philipma was added, there was immediately a thread in meta about how he needed to cull his list because some weren't worthy, and he consented. But he was added with that trust list already in place, so it obviously wasn't seen as a problem.

qwk

donator

Activity: 3542

Merit: 3411

Shitcoin Minimalist

Quote from: Lauda on June 03, 2015, 12:32:58 PM

Quote from: qwk on June 03, 2015, 10:34:57 AM

IDK, level 3 may be a little too much.
I'd rather include some more people into DefaultTrust.
Maybe you could just take the person with the highest trustrating by DefaultTrust-Level1 once a week and include him/her into DefaultTrust?
Or, even more fun:
Every week, include the two people with highest score and remove the one with lowest Grin

That would grow DefaultTrust over time, and also keep it clean of inactive or "fallen to darkness" members.

The suggestions are horrible. We would have an additional ~50 (excluding people that will potentially get removed) members in Depth 1 in a year. This is exponentially more as to what would be considered enough.

Those numbers are really just suggestions. Make that 1.1 people added per week, 1 person removed. Whatever.
I just believe the DefaultTrust list should not only have a couple names added, but although be dynamically kept up-to-date by some mechanism or other.
This is just what I came up with after thinking it through for a couple seconds Wink

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: Blazed on June 03, 2015, 12:58:27 PM

I agree that adding a few members to default would be a good move. I do not think that enabling depth 3 by default would be a good idea as it adds a lot of people into the mix. So my suggestion is pretty simple...

1) add a couple new people into default 1 (maybe 1-2)
2) users who are in default 1 should be willing to look around and add some people into their lists (obviously careful consideration when adding + keep an eye on them)
The added people would have to be pretty trusted - People like devthedev who are clearly legit users, but not in the default lvl 2.
3) keep the public disputes in meta since things seem to work out pretty well

I know that if I were added I would be willing to expand my trust list and keep track of who I added Tongue

I don't agree with enabling depth 3 either. That wouldn't be a wise move at the moment.
I agree with you on all three points. As long as we don't run any polls on the forum and don't make useless threads where we vote for people. We all know that the vast amount of shills here are going to abuse such a voting mechanism.

Blazed

legendary

Activity: 2128

Merit: 1119

Quote from: Lauda on June 03, 2015, 12:32:58 PM

Quote from: dogie on June 03, 2015, 05:20:17 AM

If anyone is desperate then I can find their nodes on each of the graphs and I'll give you directions. Yes it won't show special characters properly and thankfully they're quite rare. I could manually replace them but I don't think its worth it. Your best off downloading the larger graphs as most likely they'll fill your browser cache or just refuse to display (right click -> save link as).

Well I was just curious about my position on Depth 3 since there were quite a number of people there.

Quote from: dogie on June 03, 2015, 05:20:17 AM

Hey, this wasn't a honk if you like graphs incitation to poke, there was meant to be a reason Cheesy

.

Maybe I just wanted to poke him all long. Wink

Quote from: qwk on June 03, 2015, 10:34:57 AM

IDK, level 3 may be a little too much.
I'd rather include some more people into DefaultTrust.
Maybe you could just take the person with the highest trustrating by DefaultTrust-Level1 once a week and include him/her into DefaultTrust?
Or, even more fun:
Every week, include the two people with highest score and remove the one with lowest Grin

That would grow DefaultTrust over time, and also keep it clean of inactive or "fallen to darkness" members.

The suggestions are horrible. We would have an additional ~50 (excluding people that will potentially get removed) members in Depth 1 in a year. This is exponentially more as to what would be considered enough.
We currently have 12 people in Depth 1. Maybe this isn't enough and it would be wise to move 1-5 additional members from Depth 2 to 1. This would enable more people to come to Depth 2 as well.

However we should not be doing anything to the default trust for the sake of fun.

I agree that adding a few members to default would be a good move. I do not think that enabling depth 3 by default would be a good idea as it adds a lot of people into the mix. So my suggestion is pretty simple...

1) add a couple new people into default 1 (maybe 1-2)
2) users who are in default 1 should be willing to look around and add some people into their lists (obviously careful consideration when adding + keep an eye on them)
The added people would have to be pretty trusted - People like devthedev who are clearly legit users, but not in the default lvl 2.
3) keep the public disputes in meta since things seem to work out pretty well

I know that if I were added I would be willing to expand my trust list and keep track of who I added Tongue

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: dogie on June 03, 2015, 05:20:17 AM

If anyone is desperate then I can find their nodes on each of the graphs and I'll give you directions. Yes it won't show special characters properly and thankfully they're quite rare. I could manually replace them but I don't think its worth it. Your best off downloading the larger graphs as most likely they'll fill your browser cache or just refuse to display (right click -> save link as).

Well I was just curious about my position on Depth 3 since there were quite a number of people there.

Quote from: dogie on June 03, 2015, 05:20:17 AM

Hey, this wasn't a honk if you like graphs incitation to poke, there was meant to be a reason Cheesy

.

Maybe I just wanted to poke him all long. Wink

Quote from: qwk on June 03, 2015, 10:34:57 AM

IDK, level 3 may be a little too much.
I'd rather include some more people into DefaultTrust.
Maybe you could just take the person with the highest trustrating by DefaultTrust-Level1 once a week and include him/her into DefaultTrust?
Or, even more fun:
Every week, include the two people with highest score and remove the one with lowest Grin

That would grow DefaultTrust over time, and also keep it clean of inactive or "fallen to darkness" members.

The suggestions are horrible. We would have an additional ~50 (excluding people that will potentially get removed) members in Depth 1 in a year. This is exponentially more as to what would be considered enough.
We currently have 12 people in Depth 1. Maybe this isn't enough and it would be wise to move 1-5 additional members from Depth 2 to 1. This would enable more people to come to Depth 2 as well.

However we should not be doing anything to the default trust for the sake of fun.

qwk

donator

Activity: 3542

Merit: 3411

Shitcoin Minimalist

Quote from: theymos on June 02, 2015, 11:37:28 PM

Those images are pretty cool-looking. Does anyone see anything in them that would suggest specific changes to the default trust list? I was trying to look for "islands" of not-default-trusted people that aren't just created by one person, but nothing stood out. I wonder if it'd be good to increase the default depth to 3 -- a lot of the graph isn't trusted by default.

IDK, level 3 may be a little too much.
I'd rather include some more people into DefaultTrust.
Maybe you could just take the person with the highest trustrating by DefaultTrust-Level1 once a week and include him/her into DefaultTrust?
Or, even more fun:
Every week, include the two people with highest score and remove the one with lowest Grin

That would grow DefaultTrust over time, and also keep it clean of inactive or "fallen to darkness" members.

Taras

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1053

Please do not PM me loan requests!

I spent a few minutes trying to find my name in the big chart

Blazed

legendary

Activity: 2128

Merit: 1119

Nice work on these graphs Dogie. Do not bother with the trust ranking system as it really does not matter. I am not sure moving us to depth 3 by default will really help anything around here, but it is up to Theymos.

Topic: Default Trust Visualisation [Picture Heavy!!!] [14th Sept] - page 3. (Read 10199 times)