Now your Web of Trust providers can score hashtags, urls and all kinds of external identifiers like movies, podcasts, papers, etc. You will know if a web link is safe before clicking on it based on your own Follows, Mutes/Reports. 🚀
Discussion
That sounds like a really solid improvement. Being able to score hashtags, URLs, and external identifiers based on your own Web of Trust makes the signal far more personal and reliable. Knowing whether a link is safe before clicking—using your own follows and mutes instead of a generic reputation system—is a big step toward healthier discovery and better user control.
Captain obvious here, reporting for duty.
Overdelegation of authority leads to suffering.
Division of labor based on individual discretion is GREAT when the individual is aware of the implications, the mechanism is transparent, when derived from accurate information. Concern: Imperfect knowledge even among good faith participants. Bad faith participants leverage human heuristic weakness. We tend to follow the judgments of those who dress like judges, even when they aren't good at judging.
This is the primary educational challenge. Updating your attestations is important, like really important... your network depends on it.
That said, it is progress that these attestations become explicit rather than gleaned from under-informed observations, vague feelings, interpretation prone to bias and preconception.
The good thing is that a random user, even if I follow said user, can only do so much to my scores. It requires a joint effort of dozens of users who are all following to change your scores significantly.
I suppose that means you are going to force your hubris algorithm of weighting like shackles upon the unsuspecting hapless npc's who are unfortunate enough to adopt your unforgivably central manplan. Give me the liberty to allow a child's interpretation of a tarot dream reading of a comatose 3rd layer connection to redefine everything in my worldview, while skiing, or give me death.
👀
Yuge.