Hmm. Idea for a personal currency: collect digitally signed to-whom-it-may-concern open recommendation letters from friends, colleagues etc. Maybe with expiry dates or revocation capacity. Maybe you have a stash of a hundred.
-
Show this thread
-
Then (and this is the clever bit) sign a few over to new people you need to have trust you while you’re working with them. They return them when relationship is done. If they like the work, they issue you their recommendation letters citing the ones they held.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likesShow this thread -
So old letters get more valuable as new letters blockchain on. You use them for more important things. It’s a secure currency because they are only useful in relation to working with you. You can stake a few letters or many, leaf-letters or roots of long chains.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likesShow this thread -
If they DON’T like the work, they have the option of destroying the letters they hold. You’d have to go back and get new letters from people for the entire destroyed chain. So it’s serious. You’re operating your own ransomware.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likesShow this thread -
How would you use this? Instead of saying “I really want this job!” you’d say, “I want this job so much I’ll stake my entire TWIMC forest* on this application!” * Set of To Whom It May Concern DAG trees
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likesShow this thread -
You’d literally be staking your reputation. Or at least signing up for a very expensive reputation reconstruction failure mode. Including recommendations from dead people that may not be recoverable.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likesShow this thread -
You could robustify your reputation forest. If Bob thinks Alice may in future turn out to be a criminal, he stakes his gig with Charlie using both letters from Alice and Dan. That way if Alice goes to jail, her letter can be removed without orphaning the Charlie letter.
3 replies 0 retweets 4 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @vgr
Honestly, I think participation in such a scheme would mark one as being a "hopeless techbro who can't figure out normal social networks."
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @veronicastraszh @vgr
It would end up somewhere on the spectrum of "people who brag about their klout score" and "rationalists who want to 'solve' dating using Bayes theorem".
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @veronicastraszh @vgr
(That probably came across as too dismissive, but really, human brains are pretty good at social stuff. I trust more adapting our neural hardware to online reality, rather than offloading it to a 'tech'.)
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Pre-Telegraph/train, people used to carry letters of recommendation and introduction around. Natural human neural stuff fails badly beyond small troop size, which is why impersonal institutions emerged. Now those are failing. Hence this idea.
-
-
Replying to @vgr
I'm down with the recommendations idea, but turning it into a kinda fungible 'currency' which to me suggests placing a legible value on social connections -- that feels "off" to me.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @veronicastraszh
It’s actually lowering fungibility. Recommendations today (like on a LinkedIn profile) are worthless because they are infinitely spendable. Now they’re chained into stories about you that stake your participation in one project/transaction. Personal digital heirlooms to pawn.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.