You are viewing ljfoaf

LiveJournal FOAF - FOAF-trolls

Jun. 3rd, 2004

10:39 pm - FOAF-trolls

Previous Entry Share Next Entry

This entire concept of FOAF seems very intresting and promising, but I do have to ask, it also is based on the conept that a web users FOAF file would be correct, yes? There's nothing preventing someone from creating a FOAF file that isn't a real reflection of themselves.


Do you think these "FOAF-trolls" may prove to be a problem, or just something we'll have to live with?

Current Mood: curiouscurious

Comments:

[User Picture]
From:denshi
Date:June 3rd, 2004 09:09 pm (UTC)
(Link)
There's that tricky 'correct' epistimology problem as well...

(Reply) (Thread)
From:acheron_hades
Date:June 3rd, 2004 10:17 pm (UTC)
(Link)
How about just adding in a PGP-style web of trust? I haven't thought the details through but I imagine it's do-able..
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:revgeorge
Date:June 4th, 2004 05:15 am (UTC)
(Link)
There is a web of trust FOAF project, which basically relies on a detached GnuPG signature. Then you can verify the authorship of FOAF files using GnuPG.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:hohf
Date:October 9th, 2004 06:29 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Yes, this will *definitely* be a problem, even with GPG, and especially
when considering that the broad masses aren't really using GPG.

FOAF is nice, but i fear it'll have the same problems soon which E-Mail
has now. (Maybe that's a RDF problem, though.) If you want to know my
opition, all those semantic web things shouldn't be technically usable at
all without a proper GPG key.

-hohf
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:dvae
Date:November 25th, 2004 04:29 am (UTC)

faof trust

(Link)
Why is it a problem. As long as people only list true friends as friends in thier foaf files then it's ok. If you don't trust someone, don't list them as a friend. Simple
(Reply) (Thread)