Thread

Zero-JS Hypermedia Browser

Relays: 5
Replies: 57
Generated: 17:06:53
Yo, suddenly my trust score had a little boost. Check your scores for nostr:nprofile1qyw8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytfsxgh8jcttd95x7mnwv5hxxmmdqyvhwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ycmgv43kktndv5hhyetvv9usqgrvy7j65q4hd8rt287hahvqckephxar9stdjyajhj8pv9lmg4eksqfh8mhq tasks, still not clear how it is measured, but let's hope it does get explained soon.
2025-12-03 02:14:16 from 1 relay(s) 38 replies ↓
Login to reply

Replies (57)

A grosso modo, intenta dar una calificación al revisar la cadena para llegar de un usuario a otro según la cantidad de saltos usando a tus contactos y los contactos de tus contactos (por lo general lo usan así), analiza todas las cadenas y da una puntuación, mientras menos saltos y más cadenas es más confiable el usuario… el valor límite para definir confiable lo define el dev además de las variaciones en el cálculo para llegar al valor, más menos es así como funciona
2025-12-03 03:14:19 from 1 relay(s) ↑ Parent Reply
So, Vertex uses pagerank which is a probability, which implies it's a number between 0 and 1. Pagerank is distributed as a power law, which means that between an average pagerank and a high pagerank there are 4 or more order of magnitude difference. Jack dorsey has 1000-10000x the pagerank of a normal person. Power laws are hard to comprehend for the human mind, which is why Profilestr tried different formulas to normalize this score to be between 0 to 100, in ways that make sense. These formulas were not great, so I suggested they use something like this. It's poorly written but I don't have much time to work out the details. https://gist.github.com/pippellia-btc/8642a25fcf535edcda1ddecd0bcd5f7b TLDR; Vertex didn't change anything, the ranks are computed as before, they are simply presented differently to the end users. This whole conversation is making me more adamant in my belief that ranks should not be displayed to end users.
2025-12-03 15:08:27 from 1 relay(s) ↑ Parent 4 replies ↓ Reply
nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzpa5rapcrtaadfazwpwvvl0v4xlskg4df9nfcem7yevcaka2h7hhjqy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyv9kh2uewd9hj7qghwaehxw309aex2mrp0yhxummnw3ezucnpdejz7qghwaehxw309aex2mrp0yh8qunfd4skctnwv46z7qpqlm0frscaa23ue4ze0gsweynwkn6gdf6rplpnfp8xafepnlfp9jwsekauwn
2025-12-03 15:09:26 from 1 relay(s) ↑ Parent Reply
It's hard to understand indeed. People were asking this because Trust Score some weeks ago was high for almost all users and suddenly it dropped hard, I even read that some people had 0, which raised alarms and people wanted an explanation. I didn't understand the maths, but I appreciate the transparency in this matter.
2025-12-03 21:02:26 from 1 relay(s) ↑ Parent Reply
These kinds of scores create wrong incentives, it reminds me of how it was done with a service called Klout in the early web 2.0 days. People will do strange things to get better scores, but it’s pointless as every score should be contextual. It should be clear that these scores have nothing to do with reach either (as many assume it is).
2025-12-03 21:34:18 from 1 relay(s) ↑ Parent 1 replies ↓ Reply