• rottingleaf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    The experiences coming to mind were not illegal, but were absolutely things I want to spare my fellow humans from.

    What about a guy who had a panic attack in the very beginning and couldn’t stop talking about his deceased dad, then about aunts and uncles, then about the dog, then about architecture, then didn’t get the hint because of all the shaking, got petrified when hinted at an alcohol element in the continuation of the meeting and in the end didn’t even understand a very direct hints at “only silence can save this” and having at least a sleepover?.. Who only became kinda normal after taking a sedative next morning, still shaking.

    Just describing one negative experience I have provided in the past, and that while yeah, it wasn’t too cool - maybe lifelong shame is not what I deserve for that …

    (Yes, I know that girl was a hero)

    The group summary gives a buffer so the person reviewed doesn’t know which specific date said what. And ensures the summary doesn’t include negative comments about a person unless multiple dates of theirs independently report similar experiences.

    That can’t be done without somehow verifying identities of all the people involved. Unless the review app is the same as the dating app. Then there are various technical variants, like some cryptographic connection between the reviewed person’s identity, the token representing one date, and a temporary identity for the reviewer, used to sign the review message. Something like that.

    But that only for the entity doing the summary, which will have to be trusted with the original reviews. And that “buffer” will remove any kind of verification, unless it’s something egghead-smart like a smart contract forming the review on every client, which means every client can also see the original reviews. So I dunno.

    Of course a bad actor could ditch their dating profile and start fresh any time they build up enough negative reviews to make their summary look bad. And of course the reviews and the summaries would have to be secured tighter than “Tea” is.

    Honestly things like this should work like some hybrid of Briar and Freenet. Just entrusting it to a centralized service is as stupid as using Facebook. And in this specific case Briar model is kinda fine - if you synchronize with everyone using the application. You don’t need to have the reviews from everyone about everyone, just about people roaming the same general area.