FW: RE: [cap-talk] Firefox breaks the principle of identifiability
marcs at skyhunter.com
Thu Feb 10 10:17:29 EST 2005
> -----Original Message-----
> From: marcs [mailto:marcs at skyhunter.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 12:10 PM
> To: 'Discussion of E and other capability languages'
> Subject: RE: [cap-talk] Firefox breaks the principle of
> > But I think Ben Laurie has gotten at a much more serious problem.
> > Suppose I ask my bank how much money they'd be willing to
> put behind
> > their word when they introduce me to Paypal. I think
> they're going to
> > laugh at me.
> > Moreover, I think they may be right to laugh at me. They're in the
> > business of managing money, not in the business of introductions
> > (that's the Yellow Page's business). Why would being good at the
> > former imply that they are good at the latter? To put it
> another way,
> > sure, I trust them to do the former, but why should I trust
> them to do
> > the latter? I think we've got an example of a standard fallacy when
> > reasoning about
> > trust: "I trust X for purpose P" doesn't imply "I trust X for
> > purpose Q".
> Which brings us close to the fascinating idea of ratings
> services (which in an electronic version would have to
> perform the introduction as part of the service, it seems to
> me). There are good analogies in the physical world, such
> Consumer Reports. Such services have an appropraite place,
> along with systems like google, for helping people establish
> trust relationships.
More information about the cap-talk