"Eve" is a community platform for friction-less, control-less, decentralized, private, uncensorable, unstoppable, self-sovereign, invite-only closed communities
How does vouching for each other prevent intelligence or police informants from infiltrating the "community" to then create issues trying to draw community members into saying or agreeing to something that will later be used to prosecute them ?? We all have experienced situations where in heat of moment a friend or family member says something we know is not intended to be carried out, but an outsider might see it differently.
How often have we heard our buddy/relative say something like, "That guy needs to be horsewhipped" or similar "Kill the lot of them..." ?? Next someone agrees and so the police are now informed, by virtue of their informant gathering "evidence" of a CONSPIRACY. It becomes even more insidious because the first comment was made by their informant to pimp the resulting over-the-top comment and create a conspiracy where none existed.
Eve groups would have to have very strict rules about comments which defeats the purpose of the Eve platform.
I do not see this as a valid aid in bringing cohesion to a group, but your mileage may differ.
Also you can run systems and have a code of ethics and a code of respectful dialogue. It doesn’t defeat the purpose. The purpose is to create many systems and each one can have their own rules and codes. In fact, a good society - in real life or digital life - should have a code. Plenty of people are willing to live by a code in order to be part of a bigger system. Teams have codes. Businesses have codes. Nations have codes. And network states will also have codes.
This is a good question. Maybe they will answer. For our systems it is easy. Mix IRL with URL. Also if you use collective intelligence like we want to do, infiltrators cannot sway the crowd like that because the system is anonymous.
The bigger problem is first keeping ai and bots out of the system. The second problem is just having a system where one or even many infiltrators cannot gain control of the system because it is decentralized.
This is one way we proposed it. The founders of Eve might have another way.
It is impossible to keep out all infiltrators in a system. But it is possible to use vouching to hamper them. And anonymous decentralized collective intelligence problem solving systems to keep better ideas rising to the top.
As josh said, there is never a way to prevent that from happening outright, but I believe that the reputation system helps with that a bit. The moment someone invites an informant, or anyone else that the community doesn't want they can be kicked out, and the reputation of the inviter is affected as well as that of the invitee.
Eve's purpose isn't to replace human connections or traditional social filters, but to enhance them. No software can truthfully promise perfect security without human involvement. Any platform claiming to offer complete protection without requiring user action is simply not being honest about its limitations.
I'm a layperson, but a question this Eve platform brought to mind. Might a platform like this also be used by darker, nefarious entities who don't have good intentions? If so, how might that be managed...or not? I think it might be somewhat addressed by the "reputation" ratings, but I still can't get a grasp on it.
Indeed, like all powerful tools throughout human history, platforms like Eve embody the fundamental duality of technology—capable of both tremendous good and potential harm. Technology itself is morally neutral; it is human intention that imbues it with ethical dimension.
Email can be used to connect loved ones across continents or to deliver ransomware. Even the most basic technologies reflect this duality—a knife can prepare a nourishing meal or become a weapon.
At the end of the day, encryption is just math, anyone who understands it can build it; nefarious actors could build tools that are just as secure as Eve but targeted specifically for their nefarious actions (and chances are, they already have).
Anything can be used by criminals, computers themselves can be used by criminals, cars can be used by criminals, pens can be used by criminals; we're just giving everyone in the world a way to secure their communication and to bring back communities built on trust!
As Phil Zimmermann (creator of PGP) once said: "If privacy is outlawed, only outlaws will have privacy."
I totally get it. Just wanted to pose the question for clarity. I'm all about free speech, especially for those that I disagree with which is why we need the First Amendment because we're ALL about free speech for those we agree with.
Thank you for the clarification. Interesting platform that you're building. I'll be interested to watch it's development. :-)
Sorry it is messed up and we have to upload from a backup. We have been working on the app and neglected the website and a few things need updating. Apologies
No worries. I understand the process at hand. Just wanted to share in case no one has mentioned it. All eyes on deck when launching a new platform. Godspeed.
I see a "problem...." with Eve.
How does vouching for each other prevent intelligence or police informants from infiltrating the "community" to then create issues trying to draw community members into saying or agreeing to something that will later be used to prosecute them ?? We all have experienced situations where in heat of moment a friend or family member says something we know is not intended to be carried out, but an outsider might see it differently.
How often have we heard our buddy/relative say something like, "That guy needs to be horsewhipped" or similar "Kill the lot of them..." ?? Next someone agrees and so the police are now informed, by virtue of their informant gathering "evidence" of a CONSPIRACY. It becomes even more insidious because the first comment was made by their informant to pimp the resulting over-the-top comment and create a conspiracy where none existed.
Eve groups would have to have very strict rules about comments which defeats the purpose of the Eve platform.
I do not see this as a valid aid in bringing cohesion to a group, but your mileage may differ.
Also you can run systems and have a code of ethics and a code of respectful dialogue. It doesn’t defeat the purpose. The purpose is to create many systems and each one can have their own rules and codes. In fact, a good society - in real life or digital life - should have a code. Plenty of people are willing to live by a code in order to be part of a bigger system. Teams have codes. Businesses have codes. Nations have codes. And network states will also have codes.
This is a good question. Maybe they will answer. For our systems it is easy. Mix IRL with URL. Also if you use collective intelligence like we want to do, infiltrators cannot sway the crowd like that because the system is anonymous.
The bigger problem is first keeping ai and bots out of the system. The second problem is just having a system where one or even many infiltrators cannot gain control of the system because it is decentralized.
This is one way we proposed it. The founders of Eve might have another way.
It is impossible to keep out all infiltrators in a system. But it is possible to use vouching to hamper them. And anonymous decentralized collective intelligence problem solving systems to keep better ideas rising to the top.
Like so
https://open.substack.com/pub/joshketry/p/keep-ai-and-bots-out-of-our-systems?r=7oa9d&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
As josh said, there is never a way to prevent that from happening outright, but I believe that the reputation system helps with that a bit. The moment someone invites an informant, or anyone else that the community doesn't want they can be kicked out, and the reputation of the inviter is affected as well as that of the invitee.
Eve's purpose isn't to replace human connections or traditional social filters, but to enhance them. No software can truthfully promise perfect security without human involvement. Any platform claiming to offer complete protection without requiring user action is simply not being honest about its limitations.
But great answer
- DM (Arx)
I'm a layperson, but a question this Eve platform brought to mind. Might a platform like this also be used by darker, nefarious entities who don't have good intentions? If so, how might that be managed...or not? I think it might be somewhat addressed by the "reputation" ratings, but I still can't get a grasp on it.
Indeed, like all powerful tools throughout human history, platforms like Eve embody the fundamental duality of technology—capable of both tremendous good and potential harm. Technology itself is morally neutral; it is human intention that imbues it with ethical dimension.
Email can be used to connect loved ones across continents or to deliver ransomware. Even the most basic technologies reflect this duality—a knife can prepare a nourishing meal or become a weapon.
At the end of the day, encryption is just math, anyone who understands it can build it; nefarious actors could build tools that are just as secure as Eve but targeted specifically for their nefarious actions (and chances are, they already have).
Anything can be used by criminals, computers themselves can be used by criminals, cars can be used by criminals, pens can be used by criminals; we're just giving everyone in the world a way to secure their communication and to bring back communities built on trust!
As Phil Zimmermann (creator of PGP) once said: "If privacy is outlawed, only outlaws will have privacy."
- DM (Arx)
I totally get it. Just wanted to pose the question for clarity. I'm all about free speech, especially for those that I disagree with which is why we need the First Amendment because we're ALL about free speech for those we agree with.
Thank you for the clarification. Interesting platform that you're building. I'll be interested to watch it's development. :-)
I tried to sign up for the newsletter at swarmacademy.ai but unfortunately it wouldn't process.
Sorry it is messed up and we have to upload from a backup. We have been working on the app and neglected the website and a few things need updating. Apologies
No worries. I understand the process at hand. Just wanted to share in case no one has mentioned it. All eyes on deck when launching a new platform. Godspeed.