Peering 2.0

Hi, Habr!



Peering 2.0 is not a very expressive (there is no more suitable one yet) a name for a network of social interaction, which, as far as I know, does not exist in practice yet.

I'll start from afar, with a question. How often have you encountered misunderstanding? I think that the overwhelming majority do not have a lack of such experience. Mutual understanding is much less common, and therefore we perceive the ideas, thoughts and actions that are close to us most acutely, as they say, “close to the heart”.



All people are different, it is difficult to argue with this and yet knowing that genuine, deep mutual understanding is possible, it is hoped that people sharing the same views can be combined. And this will be done not mechanically, but on a completely different basis, even if using simple, if not to say primitive technical means.



What is Peering 2.0?

')

This is a way to unite in a community of people who are united by similar views on a very different range of issues and who, in the absence of disagreement, have the opportunity to concentrate on solving problems. Moreover, the similarity of views will allow in this case to save a lot of effort that can be directed to more important issues than trying to persuade others in some way. How can Peering 2.0 be implemented? Things from the outside world that impressed us characterize a particle of ourselves: be it a movie that excited us or a book that we liked. Technically speaking, a website with a database that includes movies, music, books (not entirely, but in the form of unique identifiers with descriptions), expressive quotes, and links to web pages that users could rate can put together (and to unite clusters into communities) those who have similar ratings and thus most likely share similar beliefs. The more assessments, the more accurate the similarity estimate. The elements of the database with the highest rating are offered to assess those who have not yet rated them, thereby contributing to the dissemination of the most relevant data in each cluster. Ratings can be both positive and negative in order to cover the whole range from approval to disapproval and indifference (corresponding to zero).



The next step is to add a category of problems to the above list, that is, to add the ability to describe the most important problems for the community and evaluate them by relevance. A complete analogy adds the ability to track the most relevant problems in the aggregate assessment of like-minded people. This opportunity to make an informed choice can bring to the surface things that are truly important, as opposed to those imposed by society or contrived.



Next - ideas and projects , that is, proposed solutions to problems. Discussions on issues can be self-moderated: Troll comments (that is, ultimately people who behave inappropriately) can be properly flagged and, if necessary, blocked. The best branches of the discussions eliminated on the basis of a vote can be saved for the future, including as another category of like-minded people. The rest are discarded so as not to accumulate unnecessary information. Projects are also voted on and possibly crowdfunding is organized among those who liked the solution (as in Kickstarter).



And finally, another category - people . The category responsible for the personal ratings given in accordance with the estimated and invaluable contribution to ideas and discussions within projects (must be familiar from Habr's karma). Each user may additionally have a cloud of rated ratings tags that characterize him as an individual, including not least from the moral side.



Addressing this post to Habr, I rely on the fact that eventually there will be people who are not indifferent to this idea, will be able to implement it correctly (and I think the correct option is a decentralized distributed network) and combine, for example, those who appreciate Fight Club and Firefly Tomb, Canon Pachelbel and the Battle without honor and humanity to Tomoyasu Hoteya, So said Zarathustra and Martin Eden, Slashdot and Habrahabr. If the implementation proves successful, it will create the ground for further self-organization within the communities of like-minded people up to the move to co-reside in the same area to those who like it. But that's another story.