Proposal "Beacons links"

Now there is a blind acceptance or rejection of triples, validators from the Top 5 cannot manually check this many triples per week, simple math works: it takes at least 3-10 seconds to check 1 link. It is necessary to install beacons that fix the transition by the link.

This will improve the accuracy of accepting triplets.

To solve permanently the problem with inaccurate acceptance/rejection of triplets. It is necessary to take 3 proposes
1.Channel Validator; Create a discord channel #Validator
2. Beacons links; Proposal "Beacons links"
3. Super validator. Proposal "Supervalidator"

Hey @lavvpix ! I think we are on the same page here and I fully agree with your proposal. I just think we should make it look more like a sustainable proposal as @leeds asked. What do u think on the following?

Title: Introducing Beacons Links
Author(s): @lavvpix @Ras
Submission Date: October 12, 2022

Simple Summary

This proposal offers to increase accuracy of the validation process by installing beacons that fix the transition by the link.

Motivation

Since the very launch of the validation part of the incentivized testnet users, acting in a good faith, have observed various ways of abusing the system. Using simplistic bots to automate the acceptance of the validation tasks (i.e. accepting/rejecting every validation task) and processed through the queue quickly with low quality voting appeared to be one of the most serious challenges so far. The apogee of this kind of abuse was the WikiID predicate abuse that led to removal of the votes cast on the ‘Wikidata ID’ predicate by the team and revalidating these triples.

In order to prevent this kind of gaming mechanism and reduce low-accuracy validations the Golden team has introduced Ground Truth Triples (GTT is a triple with a known answer that are used to test validators).

Despite the GTT appearing to be a good and valuable instrument for preventing abuses it, unfortunately, has not fully addressed the problem. Users continue to reveal facts of inappropriate validation, i.e. arbitrary accepting or rejecting triples. Moreover, some community members pointed out that the pace of validation of some users evidence that those users perform validation without even using/clicking on the predicates’ links.

Besides the very fact of fraudulent activities, those users are getting an extremely high amount of points that could lead to the disproportionate distribution of the airdrop. Thus those who perform validation in a good faith will get very few.

One of the ways that could alleviate the problem is to oblige users to follow the link, i.e. to go to the predicate’s webpage using a link provided for that particular triple.

As some community members rightly pointed out, this requirement should not affect those users who perform validations via API.

Benefits

  • combate gamification and abuse;
  • increase accuracy of the validation.

Downside

  • could, possible, lead to increased load on the system that may result in slower functioning of the Golden dapp.

Voting

“Yes” - Introduce Beacon links

“No” - Do nothing

1 Like

This is a good suggestion, with more precise wording that solves the problem!

1 Like

What about users validating through the API with high accuracy. how should this apply to them?

This requirement should not affect those users who perform validations via API.

how will they be distinguished? Since bots don’t press any buttons on the keyboard,

To work through the API, you can put a beacon of a different type.
There will be an exchange of keys and the golden team will see that it works through the API

1 Like

No, I mean how to distinguish good and bad API bots. It seems to me that most of the wrong validations are coming from the bad API bots right now, how will the beacon work for them?

Implementation of 3 solutions will fix the problem

1.Channel Validator; Create a discord channel #Validator
2. Beacons links; Proposal “Beacons links”
3. Super validator. Proposal "Supervalidator

Yeah, u are right, the majority comes from the API bots. However this proposal aims at combating gamification for users who perform validation manually. I mean it’s not a panacea that will make the whole system 100% secure. It is just a small step that we propose to take in order to help to resolve one problem. As for the API bots, I believe it is a huge topic and deserve its own proposal or even a number of various proposals.

Seems that I have slightly changed my mind about this proposal. Actually, I have repeatedly found myself in the situation, when I could identify if a triple is not correct without clicking on the URl. One of the most frequent example is using social media as a website. So thee is no need to click on the link to understand that the triple is not correct. Another example is fan tokens. Someone added a lot of fan tokens indicating one website for all. In this case it is also clear that such triples are wrong.

In this respect, despite I advocated for it at the beginning, I doubt that beacon links is a good way out as it will slow down the verification process.

No. You need to follow the link, I came across links to the official page that matches the name of the company. But when clicked, the official web page was translated to linkedin. Accordingly, such references should be rejected.