Could you trust again?
- Thread starter AnonSP
- Start date
it depends on the situation, but generally....
trust is to be earned, and maintained mutually over time. it is fluid, dynamic.
actions speak far louder than mere words.
I have a very narrow and clear definition of what constitutes "trust". I could likely quantify it mathematically if asked.
trust is to be earned, and maintained mutually over time. it is fluid, dynamic.
actions speak far louder than mere words.
I have a very narrow and clear definition of what constitutes "trust". I could likely quantify it mathematically if asked.
I agree!
Trust is earned, not given away.
It does depend to a certain degree on the situation, but if a lie is discovered, trust can still be earned. However, that trust will be (much) more difficult to earn and generally will take longer. Time eases most pains after all.
Trust is earned, not given away.
It does depend to a certain degree on the situation, but if a lie is discovered, trust can still be earned. However, that trust will be (much) more difficult to earn and generally will take longer. Time eases most pains after all.
Perhaps...
There should be some intermediate choices on this poll; I have abstained as a result.
Zog.
I agree. If she tells me I look good in my favourite jeans (trust me, I don't) I'd be willing to overcome my horror and anguish.AznBikerBoi said:
There should be some intermediate choices on this poll; I have abstained as a result.
Zog.
I'm asking...
Zog.
P.S. I'm serious, I'd like to see how it's done!
Oh! Please do!CyberGoth said:
Zog.
P.S. I'm serious, I'd like to see how it's done!
Do some people find it ironic that a question on trusting your partner is asked in a forum where in a previous poll 54% of the paticipants voted that they participate in this hobby secretly behind the back of their partner? 
Anyway I voted Yes though it really depends on the situation and severity
Anyway I voted Yes though it really depends on the situation and severity
Yes, it depends on the situation ...
If they lied to you because they wanted to protect you or for your own good, then its all good. Because sometimes, the truth hurts ...
Its like, your friend gets a new hair cut and asks you how it looks. You don't wanna say they look busted and that their new cut is fucking ugly. So you'd probably say its "alright" even though you think its ugly ... but you don't say it cause you don't wanna hurt their feelings ...
But yet, even from the simply example above ... it already encompasses two "questions".
1) "does it look good?" is a question in regards to aesthetics ...
2) and whether you answer "yes" or "no" is a result of a moral question, to lie or not to lie ...
3) choosing either "yes" or "no" maybe influenced by emotions and feelings over reason and objectiveness ...
So as you can see ... it really depends ...
If they lied to you because they wanted to protect you or for your own good, then its all good. Because sometimes, the truth hurts ...
Its like, your friend gets a new hair cut and asks you how it looks. You don't wanna say they look busted and that their new cut is fucking ugly. So you'd probably say its "alright" even though you think its ugly ... but you don't say it cause you don't wanna hurt their feelings ...
But yet, even from the simply example above ... it already encompasses two "questions".
1) "does it look good?" is a question in regards to aesthetics ...
2) and whether you answer "yes" or "no" is a result of a moral question, to lie or not to lie ...
3) choosing either "yes" or "no" maybe influenced by emotions and feelings over reason and objectiveness ...
So as you can see ... it really depends ...
Re: I'm asking...
ok, here's the essentials of it. [gimme a couple days and I'll submit a formal paper after having checked a few things]
trust, can be calculated as the likelyhood or probability that given a known set of stimulus/circumstance, an entity will react in a predictable manner. one calculates this by statistical analysis over time.
therefore, as an example.
when I submit an invoice to a particular client, because they have consistantly in the past payed me within a given amount of time. I can predict with a high level of certainty that they shall pay the next invoice as before.
ok, opaque example.
[originally i had this conversation over a period of three days with someone who was writing his PhD thesis in e-commerce in the early 90s.]
we analyse behaviour and probability against a known reference point. credit companies do something similar.
if we were to then implement a way to assess trust, from one entity to another entity. there would have to be a history that is documented and the results, positive/negative of each interaction analysed in terms of predictability/probability.
best thought in terms of a 4x4x4x4 matrix where x=previous-result y=consistancy z=probability t=time.
the trust level moves forward in time, and either up or down as a calculated probability level. [scale 0-99] Y is expressed as green/yellow/orange/red
its a little more complex to apply to humans. [how does one calculate or quantify "gut feelings" ??]
disclaimer: I've from time to time made trust assessments that turned out to be utterly and completely dead wrong. [everyone does that]
I'll post URLs to relevant papers if asked.
zog said:
ok, here's the essentials of it. [gimme a couple days and I'll submit a formal paper after having checked a few things]
trust, can be calculated as the likelyhood or probability that given a known set of stimulus/circumstance, an entity will react in a predictable manner. one calculates this by statistical analysis over time.
therefore, as an example.
when I submit an invoice to a particular client, because they have consistantly in the past payed me within a given amount of time. I can predict with a high level of certainty that they shall pay the next invoice as before.
ok, opaque example.
[originally i had this conversation over a period of three days with someone who was writing his PhD thesis in e-commerce in the early 90s.]
we analyse behaviour and probability against a known reference point. credit companies do something similar.
if we were to then implement a way to assess trust, from one entity to another entity. there would have to be a history that is documented and the results, positive/negative of each interaction analysed in terms of predictability/probability.
best thought in terms of a 4x4x4x4 matrix where x=previous-result y=consistancy z=probability t=time.
the trust level moves forward in time, and either up or down as a calculated probability level. [scale 0-99] Y is expressed as green/yellow/orange/red
its a little more complex to apply to humans. [how does one calculate or quantify "gut feelings" ??]
disclaimer: I've from time to time made trust assessments that turned out to be utterly and completely dead wrong. [everyone does that]
I'll post URLs to relevant papers if asked.
B
belgiumcdn
It would depend entirely on the nature of the lie! To be honest, there are times when I can understand why in some situations I'm lied to as I would be tempted to do so as well were the situation reversed, even if ultimately I would choose not to. However, if its a matter of betraying the very foundations of our relationship or with the intent to hurt/misinform - that's another story. I don't think I could trust again.
light reading.
here you go. just a couple. mostly published papers in acrobat format.
I'll post more later.
enjoy
http://www.iaik.tugraz.at/teaching/11_diplomarbeiten/archive/roessler.pdf
http://www.usenix.org/publications/library/proceedings/ec98/pki/greenwood.pdf
http://www.cs.tcd.ie/publications/tech-reports/reports.02/TCD-CS-2002-66.pdf
blofeld said:
here you go. just a couple. mostly published papers in acrobat format.
I'll post more later.
enjoy
http://www.iaik.tugraz.at/teaching/11_diplomarbeiten/archive/roessler.pdf
http://www.usenix.org/publications/library/proceedings/ec98/pki/greenwood.pdf
http://www.cs.tcd.ie/publications/tech-reports/reports.02/TCD-CS-2002-66.pdf
