Yep, I agree that potential loss of job is the ultimate result of doing a bad job. But I'm thinking about what happens leading up to that. For instance, I don't pull a vote from a witness that misses blocks. It's a clue about what state their witness is in, though. It might be a good indicator to kick off a meta-analysis.
It's this "in-between" state that's interesting. It seems like an oracle system might need some kind of feed granularity. Like, "This oracle is doing a fine job on feed A, but feed B needs some attention."
Or maybe it's just all-or-nothing for a particular SMT and not feed granularity. Like, "This oracle is doing a fine job on SMT A, but not all of the data on SMT B is up to par, so they're disqualified from SMT B entirely."
Let's also look at how User-Feedback flows into the process. If you are a user trying to earn SMT, will you react in either scenario where a) Oracles are not including you (incorrectly) in their feed and b) where other are being included (incorrectly) in their feed. The answer is the user will react, likely publicly and on Steem, to both because they have an incentive to do so.
This feedback loop should strengthen Action/Event Feeds better than Price Feeds because of the difference in potential loss for individuals rather than social loss.
Sounds like the solution to what I'm describing is to limit/focus the number of related feeds per SMT. If there's a problem with a certain feed, it needs to be shed from the SMT or put on its own SMT.
Splinter early, splinter often.
Like, say you have a single SMT dealing with identity. It seems like two feeds might be good. One certifying validity, another certifying individuality. But in reality, it might be better to have two SMTs with their own feeds.
Since SteemFest conversations, it’s possible we should construct ability for second layer Oracles to act as QA on first layer Oracles. For instance if using Identity as an SMT rewards pool construction, an Oracle(s) should be paid/incentivized to identify accounts in the first layer that are not true single identities.
i was wondering about that.. so the same sort of Oracle used in Bitshares to determine the value of bit.USD is going to also determine whether someone has a real account or a fake one, ... are we talking about a crawler that just scans all parts of the comments section of a wordpress blog for example? and the n allows someone to use tokens on a wordpress blog??? and the oracle is for determining which accounts were primary accounts and not simply setup with similar names to fol the smart media token system? Like Youtube users who change their name to look like "Taylor Swift Vevo": to fool users into clicking links etc etc, this is to avoid stuff like that? To avoid mistaking user accounts on other websites??
Why not just ask the oracle to tel us the future? Do it alexnader the great style, march right into that temple, and grab the oracle by the throat and FORCE her to give us a winning prophecy!
"Steemit shall be undefeated in battle!"
