- Created a table with 50+ privacy-services recommendations from Sismo to Privacy&Scalability explorations for non-techies assesment [Link](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1JWpAsGL10UTsVeuIVbouzUxRjaSPUAamxcbFljXuUWE/edit?usp=sharing)
- Created a concept that assumes that not every techie could "read&understand" the tech side like code equally (junior dev vs CTO) [Link](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1JWpAsGL10UTsVeuIVbouzUxRjaSPUAamxcbFljXuUWE/edit?usp=sharing). At the moment categories are: docs, code, transaction tracibility. Potential categories: cross-chain assesment, cross-services assesment (Layer-1 vs Mixers).
Had a call with Ethereum Foundation. They would love to understand if non-biased/objective scoring model is possible & at which stage.
This is a challenging issue because if players didn't make one within years of privacy services existence & their general competitive attitude - this could take ages to accomplish.
I decided to ask private projects & their core team publicly how to measure whenever their solutions are private. Important note: it should work for non-techies.
Opinions are great for future scoring building:
- [SCBuergel.eth from HOPR](https://twitter.com/SCBuergel/status/1625424568314654723)
Had a call with Nick Havrilyak (experienced product manager). We discussed different approaches to scoring modelling, on-chain & off-chain data management, indexing protocols etc.
- lots of privacy scoring directions are highly subjective (like "if a team is ideological") & can't be automated in the DB
- The scoring model MVP would be oversimplified.
- Because the ultimate goal -> on-chain reputation x privacy services (where Unirep Protocol & co are headed)
- But there should be a point on a roadmap to receive non-expert opinions from the people who would use privacy services. I think there will be interesting insights into how they would approach assessment & "trust" (especially within non-web3 people).