Update Readme.md
This commit is contained in:
rodič
d90f966d67
revize
7e64784491
|
@ -22,36 +22,18 @@ We asked 50+ privacy opinion leaders how they will attest privacy claims behind
|
|||
| further questions feel free to drop them in our discord | Discord serves as a two-way comms platform (but depends on the project) & it creates additional dependence of user on the core team | - |
|
||||
|
||||
## **Holonym**
|
||||
|
||||
Answers:
|
||||
- Check their website or docs
|
||||
- If they vaguely say “data is kept private” and provide no explanation how, run
|
||||
- If they provide an explanation, check with an expert or DYOR
|
||||
|
||||
_Observations_:
|
||||
- "check" is a highly abstract action related to the website or docs -> extract value should be related to understanding "privacy"-validity markers
|
||||
- "private data explainers" needed to be defined within use-cases (case studies for the market)
|
||||
|
||||
_Product feature_:
|
||||
- website checklist (1-2-3-4-5..., yes/no validity)
|
||||
- case studies "private data" explainers
|
||||
- DYOR (that's our platform)
|
||||
| Answers | Observations | Product feature |
|
||||
| ------------- |------------- |------------- |
|
||||
| Check their website or docs | "check" is a highly abstract action related to the website or docs -> extract value should be related to understanding "privacy"-validity markers | website checklist (1-2-3-4-5..., yes/no validity) |
|
||||
| If they vaguely say “data is kept private” and provide no explanation how, run | "private data explainers" needed to be defined within use-cases (case studies for the market) | case studies "private data" explainers |
|
||||
| If they provide an explanation, check with an expert or DYOR | - | DYOR (that's our platform) |
|
||||
|
||||
## **Spinner cash**
|
||||
|
||||
Answers
|
||||
- code is law.
|
||||
- So how about "don't trust, verify"? But to verify, it would require certain technical skills... like reading source code 😅
|
||||
- We hope to bring in 3rd party auditors at some point
|
||||
|
||||
_Observations_:
|
||||
- the more ideological language is on the website - the harder to navigate the factual privacy features
|
||||
- source code reading is a highly technical skill (moreover: Ethereum dev could struggle with Solana code & vice versa)
|
||||
- 3rd party list is needed here to be transformed into privacy signalling features
|
||||
|
||||
_Product feature_:
|
||||
- missing 3rd party audit potential risks 101
|
||||
- 3rd party list (yes/no) from security audit agencies to independent security engineers (+their reputation 101 in later versions)
|
||||
| Answers | Observations | Product feature |
|
||||
| ------------- |------------- |------------- |
|
||||
| code is law | the more ideological language is on the website - the harder to navigate the factual privacy features | missing 3rd party audit potential risks 101 |
|
||||
| So how about "don't trust, verify"? But to verify, it would require certain technical skills... like reading source code 😅 | source code reading is a highly technical skill (moreover: Ethereum dev could struggle with Solana code & vice versa) | 3rd party list (yes/no) from security audit agencies to independent security engineers (+their reputation 101 in later versions) |
|
||||
|We hope to bring in 3rd party auditors at some point | 3rd party list is needed here to be transformed into privacy signalling features | - |
|
||||
|
||||
## **Session**
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
Načítá se…
Odkázat v novém úkolu