On the Web, we let strangers tell us who to trust, what to read, and where to go. Which means your good name can be worth real money. And reputation hacking can be big business.
By Annalee Newitz -- Wired
March, 2007 -- John and Nina Swanson run a business selling vintage postcards on eBay. To keep customers happy, the Swansons reply to buyers promptly and ship on time. This policy is reflected in their eBay feedback score — a rating based on responses to prior transactions. Positive comments are scored as one point. Neutral and negative remarks are recorded as zero and negative one, respectively. The Swansons have a score of over 2,000.
Six years ago, University of Michigan information studies professor Paul Resnick asked the couple to participate in an experiment. Resnick wanted the Swansons to continue selling postcards through their established profile, but also to offer the same goods and services through seven fake identities. Initially these bogus profiles would have no reputation; later they would be given negative scores. The Swansons agreed.
After 470 auctions, Resnick found that the Swansons’ main account, with its high customer rating, earned an average of 8.1 percent more per transaction than the fakes. It was the first hard proof that a feedback score — a number generated by a collection of unrelated people — carries quantifiable real-world value. “What we’re seeing here is a new kind of trust,” Resnick says. “It’s a kind of impersonal trust geared to situations with lots of interactions among strangers.”
In other words, the crowd matters. Today we harness the masses for everything from choosing the next pop star on American Idol to perfecting open source software and assembling Wikipedia articles. But perhaps the most widespread and vital uses for group input online are in scoring systems. In addition to eBay feedback, these are the customer ratings that Amazon.com and Yahoo Shopping post with product reviews. They’re the feedback scores that Netflix tallies to help subscribers decide which movies to order. And they’re the up-or-down votes that sites like Digg and Reddit (part of the Wired Media Group, which also includes WIRED magazine) rely on to determine which stories to feed Web surfers.
But as rating systems have become more popular — and, as Resnick shows, valuable — there has been what some would say is a predictable response: the emergence of scammers, spammers, and thieves bent on manipulating the mob. Call it crowdhacking.
In some cases, crowdhackers are looking to boost sales or increase traffic to their Web sites. In other instances, they’re simply ripping off unsuspecting consumers. Either way, the more we base decisions on the wisdom of crowds, the greater the incentive to cheat.
more
