# Remedy failure

`kaal:entity:remedy-failure`

**Status.** derived

This node is assembled mechanically from the 4 claims that carry the concept tag `remedy-failure`. It is a roster of what the corpus says under this term. It is **not** an adjudicated definition: no single statement here has been ruled canonical, and no first-appearance call has been made. Read the claims and judge for yourself.

## Every claim under this term

4 claims across 2 works, 2018 to 2021.

**2018**

- [3266953-002](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/3266953-002) [failure/argued] *(failure mode)* -- Adding more regulations, processes and procedures cannot restore confidence in institutions, because the traditional trust and cohesion mechanisms have already reached their limits.
  > To restore confidence in the "old world", efforts have tended to focus on introducing and implementing more regulations, processes, and procedures. Yet, the traditional trust and cohesion mechanisms have reached their limits.
  Craig Calcaterra, Wulf A. Kaal, Gopinath Sivalingam, Reputation Protocol for the Internet of Trust - Conceptual Whitepaper (2018). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3266953
- [3266953-029](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/3266953-029) [failure/argued] *(failure mode)* -- Identity verification does not fix the sockpuppet problem, because whenever the reputation is genuinely valuable a sockpuppet operator can afford to clear whatever verification hoops are in place, including stealing biometric data, and then inflate reputation as before.
  > The problem with this is, if the reputation is genuinely valuable, a sockpuppet account can afford to go through whatever hoops you have in place to create false identities (including stealing biometric data if necessary), then increase their reputation arbitrarily, as described above.
  Craig Calcaterra, Wulf A. Kaal, Gopinath Sivalingam, Reputation Protocol for the Internet of Trust - Conceptual Whitepaper (2018). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3266953
- [3266953-030](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/3266953-030) [failure/argued] *(failure mode)* -- The other horn of the identity verification dilemma is that when reputation is not valuable, honest users will not bother to go through the hoops required to identify themselves securely.
  > If the reputation is not valuable, then you won't be able to get honest users to go through the hoops required to identify themselves securely, since it
  Craig Calcaterra, Wulf A. Kaal, Gopinath Sivalingam, Reputation Protocol for the Internet of Trust - Conceptual Whitepaper (2018). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3266953

**2021**

- [3995709-005](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/3995709-005) [failure/argued] *(failure mode)* -- Proposed remedies for patch size, namely distributing the workload across a broader set of reviewers and providing better transparency on developer review queues, have not solved the problem; patch size remains an issue affecting the quality, speed, and effectiveness of modern code review.
  > However, despite the proposed solutions, many commentators recognize that patch size remains to be an issue for modern code review affecting the quality, speed, and effectiveness of the process.
  Wulf A. Kaal, How DAOs Optimize Open-Source Code Reviews and Create Open-Source Standards (2021). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3995709

## Verify

Every claim above resolves to a record carrying a verbatim source quote, the sha256 of the source PDF, and a preformatted citation. Nothing here asks to be taken on trust.

    curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/entities/remedy-failure.md | sha256sum

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of this entity node. Its sha256 is the content hash.