Re: Is Privacy Dead ? A helpful hint.

Hi Daniel,

A UD-DNS could be used for accountability in business & government, info 
assurance, conceptualization of ideas, job creation, and research.   The 
abstract as written in the patent application describes it as follows:

Methods for implementing an Internet Operating System are described at the core 
as a Unified-Dynamic Domain Name Server (UD-DNS) system and may be referred to 
as a web integrity service (WIS). A list of root http addresses resides in a 
database. The top level domain (TLD) is parsed from the list. New TLD extensions 
(such as .law, .fcc, .fda, .hhs, .sec, .epa, etc.) representing human-based 
networks of integrity-founded information are bound to the previously parsed 
second-level domain names and assigned a Registry Identifier Number (RIN). The 
list is transferred to an authentication registry server (ARS). For each new 
http address/RIN, a dataset component template is imported and encrypted into a 
global encryption key. A bindery service connects the end-user of the Internet 
to a validation service through which a dataset component template may be 
populated and, per each new TLD's entity domain and qualification servers, 
displayed. Methods for conveying populated information comprise a software 
program of graphical user interface (GUI) systems with USML-(United States 
Markup Language)-encrypted stylesheets which are browsed via methods described 
herein. An Internet Configuration Panel (ICP) comprises the GUI system that 
connects a user with the UD-DNS system. 

Cheers,  
 
Michael A. Norton
 




________________________________
From: Daniel Smith <opened.to@gmail.com>
To: Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com>
Cc: Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>; Submit to W3C Egov IG 
<public-egov-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Wed, October 6, 2010 10:13:08 PM
Subject: Re: Is Privacy Dead ? A helpful hint.

Mike, just wondering, what would such a DNS have been used for?
Thanks.
Daniel Smith

On 10/6/10, Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Oh boy - you're causing me to want to dig up the 200 elements of XML
> datasets I
> wrote to support a Unified Dynamic Domain Name Server (UD-DNS) system for
> the
> feds & civilians alike.
>
> Michael A. Norton
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
> To: public-egov-ig@w3.org
> Sent: Wed, October 6, 2010 12:08:20 PM
> Subject: Is Privacy Dead ? A helpful hint.
>
> To answer my own question: No, but in the fashion of Governments everywhere,
> it
> is is buried deeply in reports [1,2].  Statistical Reports have a spatial
> and
> temporal coverage independent of population.  Population of what ?  Well,
> whatever, people (of course), fish, bananas, rocks, etc..  Whatever the
> group,
> the population number in scientific notation is always the same:
> max(id) x (10^(-log10(max(id))) [.= 1 for every integer >= 1]
> Sure, it's a trick, Chemists use it all the time calculating pH (acid-base
> balance, "concentration" = 1/(atomic population)).  Government Reports use
> the
> same trick, and the tree framework that supports the population bins - in
> the
> US:
>
> //Country/State/County/Population - can be pre-calculated (see XML below).
>
> To scale this up to Planet size requires some other assumptions[3], however
> an
> immediate useful result is that numbering subdivisions with digits (0-9) is
> more
> trouble than it's worth.  Any three digit (A-Z) code is just as good and
> promotes accuracy.  In the example below, the civil entity "Parker County,
> Texas" is considerably easier to remember as "PAR" than as the Census
> numbering
> "367".  It does take a bit of work to weed out the homonyms, e.g. "Parmer
> County, Texas" (369), but it is a one time chore.
>
> I am doing this for (at least) four reasons:
> - To give clerks a break from people who only speak hexadecimal.
> - To generalize Trade reporting.  This applies to both Trade in goods and
> Financial results (reported in currency).
> - To demonstrate how Governments protect personal privacy, even if they
> don't
> want to, or don't mean to.
> - To give establish a firm scientific rationale for ignoring the present
> Election Year foolishness[4].
>
> --Gannon
>
> (moral of the story: citizen anonymity is independent of location)
> <dct:coverage xmlns:dct="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
>              xmlns:dcam="http://purl.org/dc/dcam/"
>              xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
>              dct:issued="2010-10-06T12:00:00-05:00"
>              dct:temporal="P3M"
>              maxid="1000"
>              population="eval(max(id) x 10^(-log10(max(id)))">
> <admin0 rdfs:label="United States (Country)" dcam:memberOf="0US"
> dct:alternative="222139P" >
>  <admin1 rdfs:label="Texas (State)" dcam:memberOf="0TX"
> dct:alternative="170524P">
>    <admin2 rdfs:label="Parker (County)" dcam:memberOf="PAR"
> dct:alternative="085327P">
>      <citizen rdfs:label="Minnie from PAR" dct:identifier="1"  />
>      <citizen rdfs:label="Max from PAR" dct:identifier="1000" />
>    </admin2>
>  </admin1>
> </admin0>
> </dct:coverage>
>
> [1] http://www.fcsm.gov/working-papers/spwp22.html
> [2]
> http://factfinder.census.gov/jsp/saff/SAFFInfo.jsp?_pageId=su5_confidentiality
> [3] http://www.rustprivacy.org/sun/spookville/dct_coverage.xml
> [4] My muse is the Kingston Trio, specifically "MTA".  It is on youtube.
> Readers are encouraged to listen to the lyrics: Issuing a statistical report
> is
> like Charlie's Wife (A Government) throwing Lunch through the first open
> train
> window she sees.  Linked Data Consumers are Charlie.
>
>
>