W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > July 2010

Re: Show me the money - (was Subjects as Literals)

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 08:56:51 -0400
Message-ID: <4C2DE213.7070907@openlinksw.com>
To: Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net>
CC: Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
Patrick Durusau wrote:
> Henry,
>
> On 7/2/2010 6:03 AM, Henry Story wrote:
>> On 2 Jul 2010, at 11:57, Patrick Durusau wrote:
>>
>>   
>>> On 7/2/2010 5:27 AM, Ian Davis wrote:
>>>     
>>>> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 10:19 AM, Patrick 
>>>> Durusau<patrick@durusau.net>   wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>       
>>>>> I make this point in another post this morning but is your 
>>>>> argument that
>>>>> investment by vendors =
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>> I think I just answered it there, before reading this message. Let me
>>>> know if not!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>> I think you made a very good point about needing examples so user 
>>> can say: "I want to do that."
>>>
>>> Which was one of the strong points of HTML.
>>>      
>> Ok, what users will want is the Social Web. And here is the way to 
>> convince people:
>> "The Social Network Privacy Mess: Why we Need the Social Web"
>>
>>     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=994DvSJZyww&feature=channel
>>
>>
>> ( This can of course be improved) The general ideas should be clear:
>>
>>   dystopia: we cannot have all social data centralised on one server.
>>   utopia: there is a lot of money to be made in creating the social 
>> web, and thereby
>>      increasing democracy in the world.
>>
>>   This can ONLY be done with linked data. And there is a real need 
>> for it.
>>
>>    
> Several presumptions:
>
> 1) "there is a lot of money to be made creating the social web" - ? On 
> what economic model? Advertising? Can't simply presume that money can 
> be made.

Shallowness of Web 2.0 doesn't apply to Web 3.0.

Business is ultimately about providing tangible value packaged and 
delivered in appropriate for re. target audience.

Data by its very essence is amenable to a variety of business models 
once messaging (story telling), problem palpability, and value 
proposition articulation intersect.
>
> 2) "thereby increasing democracy in the world" - ??? Not real sure 
> what that has to do with social networks. However popular "increasing 
> democracy" may be as a slogan, it is like "fighting terrorism."

Simple slogan for social networking: Discover The Magic of Being You!

Value Prop: No matter how much data you may have on Facebook, Google, 
LinkedIn, and wherever else, "You" are the one who holds the key to Your 
Identity. You are the only one truly capable of creating effective 
context for those data fragments loosely associated with you.

What I describe above has a number of productization style monikers 
associated with it:

1. Personal Data Spaces -- how I see it
2. Personal Data Locker -- as Dave Siegel sees it
3. Personal Data Bank -- as Marc Davis sees it
4. Others..

What important here is that there is overwhelming evidence that the 
"Social Network Privacy" mess is problem that's reached its palpability 
point on a global scale. Thus, even though DBpedia may have bootstrapped 
the Web of Linked Data, its signature effect is going to materialize via 
fixing today's broken social networking landscape.
>
> Different governments and populations have different definitions for 
> both. I have my own preferences but realize there are different 
> definitions used by others.
>
> 3) "can ONLY be done with linked data." Really? Seems like the phone 
> companies from your example did it long before linked data.
Of course not.

You need a Web of Structured Linked Data.
>
> 4) "there is a real need for it." ? I get as annoyed as anyone with 
> the multiple logins and universities do have some common logins for 
> their internal systems but I am not sure I would describe it as a 
> need. At least until some survey shows that a large number of users 
> are willing to pay for such a service.

People want to be able to truly control their own privacy, which means 
control their vulnerabilities (many state transitions here), which very 
dependent on controlling their data, which ultimately requires 
verifiable identity in the form of a WebID + Data Access Policies.


Kingsley
>
> Hope you are looking forward to a great weekend!
>
> Patrick
>
>>     Henry
>>    
>


-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	      
President & CEO 
OpenLink Software     
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen 
Received on Friday, 2 July 2010 12:57:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:42:21 UTC