W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > August 2016

Re: How the father of the World Wide Web plans to reclaim it from Facebook and Google

From: Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 18:54:48 +0000
Message-ID: <CAM1Sok1HyEbs32PbZaAXCgHutJSCepqQH2k0AupRR2hp1EioQw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kaliya IDwoman <kaliya-id@identitywoman.net>, Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com>
Cc: Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>, W3C Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>, public-rww <public-rww@w3.org>, public-webid <public-webid@w3.org>
oh, and whilst i have trouble with auto-correct...

It's really very important to understand the opportunity and impact of
linked-data.  My first considerations / attempts resulted in a 3 year
project where this [1] was produced in about 2001 (having started in
2000).  Whilst i was very young at the time, so much i had no idea about
(having started with the concept of synaptic nerve cells, and how to think
about that kinda theory for online data-storage) the implications of W3C,
the production of Linked-Data, the patent policy of W3C, alongside a very
significant array of other aspects that are very difficult to see for the
untrained eye; may result in people not having a very good understanding of
what has been created within the realm of TimBL's works over the course of
many years, with so many amazing characters; yet,

i think atm; people are most afraid of robots...  whether it be the older
styled ones (ie; companies) or the new tools those older versions now use
(ie: "watson").

Simple fact is, i'm not sure we'd even know what they're doing; let alone
whether its being used and/or what the potential impact may be on the lives
of citizens...

I'm sure you have a good comprehension about the issues therein.

Kind Regards,

Timothy Holborn.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ew1HLquFy3M

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 at 04:40 Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>

> First off - inspirational work Kaliya...
> On Wed, 17 Aug 2016, 4:23 AM Kaliya IDwoman <kaliya-id@identitywoman.net>
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 5:51 AM, Adrian Hope-Bailie <
>> adrian@hopebailie.com> wrote:
>>> What is the business case for a service provider to adopt Solid?
>> 1) first off I'm super skeptical of any project that is
>> university/research based it is notoriously difficult to get those to
>> escape the lab as it where. Everyone has incentive to "publish" for their
>> degrees/professorships - zero incentive to make a usable, market
>> worthy/ready product (I don't just mean in a business way relative to
>> market but adoptable in the marketplace of tools and software)
>> 2) The Personal Data Ecosystem Consortium that I founded in 2010
>> http://www.pde.cc has a whole range of companies that have been working
>> on similar technology and ideas for well over 5 years. So it isn't new -
>> the ideas around personal data stores/banks etc and putting people at the
>> center of their own data lives go back at least to Johannes'  Ernst work
>> (See the top of my twitter for a diagram he drew in 2005-6.  And the
>> Augmented Social Network White Paper which itself and antecedents in other
>> work. http://asn.planetwork.net
>> 3) Please show me what Tim has lead that has gotten to market besides
>> HTML back in the day?
> I'm sure you mean TimBL, and I think it's important to note the web
> foundation, the w3c, the web we want campaign and of course ODI and
> Webscience related works; which is amongst his very broad-spectrum of
> interests that are all very complex and surely time-consuming.
> I think Sandro was amongst the earlier 'cross cloud' focused individuals,
> alongside a group of others and I note the w3 designissues notes.
>>> Why would Google, Facebook or anyone that build's their business on user
>>> data choose to let users take that away?
>> They don't have a choice because the European regulatory framework the
>> General Data Protection Regulation that comes into force in 2018 is
>> mandating it.
>> You also have a whole group of companies working on building businesses
>> around this premise and one finally finally got funding -
>> https://techcrunch.com/2016/06/30/digi-me-bags-6-1m-to-put-users-in-the-driving-seat-for-sharing-personal-data/
>> Meeco https://meeco.me/ from Australia is doing awesome work (Both there
>> and in the UK) as is MyDex https://mydex.org/
>>> Who will offer users a comparable service to these silos that attracts
>>> them away but adopts Solid and can still make enough money to survive
>>> competing with the biggest tech companies in the world?
>>> The point is not whether or not the architecture is easy the point is
>>> whether it has the potential to make anybody any money because if it
>>> doesn't then I think you will have a hard time persuading people to use it,
>>> no matter how well it scales.
>> We have to really get into the weeds of figuring how value flows in these
>> networks to make it work for the parties involved and be sustainable in the
>> long run.  It will take way more then "architecture".
> Fwiw - I far prefer the concept of 'human centric', rather than 'self
> sovereign'.
> I also am not confident we have a means to denote a human in a human
> centric manner yet.  I do not think a webid-tls cert with a foaf doc uri
> stating 'person' does it: and whilst I've explored the idea of allocating
> ipv6 subnets, through to a grand array of other alternatives, all I have
> found to date is a bunch of smart people debating concepts, who could
> ideally cooperate as to define something that works for the most vulnerable
> on our planet reliable.
>> If you all want to dive into some of the nitty gritty I invite you to the
>> Internet Identity Workshop - http://www.internetidentityworkshop.org
> If I can find the budget I would very much enjoy the experience.
> If more info exists, please let me know.
> Oh, also - what are your ideas about how to put human-centric controls on
> superintelligent A.I. systems and how they interact with person/s via data?
> Tim. Holborn :)
> :) Kaliya
>>> On 15 August 2016 at 14:11, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On 15 August 2016 at 14:08, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Solid isn't finished yet.
>>>> Solid is at version 0.6 rather than 1.0.
>>>> But I dont really know what more can be added to it to get it to v1.0.
>>>> Im using it on a daily basis and it works fine.  Some people are
>>>> perfectionists I suppose :)
>>>> In any case its IMHO light years ahead of where the rest of the web is,
>>>> even if you only take small parts of it and use it.
>>>> You can also argue that solid will never be finished, in the sense
>>>> that, the web will never be "finished".
>>>> Its definitely something that can be used today.
>>>>> On Mon, 15 Aug 2016, 10:07 PM Melvin Carvalho <
>>>>> melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 15 August 2016 at 11:50, Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>> From the article: "The question is whether architecture will be
>>>>>>> enough."
>>>>>>> The answer is no.
>>>>>>> We live in world where few ideas succeed without a strong business
>>>>>>> case. The architecture is the easy part.
>>>>>> Architecture is deceptively difficult to get right.  The vast
>>>>>> majority if systems start to fall over as they scale.  The web and REST are
>>>>>> two architectures that buck that trend and just get stronger as they scale.
>>>>>> Solid is the next evolution in that architectural trend, imho,
>>>>>> because it simply embraces the points that made the web great, and extends
>>>>>> it a little bit, while being 100% backwards compatible.  Right now, it's
>>>>>> the only system that I know of, with this property, in fact, nothing else
>>>>>> is close.  So this in itself, the ability to scale to billions of users, is
>>>>>> a business case.  Quietly facebook adopted the social graph approach to the
>>>>>> web, and web architectural principles with their graph protocol, and also
>>>>>> an implementation of WebID.
>>>>>> I think what's true is that few ideas succeed, because simply, we
>>>>>> have a lot of ideas and a lot of competition.  Having a business can help,
>>>>>> but the right architecture is the magic sauce to get through those
>>>>>> scalability barriers.
>>>>>> I personally think Solid is the business opportunity of a lifetime,
>>>>>> perhaps even bigger than the first web.  Im certainly investing on that
>>>>>> basis.
>>>>>>> On 14 August 2016 at 10:49, Timothy Holborn <
>>>>>>> timothy.holborn@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Anders,
>>>>>>>> I'm using this email to respond to both [1] in creds; in addition
>>>>>>>> to the below, with some lateral considerations.
>>>>>>>> See this video where Mr Gates and Mr Musk are discussing in China
>>>>>>>> AI [2].
>>>>>>>> I haven't fully considered the implications, whilst i've certainly
>>>>>>>> been considering the issue; i have not fully considered it, and as modern
>>>>>>>> systems become subject to government contracts as may be the case with
>>>>>>>> enterprise solutions such as those vended by IBM [3], may significantly
>>>>>>>> lower the cost for government / enterprise, in seeking to achieve very
>>>>>>>> advanced outcomes - yet i'm unsure the full awareness of how these systems
>>>>>>>> work, what potential exists for unintended outcomes when work by
>>>>>>>> web-scientists[4][5] becomes repurposed without their explicit and full
>>>>>>>> consideration of the original designers for any extended use of their
>>>>>>>> works, what the underlying considerations are by those who are concerned
>>>>>>>> [6][7] and how these systems may interact with more advanced HID as i've
>>>>>>>> kinda tried to describe recently to an audience here [8] and has been
>>>>>>>> further discussed otherwise [9] [10].
>>>>>>>> I'm a little concerned about the under-resourcing that seems to
>>>>>>>> plague Manu's / Dave's original vision (that included WebDHT) to the
>>>>>>>> consultative approach that i believed had alot of merit in how it may
>>>>>>>> interact with the works of RWW at the time (alongside WebID) which have al
>>>>>>>> progressed, yet, not seemingly to a solution that i think is 'fit for
>>>>>>>> purpose' in attending to the issues before us.
>>>>>>>> I have considered the need for people to own their own biometric
>>>>>>>> signatures.  I have considered the work by 'mico-project'[11] seems to be a
>>>>>>>> good supporter of these future works, particularly given the manner in
>>>>>>>> which these works support LDP and other related technologies...
>>>>>>>> But the future is still unknown, and what worries me most; is those
>>>>>>>> who know most about A.I. may not be able to speak about it as a citizen or
>>>>>>>> stakeholder in the manner defined by way of a magna carta, such as is the
>>>>>>>> document that hangs on my wall when making such considerations more broadly
>>>>>>>> in relation to my contributory work/s.
>>>>>>>> i understand this herein; contains an array of fragments; yet, am
>>>>>>>> trying to format schema that leads others to the spot in which i'm
>>>>>>>> processing broader ideas around what, where and how; progress may be
>>>>>>>> accelerated and indeed adopted by those capable of pushing it forward.
>>>>>>>> I remember the github.com/Linkeddata team (in RWW years) wrote a
>>>>>>>> bunch of things in GO, which is what the IPFS examples showcase, and
>>>>>>>> without providing exhaustive links, i know Vint has been working in the
>>>>>>>> field of inter-planetary systems [13], therein also understanding previous
>>>>>>>> issues relating to JSON-LD support (as noted in [1] or [14] ), which
>>>>>>>> in-turn may also relate to other statements made overtime about my view
>>>>>>>> that some of the works incubated by credentials; but not subject to IG or
>>>>>>>> potential WG support at present - may be better off being developed within
>>>>>>>> the WebID community as an additional constituent of work that may work
>>>>>>>> interoperable with WebID-TLS related systems.
>>>>>>>> Too many Ideas!!!
>>>>>>>> (perhaps some have merit...)
>>>>>>>> Tim.H.
>>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-credentials/2016Aug/0045.html
>>>>>>>> [2] https://youtu.be/TRpjhIhpuiU?t=16m26s
>>>>>>>> [3] http://blog.softlayer.com/tag/watson
>>>>>>>> [4] http://webscience.org/
>>>>>>>> [5] https://twitter.com/WebCivics/status/492707794760392704
>>>>>>>> [6] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tV8EOQNYC-8
>>>>>>>> [7]
>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Letter_on_Artificial_Intelligence
>>>>>>>> [8] (perhaps not the best reference, but has a bunch of ideas in
>>>>>>>> it:
>>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1RzczQPfygLuowu-WPvaYyKQB0PsSF2COKldj1mjktTs/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>>> [9] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTqF3w2yrZI
>>>>>>>> [10] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_x_VpAjim6g
>>>>>>>> [11] http://www.mico-project.eu/technology/
>>>>>>>> [12] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CMxDNuuAiQ
>>>>>>>> [13]
>>>>>>>> http://www.wired.com/2013/05/vint-cerf-interplanetary-internet/
>>>>>>>> [14] https://github.com/ipfs/ipfs/issues/36
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 at 14:47 Anders Rundgren <
>>>>>>>> anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2016-08-11 15:16, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
>>>>>>>>> > Really good article, mentions Solid and other technologies.
>>>>>>>>> WebID is mentioned by the author in the comments too ...
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > http://www.digitaltrends.com/web/ways-to-decentralize-the-web/
>>>>>>>>> One of the problems with the Web is that there is no easy way
>>>>>>>>> letting a provider know where you come from (=where your Web resources
>>>>>>>>> are).  This is one reason why OpenID rather created more centralization.
>>>>>>>>> The same problem is in payments where the credit-card number is used to
>>>>>>>>> find your bank through complex centralized registers.
>>>>>>>>> Both of these use-cases can be addressed by having URLs + other
>>>>>>>>> related data such as keys in something like a digital wallet which you
>>>>>>>>> carry around.
>>>>>>>>> There is a snag though: Since each use-case needs special logic,
>>>>>>>>> keys, attributes etc. it seems hard (probably impossible), coming up with a
>>>>>>>>> generic Web-browser solution making such schemes rely on extending the
>>>>>>>>> Web-browser through native-mode platform-specific code.
>>>>>>>>> Although W3C officials do not even acknowledge the mere
>>>>>>>>> existence(!) of such work, the progress on native extensions schemes has
>>>>>>>>> actually been pretty good:
>>>>>>>>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webappsec/2016Aug/0005.html
>>>>>>>>> This is approach to decentralization is BTW not (anymore) a
>>>>>>>>> research project, it is fully testable in close to production-like settings
>>>>>>>>> today:
>>>>>>>>> https://test.webpki.org/webpay-merchant
>>>>>>>>> The native extensions also support a
>>>>>>>>> _decentralized_development_model_for_Web_technology_, something which is
>>>>>>>>> clearly missing in world where a single browser vendor has 80% of the
>>>>>>>>> mobile browser market!
>>>>>>>>> Anders
Received on Tuesday, 16 August 2016 18:55:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:24:42 UTC