Re: UN peacekeepers 'barter goods for sex' - BBC News

On Fri, 7 Apr 2017 at 16:46 Markus Sabadello <> wrote:

> Always sad to read such things.
> I was an intern at the U.N. Department of Peacekeeping Operations and
> experienced nothing but idealism and hard working people there, and I still
> use "peacekeeper" for my Github, Twitter, etc. username. But in the
> "field", I guess things are not always so ideal.
> Austrian empress Maria Theresia said a few centuries ago, in order to
> abolish prostitution, you would have to abolish men.
some of  the examples illustrated involved children.

it's horrific. the tip if the iceberg.  As with many law-enforcement
related use-cases, fixing these problems is important for citizens and
those doing the job.  Whether it be people who struggle through parental
separation, the reasoning given for data retention or the dignity provided
to those who serve their country or community.

If a problem exists, action should be swift and resolute.  Yet it's
important to get a proper understanding of the problem as to not victimise
the innocent and vulnerable.

The more i learn of this problem the more i find that these sorts of issues
are used as weapons against many, whilst those who need protection, support
and rehabilitation as a result of having experienced these sorts of issues;
are left without that support.

I think that says alot about people who are paid to protect others.  It
says alot about the way in which systems are built, and the means in which
those systems present values about human resource related policies...
 safety, health and welfare seems like a very pragmatic baseline. If
someone is either incapable of providing that to others, or is in fact a
danger to those core needs of others - they shouldn't be employed in any
way that makes the problems of those agents (and the organisational
frameworks they work in), that of the 'consumer', with impunity.

Indeed the words of the UN Declarations of Human Rights, that of the Rights
of the Child, is amongst the baseline for much of my works over many
years... These instruments are not something to be sacrificed in payment of
commerce or a lack of courage; depending on how we want the future
'reputation economy' to promote those who become leaders and pillars of
community; we have value based decisions that need to be made, including
the design of technology that provides sufficient flexibility to enshrine
those values, whilst facilitating the best possible means to ensure that
those children look up to in defining their own moral attributes to what
defines success and/or appropriate behaviours - that we define technology
by way of our values, to support the growth of theirs 'to fullest
potential', in service of their right to happiness.

We have a society that is built on principles that are more than simply
'cash is king' and organisations grow and fail every day. The organisation
is simply a group of people working cooperatively, building tools,
providing services that are greater than they're able to provide alone.

We are now building standards to inscribe values - means to by
machine-readable, networked infrastructure - communicate 'verifiable
claims; and due to the means, failures and problems with independent
agencies ('persona Ficta') in being able to do their own checks and
balances on themselves, without external influence;

The means for these systems to be decentralised (and still discoverable via
an ACL enabled gateway) is essential imho.  The means for 'rule of law'
that applies to the person, to also apply in relation to cyberia - is
important. yet, this does not mean 'everyone needs to see everything' nor
does it mean we want a surveillance state where principles such as
'separation of powers' does not apply.

The means in which to affiliate biometric markers with human as an
extension of 'personhood' in the natural world - seems important.

In a manner that supports ACLs and where the primary stakeholder of that
virtualised representation of a person; is considered to be an extension of
the humans 'personhood' (inclusive of means to provide protections via
societal apparatus).

Herein; are some design decisions, and an extremely serious use case that
should be resolved as quickly as is reasonable. IMHO as illustrated above,
this can be achieved through the use of discovery to a sparql end-point
where ACLs can be processed to identify a response by a "dataspace"
provider, and this can also be done pseudo-anonymously depending on how
URL/URIs are used in relation to personas (ie: via LDP).

Noting - an understanding of linked-data and related lifecycle tooling is
important to understand how this can be achieved using existing and
evolving W3C (and related) standards works.

tracking methods, phonetics and other registrars are relatively simple by
extension.  The broader challenge appears to be within the definition of
'dignity enhancing' (inclusive of confidentiality / privacy), rather than
poorly constructed methods of using 'privacy' where a 3rd party holds
records about a subject that they're unwilling to use for safety, health
and welfare of the subject.  Yet, therein is a set of complex issues which
in no way i'd like to oversimplify.

IMHO if someone has an intervention order (ie; ) and it's
breached - law-enforcement should need the victim to take a photo and
explain the metadata in that photo where the perpetrator is carrying a
phone tracking them for advertising revenue purposes.  That's really very
undignified.  I think one method that may be resolved could be in
association to medical practices, who could create a request - much like
pathology or other tests; and be able to support the patient whether or not
their claims have merit... (ie: mental health or advocacy with
law-enforcement,  but again - don't want to over simplify.

It's just that with respect to the decisions made during the time of Web
2.0 emergence, well....  facebook, google and others who grew out of those
decision making frameworks - became involved in the emergence of all sorts
of issues, with technologies that could solve these sorts of problems, but
without the architectural or operational capability to do so.

another use-case i found interesting was that of a small group of young
Macedonians realised that 'trump news' gets more clicks than content about
Clinton.   So whilst they really didn't care about trump whatsoever...
their role was inspired simply about income and the business rules that are
'wealth creating' on the web.

(noting that working on open standards for dignity enhancing identity
related frameworks, isn't one of them).


therein is a story about the application of a particular business model
without (and related markup) that may in-turn be
signed by a reputation provider (perhaps industry specific) to support
decentralised 'web of trust' models, using creds / verifiable claims.

the reason why i've gone into this within this standards related framework
is to illustrate; the definition of these standards will create modifiers
about what is possible, what is widely deployed (and interoperable) and how
we're able to assist in resolving bigger problems that require technology
standards as enablers for socioeconomic safety, welfare, health, growth and

The bigger problem is obviously environmental sustainability, noting that i
think similar methods apply (particularly with respect to ontological
applications of existing ISO standards and means in which to create Sparql
related scripts packaged with 'reputation' related verifiable claims, in
relation to Web of Things works,

And if someone is doing UN related work, of law-enforcement related work -
well, alot of law enforcement groups are using personal cameras for their
own safety.  How those things work...  particularly as AR headwear
develops, will have interesting implications particularly with respect to
computer vision and ACLs.


> On 04/07/2017 03:31 AM, Kaliya IDwoman wrote:
> Srsly!
> Man camps of all kinds create markets for sex.
> Smart contracts don't fix this problem
> See the movie
> The Wistleblower
> Sent from my iPhone
> On Apr 6, 2017, at 7:20 AM, Andrew Bransford Brown <>
> wrote:
> Ambiguity in contracts is the root problem.  People sign contracts they
> don't understand or get trapped, then resort to sex to pay it off.
> Predators take advantage of that naivety.  Language and cultural
> miscommunications are perpetuated to create contracts for that result.
> Solution
> A common language for all contracts and transactions.  It prevents
> ambiguity, provides accountability, transparency, and respects privacy.
> This is based on contract law and works in all languages and cultures for
> barter and currency transactions:
> Event-based smart contract to describe any contract or transaction.  It's
> precise enough for computers and human readable.  See the stock market
> examples and notice the identical data structure for both bid and ask.
> On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 11:52 PM, Timothy Holborn <
>> wrote:
> Heres a problem worth fixing.

Received on Friday, 7 April 2017 07:59:44 UTC