Re: Rango WoN Re: Public consultation on EU digital principles

> On 16. Aug 2021, at 17:27, Chris Gough <> wrote:
>> What you want is a window opening up with rich 
>> live information: shop opening hours perhaps, but
>> possibly scandals, bankruptcy, or phenomenal growth stories!
>> A map of the world showing where the company is located.
>> Local news over there perhaps.  

>> Ok. That’s exaggerating, but it’s just to help make the point
>> about how far we are from having something people want to look at.
> If a sufficiently rich tapestry of contextual data was available, why would you inflict it on a human? I would much rather have my own due diligence robot that hid out of sight except to warn me when something smelled like trouble.

Human beings are very good at evaluating contextual information. 
That is what we were evolved to do. The Web has nearly no such information, 
other than that we arrived at a link by following another link. 

That was enough contextual information when the web started off, 
if you were lucky enough to start from a good web page. But now 
with so much value online, and people just reposting content 
nearly automatically, those minimal contextual clues no longer work.

So we need Rich contextual data (including legal, geopolitical data) + 
User Interface design and of course some AI algorithms to work out when 
it is worth showing the data. 

But we don’t want the AI to make the decisions of showing or not 
showing information. At some point humans have to be able to see 
the contextual information. Such as: which country is the new domain 
you are looking at located in… That is work for designers. 

A spoof article can be very valuable, and need cause no harm if  
one knows where it comes from. In fact it can be positive.

> Algorithmic due dilligence is a kind of spam detection problem (inverse recommendation), it seems like it might yield to a combination of transfered knowledge from the community plus personalised refinements. If this community and I can agree on what we are trying to avoid, then we can collaborate on avoiding it by sharing examples of bad.
> How to trust the consensus of the community? That's an identity assurance problem, which reduces to an assessment of the accumulated evidence of participation in society. If only I had a rich tapestry of... Ah-Ha!.
> Cross-referencing identity fiats (like business registers etc.) may just be a bootstrapping exercise until systems accumulate enough verifiable evidence of economic activity that's densely linked to themselves.

yes. so a good network of referrals from friends or review sites to an online shop
is a good starting point to want to go there. But we need the grounding
that we have in real life: a shop, school, newsagent, postoffice building in a town
don’t just appear overnight and disappear the next day, as they can do online.

It is the ”just a bootstrapping” part I have a problem with. 
The web has been bootstrapped already. 
We now need a way to ground it in real legal and social 
institutions. We need to allow those institutions of knowledge
to stand out from the others, to allow long term games of trust
to emerge: game theoretical dynamics change dramatically if one
is playing only one game or engaged in long term with others.

I forgot to sent the  link to the article on stopping https phishing

> Chris Gough
> ---
> The content of this email and attachments are considered confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the email and any copies, and notify the sender immediately.  The information in this email must only be used, reproduced, copied, or disclosed for the purposes for which it was supplied.

Received on Monday, 16 August 2021 16:14:24 UTC