Re: Volunteers for Chair?

Hi Michael,

The list is public - so, if you don't want to share the contents provided
to the list, maybe you'll have to do something with the link...  just FYI.

As the list is public, there's alot i can't get into.  Indeed, i think
that's been an on-going issue generally with W3C works & similar, as the
real human stuff, the use-cases that try to address serious problems,
crimes like human trafficking related issues; the details, aren't for a
public list.  indeed also, those pertaining to children, or the many other
areas where our humanity, gets truely tested - not merely on the 'sunny
days', but rather, how our technology serves us, as members of our humanity
- when things aren't all ok...

it seems the ideals believed, are that a wallet will sort it all out -
don't worry if you loose your phone, they can get you access to the wallet
again - i assume..?

therein also, leading to another area of thought, that's seemingly not
really allowed.  i'm very sad about a great many things that have been
meaningful to me.  I don't think i'll be found wrong, at least, not in the
end - but whether and how the WORLD wide web, will grow, is unknown; and,
i've survived, although barely at times, some fairly serious attacks as the
adversaries - go get this wallet thing done, seemingly because it'll
protect human rights, support our values - better - even if i disagree..
or, perhaps, until later, idk.

W3C can produce 'recommendations', or methods to do stuff.  In my time with
Web-Payments, WebID, RWW, Credentials, SchemaGen and various other bits and
pieces (inc. the old webizen initiative) ;  i remember the journey, few
were there, billions now impacted.

personally,

i've got a workstation that i'll use to adjust my deliberations around the
reality of what is, rather than what i'd hoped, as articulated back in
2013,14, etc.  but, certainly not enough, not well enough.. wanting to
build parts, in a less than peaceful space.

The workstation has a few a4500/a4000 GPUs, dual xeon, 256Gb ram, etc.
once i've done some background work on it, i'll be setting it up to be a
private & personal AI server;  there's some bits & pieces
https://github.com/WebizenAI/  basically, building upon the old 'read-write
web' stack, then making various adjustments - inc. wireguard related
personal networking, probably also patch in nymtech - seems, sadly, some of
the elders - well, maybe we do need a new bbs age like - 'new internet'
initiative.. Maybe, it's essential that those who remember the dial up
days, DIY, etc.  get stuck into making an alternative, just in case digital
slavery does become the dystopian underpinnings to a realm we don't want.
i dont know.

there's a list of objectives outlined in posts
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-humancentricai/  - one of the
major things that led to this group, was that i wanted to get human rights
documents put into RDF, so that they could be used when forming agreements
with one-another in social-web implementations (where there's no 3rd party
platform intermediaries required between all human relationships); then
finding, in the WSIS / UN related stuff, a range of problems that in my
view, have proven themselves to have been overwhelmingly well prosecuted,
over a very long period of time..  So, I didn't want to make a platform
where hosts couldn't kick bad actors off it, nor did I want to own the
human rights instruments as defined for digital transformation, or the ai
safety protocols that were / are needed, etc..  Yet, the expectations, need
to be reasonable, and, i don't think the dynamics related to that stuff,
will be first discussed on a public w3c list, although, i hope at some
stage - it does happen & that it does in-fact lead to good outcomes, not
just rebranding processes for old programs.

brave new world... IMHO: Asymmetrical pervasive surveillance is a
remarkable feat of engineering - doesn't have much to do with STEM, but
nonetheless, remarkable stuff...  how people can suffer so much, without
means to have disputes resolved peacefully in courts of law; as others,
apparently know everything..  they're values, are just so distant to me..
i've been losing hope.  I started, the renewed efforts in 2010 in a manner
linked with presenting: https://vimeo.com/30416090 on the screens, at an
event of importance, CHOGM 2011, having been handed 'the commission'...
but that's now, so many years ago...  its not like, there hasn't been an
opportunity, or that we didn't produce the tools to empower them to do so;
they just had other priorities...  apparently, making them - better
people..  so, ok...

but, i don't think the technological infrastructure is at all
human-centric; and, it seems any honourable effort to address it, has a
negligible chance of success, irrespective of whether the words appear in
marketing materials, or whatever else, linked with promotions...

Telecoms, selling ISDN connections at $1000 PCM, weren't promoting ADSL for
$50 PCM, in-fact, they got in the way.  Cable Companies, didn't help VOD
systems; and CDNs, wrecked the international investigative journalism
industry, as pricing control was centralised into the US via companies that
didn't make any money - but - owned the global marketsphere & its
advertising revenue markets...  so, no funding - just, public relations as
a replacement, in an ecosystem that seems to prefer people forget, than
tell the truth...

The group now has no chair.  If any member would like to become the chair,
they just need to log in & goto
https://www.w3.org/community/humancentricai/participants

officially, there should be a vote - via teleconf - but, we've not managed
to do that yet generally..  if people are interested in a teleconf, let me
know, or indeed also, feel welcome to have one without me ;)

I think, if the WORLD wide web is to survive...  that is, something that is
for all members of our human family..  then, well.  its 'the people', who
will have to go do what needs to be done, to make sure that happens for the
betterment of our human family, in a manner that is representative of our
values..  and truth, at least seeking to work through it - even if it
upsets someone, or has serious repercussive implications upon others -
well, shouldn't mean its not allowed; and somehow, the values, the aspects
of life that are of most importance, to need attention - without having to
expose it all to public lists, where people look for weaknesses in their
combat fantasies seeking to defeat 'competitors', for profits, or
whatever...   at times, its almost like i should start selling books
declared to be god..  not sure what the digitally transformed alternative
is, but, regardless, i think the objective overall is to seek to ensure
however its defined, its able to be commodified.

i'm just unable to maintain a high level of output, without resources,
trying to smile & be friendly to all, whilst so troubled by the
implications of what has in-fact happened in the past, morally sought, if
honourable, to be silent about it.

so, i think someone who is 'unburdened by the past' or whatever the
statement is, is needed for a w3c human centric AI effort - if indeed, it's
something sought to be maintained at all.  Certainly also, if there is no
interest, the group can be closed, per w3c rules & processes.

FWIW also;  I'm also looking for expressions of interest for 'web civics',
which i set-up in 2014 as there wasn't any organisation in the internet
governance ecosystems to support the production of free software, as
required for human rights related purposes.  i recently spoke about
humanitarian ict at the IETF119; and had planned to work on ontology for an
'agent discovery protocol' ecosystem, intended to impact a few things
including 'human centric internet' as it was termed by IGF - but it seemed
like, a few competitive alternatives then emerged - and, i'm troubled by
many of the dynamics brought about as a consequence of credentials being
commercialised without the other pieces - for reasons, i'm not sure is
appropriate to go into, on these lists.

BRICS has alot of people within participating jurisdictions, last I
checked, it's all associated to members of our human family who exist in
our WORLD..  whether & how the World Wide Web & related ecosystems grow, or
fail to, idk. As noted, I feel I've been defeated.

I've failed.  apologies, but i did my best..

best wishes.

Tim.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/ubiquitous/

On Thu, 8 Aug 2024 at 22:59, Michael Robbins <michael@learningpathmakers.org>
wrote:

> Timothy,
>
> Thank you for your thoughtful email. I understand and share your
> frustrations. I’ve been on a parallel journey for the last decade+ as a
> social entrepreneur working at the intersection of education, the web, and
> community change.
>
> I have reached a set of extensive conclusions and operating hypotheses
> related to your remarks and the mission of this group. Much of my knowledge
> and wisdom comes from direct experience and failure. It is complex and a
> LOT to explain.
>
> I have put as much as possible into a Coda repository. This is not for
> public distribution but I’m talking a leap of faith and sharing it with you
> and the rest of this group. I call it the Yantismor Codex.
>
> coda.io <https://coda.io/d/_d7HrfjQE5Tu/Dotes-Deck_suFD1>
> <https://coda.io/d/_d7HrfjQE5Tu/Dotes-Deck_suFD1>
> <https://coda.io/d/_d7HrfjQE5Tu/Dotes-Deck_suFD1>
>
> I’m continuing to advance parts of this as possible with a fww close
> collaborators. It’s challenging given my staunch commitment to the public
> good and exodus from our age of technofeudalism.
>
> I would welcome a discussion with everyone who is interested in learning
> more and exploring together.
>
> Michael
>
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/mwrxyz
>
> On Aug 8, 2024, at 4:57 AM, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> 
> FYI - FWIW - just figured out the archives link:
> https://www.w3.org/Search/Mail/Public/advanced_search?resultsperpage=100&sortby=date-asc
>
>
> On Thu, 8 Aug 2024 at 18:54, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> It's been reported to me that the group needs to have a chair-person,
>> whilst i note, i've seen other groups without one.  I think this is an
>> administrative requirement..
>>
>> There's a bit to update the group about, write a post about..  or perhaps
>> a few posts...  but i'd like to step-down as chair, which means there needs
>> to be a replacement.
>>
>> This doesn't mean that I'm unsupportive of efforts to bring about
>> technological infrastructure that may reasonably support a variety of, what
>> I'd consider to be universal ideals..  Yet, the conclusion that I've come
>> to, again, overall is that i' feeling overwhelmingly defeated.
>>
>> I'm not presently sure how to best articulate, circumstances,
>> deliberations, considerations & implications; that are complex, and in some
>> areas of most importance, have serious privacy implications; whilst others,
>> pertain to confidences, and behaving honourably is important to me.
>>
>> I started work on what i later called 'human centric' ecosystems, in
>> 2000, due to a relatives work on how synaptic nerve-cells work which led
>> him to be awarded a nobel prize, i was inspired by that work, alongside
>> other factors - and went about designing an ecosystem for online data
>> storage, that was based upon people owning their own data, and sharing
>> content by links.  There were many facets involved in these first 'crescent
>> network' / iBank designs, i was very young, troubled, naive & overall, just
>> starting out, after several years in the ICT sector as a young person..
>> These works developed through an initial attempt, that led to an
>> involvement with 'video on demand' and even 'streaming games' (soon
>> thereafter); alongside wifi, and all sorts of other things; but, to
>> characterise a fundamental dispute, there was opposing ideas; whilst i
>> wanted fairness, means to empower people, the opposite point of view was to
>> use the opportunity to manipulatively aggregate & seek to 'own it all', as
>> a super aggregator...  this was a problem, that i've been struggling to
>> ensure that at least alternatives exist to, since then.  It appears the
>> consequence of various complex issues now leads to a thin-client 'wallet'
>> based model being monopolistically deployed, and, i don't understand how to
>> support access to justice, means for people to store & be able to use in a
>> court of law, even if in poverty, electronic evidence pertaining to their
>> lives to lawful remedy, peacefully and in a timely manner; as does in-turn
>> also, impact our capacity to support STEM, fair-trading, electronic
>> agreements where both parties define terms rather than asymmetrical
>> agreements that may vary whenever; and beyond the many complex social
>> implications, there are also significant issues pertaining to engineering
>> systems to better support human consciousness via our technological
>> infrastructure that's increasingly acting as a prosthetic dependency upon
>> life, the lives of people, etc.
>>
>> the outcome is also, that whilst i feel defeated - those who may be
>> considered to have 'won', also do so in an ecosystem that poorly supports
>> accountability, provenance tracking & personal responsibility.  Whilst
>> seemingly good for some to 'make money' or indeed others, to merely get
>> more promotions - it seems, such beneficiaries can always claim they've
>> always been doing it, and so long as they've got the resources from the
>> past wins, it doesn't really matter - whilst seeking to maintain an
>> honourable approach, provide means to deliver outcomes where people can own
>> the software (licensing, patent-pool considerations, etc) pertaining to
>> their own thoughtware - well - that's work that's done in poverty, without
>> funding or safety and the outcome of these fundamental requirements means
>> that these foundations need to be ownable, by the 'data subject',
>> themselves...  their own thoughtware...  their own 'api', defined by them -
>> without undue interference or coercion.
>>
>> means, in-turn, to build the test apparatus needed to better understand
>> consciousness..  but how can that be done safely, given the environmentals
>> generally..  I really don't know.
>>
>> Indeed, whether its called 'human centric', which i termed due to needing
>> to have a condition in the earlier W3C work to ensure modalities of
>> outcomes were broader than 'platform owned' or 'corporation centric' or
>> indeed also, government centric - as the intellectual property for natural
>> persons, wasn't supported - so, that's why a new term was needed, and i
>> thought about it; notes can be found by searching the lists - noting, i've
>> just gone to the link, it appears to have changed..  anyhow.  As noted,
>> feeling defeated and due also to the code of conduct, I don't think
>> discussion about some of the related issues can be discussed - regardless
>> of science or reality...
>>
>> two last notes.
>>
>> with respect to protecting the human rights & interests of children and
>> in-turn also, identity development - which is a term pertaining to
>> psychology / social sciences.  I understand efforts are being made to apply
>> the wallet to all things internet.  i don't think itll deliver what they
>> say it'll fix, but, if that's not the point of doing it - i probably can't
>> talk about it anyway.
>>
>> a straight forward solution is to use RDF on domains or even posts, to
>> provide information about whether the content is suitable for children; ie:
>> ratings. and then, have a browser plugin or OS tool that looks for these
>> files, and then makes decisions based on what it says.  this means ontology
>> needs to be done for it, and somme other tooling - fairly straight forward,
>> should probably be done by schemaorg | could also be done in a way that
>> means it associates to particular posts in a social media system, rather
>> than just the high-level domain / URL.
>>
>> also; there's a bunch of stuff that i don't particularly want to see as
>> an adult, therefore, restricting this approach to merely considering the
>> interests of children as a child focused outcome; may in-fact, diminish the
>> ability for the outcome to do so - for children.   Therefore, i considered
>> the notion of terming any such initiative a personalisation solution
>> 'myweb', which therein has a particularly attentive focus upon delivering
>> outcomes to address the needs of young people.   The outcome would require
>> websites to install the file and/or ontological supports, much like
>> accessibility projects.
>>
>> soe notes about it - still poorly drafted (imho)
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1c1Afo-bja_jksBEynHyG7nBDz71TAPOZYkagdoh4e6A/edit
>>
>>
>> AND finally,  I apologise for not having been able to achieve more since
>> i instigated the creation of the group.  There has been alot of work in the
>> background, i'll go into it at some later stage.  But, should others have a
>> belief in the notion called 'human centric' AI, Internet, etc..  then -
>> finding someone willing to take on the role of Chair, would be very much
>> welcomed and i'll do my best to support it, but that's not delivering
>> much atm.  so, I guess, this is an honourable result..
>>
>> I have managed to obtain the 2nd hand parts to build a workstation that
>> is suitable for local LLM related AI work.  I'm hopeful that i'll be able
>> to build an environment that'll be good for art, RD&D, etc.
>>
>> but this is different, to seeking to...  well.  I'm very troubled about
>> the implications associated to some of my earlier works and the direction
>> the world is going in generally, the implications, etc.  as i'm defeated,
>> it appears the higher-level consensus must be, that i'm wrong; otherwise,
>> why would the resources go into the stuff thats troubling, rather than
>> solutions for tooling to help deliver SDGs and do all the good things -
>> unless, the so called 'promoter' of such sorts of solutions, is wrong.
>>
>> But thankyou for your time.  It's been a difficult ~12 years or so of W3C
>> works..  i'll write about my personal deliberations otherwise, somewhere
>> else.  I am happy to help any incoming chair learn more about the stuff
>> they may not know re: w3c, etc.  where i can help..
>>
>> I'll write about my view of what i intended re: human centric / human
>> centric ai, sometime soon.  but, i do worry, that work with the best of
>> intention - can seemingly be perverted - its like, inventing a hammer, then
>> seeing it go to market as a new weapon, rather than something that's really
>> helpful, when seeking to build homes...  notwithstanding the moral hazard
>> with oversimplifications...
>>
>> 🙏
>>
>> Timo.
>>
>