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

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
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>>