philosphical design

Hi Jeff,

W3C is about open standards to support human rights in relation to
'cyber' interactions with personhood.  This is far simpler than talking
about patent pools, platforms, stakeholders, AI, etc.

How do we better support the human dignity of persons who've been involved
in making those standards not for wage or income, but in support of the
underlying virtues in which w3c was created, or so it is said by media, to
support humanity overall.

I'm feeling a broad sense of moral hazard, and i'm seeking input about how
best to triage it... spoke of webscience and
philosophical engineering.  It seems that the progressive growth of W3C has
seemingly lacked capacity to better support these emerging issues, nor
'take advantage' of the opportunities it presents, with respect to patent
pool agreements and in-turn legal personality participatory agreements with

I have attempted from the past to forge 'web civics' as a
complimentary entity, yet this has largely failed.

How could all those concerned about #VaccinePassports (verifiable claims /
credentials works) become involved in W3C as to better illustrate what it
is they view as they're needs (and those of their loved-ones, children,
etc.) productively via the forum that was responsible for the creation of
the tooling, so many believe, is worthy of protests, world-wide.

I am deeply concerned; personally, that as i made a significant investment
in marketplace creation / establishment; upon a basis, of open standards
(perhaps, with poor documentation at times); that the broader ecosystem
surrounding my views about how to better support human 'identity' or
#RealityCheckTech hasn't better been described (too often, for persons now,
shown to have wronged me, from my point of view, in a pursuit of future
profits - problem being, i'm not seeking to tax consciousness as others may
be willing to do, in ways, i morally believe to be a form of wrong; but i
won't judge you today, on the basis of how much toilet-paper you have at
home, given circumstances broadly).

I would happily discuss the matter with you, perhaps also, we could create
an online chat; for instance, at a
scheduled time, to support engagement on this important topic with a view
to some sort of progressive outcome for us all, world-wide.

the underlying principal objective; is to figure out how to best serve
humanity, without sacrificing the lives of those who do the work who may
end-up dead, without a war memorial, as is the case for 'cyber' greyfare
participants, all too often; as to moreover forge a pathway, that could

the method and practice discipline for how that may be done; i'm yet to
fully discover, and am hopeful you'll have some progressive ideas about how
any human being from any part of our world may better participate with
better confidence, that they're less likely to be subjected to harms, alone
and isolated; should it be the case, that they do not represent a legal
personality (incorporated entity) but rather, are seeking to do good, for
the betterment of our biosphere and humanity as is part of it.

Kind Regards,

Timothy Holborn.

Received on Saturday, 14 August 2021 14:52:23 UTC