Re: Simple 'Graph tech' videos...

Will think more, whilst seeing stuff like:
https://twitter.com/AussieVal10/status/1439429592813498370?s=19

That doesn't see feasible to have occurred without the work on a few
centred around this list, at least in the beginning before others to works
in different directions.

Obviously, a "double vaccination" "credentials" isn't the only type of
"credential", but as has been noted; the relationship between the choices
made to not go do proprietary works, that incur income and all those sorts
of dignity enhancing things but rather to make royalityFreeTech - doesn't
have a meaningful relationship with human rights.


"Taxes" like identity can mean many things.

Not many, indeed very few - understand graphs / semweb; kinda makes them
like animals.  I guess that's a way to consider the association to human
rights, etc.

Treat them like animals via tech, for profit.

:(. I am so very sad about it.

On Sun, 19 Sep 2021, 12:55 am Melvin Carvalho, <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, 17 Sept 2021 at 14:06, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I would really appreciate some simple, designed for people who barely
>> understand how to use a smart-phone / apps; videos (youtube, etc.)
>> about how RDF / SemWeb / Graph tech works.
>>
>
> Good question.  I'm not sure what the best point to jump in to RDF /
> SemWeb is in 2021.  It's scattered around the web a bit.
>
> There's also RDF is not quite the same as the "semantic web" (small
> letters) which I take as being human and machine readable data
>
> Most of this group are well versed in RDF and related standards.  10 years
> ago there was a push to make it a lingua franca for the web
>
> Arguably developers have not fully embraced that push, leaving us in a
> world where there are multiple standards to read (human and machine) and
> write.
>
> Personally, I think that's something to embrace, rather than fight (I've
> done many years of RDF evangelism too!)
>
>
>>
>> It seems, if you try to talk about the ability to pull data from 'the
>> network' people have NFI how choices relate to their rights (re: use of
>> public funds) to support #AccessToJustice.
>>
>> In-turn; this gets to the heart of why RWW was an important thing to
>> spend countless hours progressing freely, in the interests of #HumanRights,
>> etc.
>>
>
> This group is simply about using standards to read and write to the web
>
> W3C has traditionally had a royalty-free patents policy, so we operate in
> the spirit of protocols of the web being unencumbered by founders' taxes
>
> This doesnt automatically dove-tail into human rights and values.  Put
> simply, the web cannot be said to have any one set of values, because look
> at all the different values it represents
>
> Re "better for humanity".  Well intended actions can have negative
> consequences, and bad actions can have good consequences.  You can only
> hope to lean towards the good side, in whatever way you operate
>
> So, I think a more pragmatic approach is to use standards to build things,
> and where there are gaps create new standards, and see if they catch on
>
>
>>
>> Far beyond the CG filled with unpaid contributors; W3C obviously
>> incorporates an array of global organisations.
>>
>> Perhaps they should also be asked to provide, for humanitarian purposes,
>> simple videos to explain what it is and how it is, they're so very involved
>> (via humans) in deciding the future of our inalienable human rights; and
>> whether or not, it'll end-up getting better for 'consumers' / 'humanity' at
>> large.
>>
>> The RWW Community was established on forging a future that was intended
>> to be 'better for humanity', as far as i'm aware; as far as i am aware were
>> the predicates; linked to 'patent pool protected' royalty free standards,
>> as is required to protect freedom of thought.
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zXqHIJJVxk
>>
>> tell me, by all means, the sentiments about human rights are not shared.
>> I will then be empowered to employ those statements to make better
>> decisions in future.  Yet, its impossible presently for me to believe that
>> the consequential commercialisation schedule for linked 'technologies', is
>> driven by anything other than those so focus on the money; when so many
>> worked, without that in-front-of-mind; other than to seek benefit, for
>> having made awesome work (with others) for the betterment of humanity..
>> etc.  Seems to me, so many who took-up the consequence of these works,
>> don't understand it; and, well.  how does it actually help the vulnerable
>> when governments say, it'll be used to limit socio-economic participation
>> to those who do not have a valid W3C credential at that time.  As i engaged
>> with, years ago, WebID via its documentation; did not support the various
>> elements required to support an ecosystem that could in-turn support human
>> agency, with AI.
>>
>> notwithstanding conversations about 'personal ontologies' or whatever
>> else; the world is in distress.
>>
>> As far as i can tell...  And, given my heritage being linked to a large
>> pathology company (and pathologist) it also doesn't make any sense to me,
>> other than to commercialise globally a health-system via tech, as to forge
>> a solution intended to improve the circumstances of Americans.
>>
>> from 2015 (pre-chartered, as was the intent of the call, to get done);
>> https://soundcloud.com/ubiquitous-au/credentialscgtelecon2015-06-02medical
>>
>>
>> The humanity of a person should only be attacked on the basis of facts.
>> I have alot of facts, but some relate to vulnerable persons relating to
>> use-cases about vulnerable persons, that are fairly undignified for the
>> 'data subject' to disclose.  So tell me, about human rights? What do you
>> support?
>>
>> because facts should outweigh the benefits of wrong-doings, afaik; or
>> tell me,show me why those sorts of moral values, those sorts of
>> philosophical engineering[1] considerations are actually false.?
>>
>> as i've survived, stuff, others have not.  I see no dignity for having
>> done the right thing, by the choices others have made leveraging the
>> circumstances in which the dignity of others should be preserved.  IMO
>> there are several areas relating to the future of human dignity[2] that
>> need to be better figured out than my intentionally crappy works[3] linked
>> to an identifier[4] harmed, without available legal recourse; in addition
>> to the fact, that the harms made, resulted in distortions of various forms
>> as to manufacture a case that has not reasonable association to reality; as
>> is a form of causality related attack, for the benefit of those who
>> succeeded.   If the implications were just about me, that wouldn't lead to
>> a complaint about it; rather, i'm seeing stuff, protests world-wide, that
>> seemingly may support an underlying reason for it, impacting millions if
>> not billions.
>>
>> Fact is, if human rights were important, there'd be an RDF ontological
>> URI Framework for it.
>>
>> please, by all means, send me those URIs, show me how i started the work
>> on them; after they were already made by others...  because, regardless of
>> the issues - these sorts of URIs are important,
>>
>> for humanity.
>>
>> given the apparent absence of them;  where are the videos showing, for
>> kids, what's being made to impact their lives via 'vaccine passports' and
>> related 'web infrastructure' as is impactful upon their human rights[4]...
>> as when others in the commercial space tell me, i wasted my time; it's hard
>> to provide evidence to show reasonably why i should disagree with their
>> rational point of view on it.
>>
>> yet, if i had of not made the 'royalty free, patent pool protected' 'web
>> means' for 'freedom of thought', then i'd be far richer, having a
>> completely different sort of life; as may be best demonstrated to others
>> who may in future face a choice about what it is the best thing to do,
>> is...
>>
>> #Causality. It has implications, imo.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Timothy Holborn.
>> [1] https://www.w3.org/2007/09/map/main.jpg
>> [2] https://www.ohchr.org/en/udhr/pages/udhrindex.aspx
>> [3] https://github.com/webcivics/ontologies
>> [4] https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx
>>
>