Re: Distributed architecture and social justice / at risk individuals

I think social justice is a commonly understood term, whether you agree
with its definition or not.

We're very concerned about these issues at Known, but I think a lot of them
don't necessarily fall into the protocol design. Things like blocklists are
implementation features of individual systems, and may even turn out to be
features on which different systems compete. As an analogy, I think
blockbots are not a million miles away from spam blacklists, and are
totally cool in that respect - but those spam lists aren't a part of the
core email protocol. Things like analyzing a third party user to determine
whether they should be automatically blocked is a client feature.

Making these technologies *easy* is important. One good way to make that
happen is to not be too strict about what kind of systems can interact with
the protocols and formats that are agreed upon. In other words: don't be
too prescriptive about platform. That leaves room for innovation, and for
people to create new tools that make things like servers easier. For
example, I'm willing to bet on living room servers as Internet speeds make
this viable, but I'd argue that this shouldn't be part of what's decided in
a group like this.


On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 8:59 AM, Crawford, Mark <mark.crawford@sap.com>
wrote:

> Perhaps the subject should be changed so as not to confuse as Social
> Justice is a politically charged term that should probably be avoided:
>
> Social Justice - "justice in terms of the distribution of wealth,
> opportunities, and privileges within a society". Classically, "justice"
> (especially corrective justice or distributive justice) referred to
> ensuring that individuals both fulfilled their societal roles, and received
> what was due from society.
>
> Best Regards,
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher Allan Webber [mailto:cwebber@dustycloud.org]
> Sent: Monday, January 12, 2015 11:38 AM
> To: Francesco Ariis
> Cc: public-socialweb@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Distributed architecture and social justice / at risk
> individuals
>
> Francesco Ariis writes:
>
> > On Thu, Jan 08, 2015 at 05:11:05PM -0600, Christopher Allan Webber wrote:
> >> I'm not proposing any thoughts of my own in this email... I think it's
> >> best to let hers take center stage.  But I'm interested in peoples'
> >> feedback on how we can make federated technologies more responsive to
> >> these needs/concerns?
> >
> > Not federated, but p2p projects like twister [1] and the more
> > comprehensive [2] gnunet plus some client side scripting should
> > address most if not all the problems.
> >
> > [1] http://twister.net.co/
> > [2] https://gnunet.org/
>
> How so?
>
>
>


-- 
*Ben Werdmuller*
CEO & co-founder, Known
withknown.com | werd.io
<http://goog_1933028737>
+1 (312) 488-9373

Known, Inc | 421 Bryant St | San Francisco, CA 94107