- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2013 11:47:28 -0400
- To: "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>
- CC: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>, business-of-linked-data-bold <business-of-linked-data-bold@googlegroups.com>
- Message-ID: <51B20090.4020105@openlinksw.com>
On 6/7/13 11:25 AM, Gannon Dick wrote: > Lots of people make lots of money from data, structured data and > Linked Data. This is a good thing. But data is a perpetuity not an > annuity. Depends on who is claiming the annuity. For instance, imagine a world in which you charge the annuity for access to your master profile data. Master profile data? That's data curated by "You" and culled from a plethora of sources that include those Web 2.0 social networks that once thought the joke was on "You" etc.. > The math works fine if correctly applied. Yes. Thus, flip the script :-) > Don't expect your Smart Phone or Robotic Agent to have a Banker's > expectations, they are much too logical for that :-) Not expecting that. I believe in the magic of being you! Links: http://youid.openlinksw.com -- for a teaser ! Kingsley > --Gannon > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> > *To:* "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org> > *Cc:* Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org> > *Sent:* Friday, June 7, 2013 9:59 AM > *Subject:* Re: There's No Money in Linked Data > > On 6/7/13 10:47 AM, Gannon Dick wrote: >> I agree, Andrea, and would further point out that "how much money" is >> a relativistic question. Money has an associated Time Value. >> >> Money, Light and Linked Data get no Birthday Party, sadly, which is >> to say they have no Birthday. Money tries to cheat by having a Time >> Value but no Birthday. Light can not cheat: One (1) light-year is >> 364+(2/364) light-days plus 1 light-day (after) every four years. >> (1/365) is an approximation to "364 days + 2 halves of the same >> measurement". This is not a trivial point. >> >> To paraphrase your question: What is the Banker's Return on the Time >> Value of Linked Data ? >> Answer: Zero (intellectually honest answer), But don't tell Bankers, >> they are ferocious when provoked.. >> --Gannon > > What about when you apply your formula to the Web? Basically, is > anyone (including Bankers) making money on the Web? > > Funnily enough, I just had a conversation with a Banker that went > something like this, as part of an identity verification process: > > Banker said "based on public records, which of the following > statements about you is true?" > > Was the outcome of interaction valuable to the banker? > > Was the outcome valuable to me? > > In either case, would money be potentially made or lost as are result > of that interaction? It took about 5 minutes :-) > > Kingsley >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *From:* Andrea Splendiani <andrea.splendiani@iscb.org> >> <mailto:andrea.splendiani@iscb.org> >> *To:* Prateek <jainprateek@gmail.com> <mailto:jainprateek@gmail.com> >> *Cc:* public-lod@w3.org <mailto:public-lod@w3.org>; Semantic Web >> <semantic-web@w3.org> <mailto:semantic-web@w3.org> >> *Sent:* Friday, June 7, 2013 4:10 AM >> *Subject:* Re: There's No Money in Linked Data >> >> Hi, >> >> Let me get into this thread with a bit of a provocative statement. >> >> I think the issue is not whether there is money or not in linked >> data, but: how much money is in linked data ? >> >> Lot of money has been injected by research funds, maybe governments >> and maybe even industry. >> Is the business generated of less, more, or just about the same value ? >> >> Another point of view, perhaps more appropriate, is that Linked-Data >> is a bit like building highways. You can eventually measure the >> economic benefit of having them, but (at least in several countries) >> it's not something from which you expect a return. >> >> ciao, >> Andrea >> >> >> Il giorno 06/giu/2013, alle ore 13:13, Prateek <jainprateek@gmail.com >> <mailto:jainprateek@gmail.com>> ha scritto: >> >>> For some reason, my original post didn't appear in the mailing list >>> archives. My apologies for duplicate posts, if they show up here. >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>> From: *Prateek* <jainprateek@gmail.com <mailto:jainprateek@gmail.com>> >>> Date: Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 7:16 PM >>> Subject: Re: There's No Money in Linked Data >>> To: public-lod@w3.org <mailto:public-lod@w3.org>, Semantic Web >>> <semantic-web@w3.org <mailto:semantic-web@w3.org>>, >>> a.blumauer@semantic-web.at <mailto:a.blumauer@semantic-web.at> >>> >>> >>> Hello All, >>> >>> I am one of the authors of the work being discussed. >>> >>> All the stuff I have seen till now is about Linked Data being great >>> and useful for data integration within commercial settings. The work >>> does not disputes that. I agree we didn't use the proper term, and >>> from the reading of the work it becomes clear we didn't complain >>> about this aspect. The work will be revised to correct the >>> terminology and other feedback from the mailing list. >>> >>> The issue pointed out in the work is with Linked Open Data Cloud >>> data sets. This is getting limited or no attention in the >>> discussions. Its like saying the technology is awesome, lets not >>> worry so much about the 'open' data sets. >>> >>> In Adrea's blog he is saying technology is mature now. That is >>> great. But these technologies have been around for a while now. >>> >>> The question still remains, what about the 'open' datasets amassed >>> till now? The 300+ datasets which everyone uses in their slides. >>> >>> In the blog >>> >>> >>> "Yes, there is a critical mass of available LOD sources (for example >>> UK Ordnance Survey) and also of high-quality thesauri and ontologies >>> (for example Wolter Kluwer’s working law thesaurus) to be reused in >>> corporate settings" >>> >>> But they have been around for about 6 yrs? Why haven't they been >>> used till now besides academic playgrounds or for pure research? Is >>> it not good enough to be used? In the hope it will happen one day? >>> In your blog there is a link for use case of Linked Data. Why don't >>> we find same thing for Linked Open Data? >>> >>> (These are all questions which I have pondered about, not a criticism) >>> >>> I have tried collecting the use cases before for LOD >>> http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.org.w3c.public-lod/1575 >>> >>> The response was limited. >>> >>> Happy to see the discussion, but I think the main issue seems to be >>> getting sidelined. >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> Prateek >>> >>> Note: The views expressed herein are my own and do not necessarily >>> reflect the views of my co-authors of the work 'There's No Money in >>> Linked Data' and my employer. >>> >>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >>> >>> Prateek Jain, Ph. D. >>> RSM >>> IBM T.J. Watson Research Center >>> 1101 Kitchawan Road, 37-244 >>> Yorktown Heights, NY 10598 >>> Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/prateekj >> >> >> > > > -- > > Regards, > > Kingsley Idehen > Founder & CEO > OpenLink Software > Company Web:http://www.openlinksw.com <http://www.openlinksw.com/> > Personal Weblog:http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen <http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/%7Ekidehen> > Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen > Google+ Profile:https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about > LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen > > > > > > -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder & CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Friday, 7 June 2013 15:47:51 UTC