If you want to read further, you might want to check out http://abstractioneer.org which is a good bit and has OpenID in it.
Friday, January 18, 2008
Friday, January 11, 2008
Moving on to abstractioneer.org
I've decided to take the plunge and move on to publishing at http://abstractioneer.org, powered by Blogger. Since I'm the tech manager for Blogger it seems only fitting, and we've recently been adding a whole host of cool features that make it more and more attractive (OpenID commenting being just the latest).
I also have a semi-new Feedburner blog feed; some people were already subscribed through this feed, so you may notice no disruption in service as I re-point it at abstractioneer.org... just a moment... there! (http://feeds.feedburner.com/aol/SzHO). Feel free to re-subscribe there, if you are in the mood.
I also have a semi-new Feedburner blog feed; some people were already subscribed through this feed, so you may notice no disruption in service as I re-point it at abstractioneer.org... just a moment... there! (http://feeds.feedburner.com/aol/SzHO). Feel free to re-subscribe there, if you are in the mood.
[Abstractioneer] Warumungu Norms, Privacy, Facebook, and Useful Friction
We could learn something from the Warumungu. Wendy Seltzer's Mukurtu Digital Archiving: digital "restrictions" done right is about DRM, freedom, and controls; I think it's also about privacy. What's private, and what's public, and what's semi-private are culturally determined no less than the Warumungu rules around who is allowed to see what artifacts:
Who owns the data?
L'Affaire Scoble raised the question, who owns relationship data? Dare Obasanjo argues that his contact data is his, not Robert's. And he wants Facebook to enforce this.
I'd argue that we should un-ask the ownership question. As long as we're talking about ownership, we're heading down the road towards DRM that has worked out so well for the music business. I'd like to talk about community norms, and what kind of useful friction we should be thinking about in the pure digital realm to give community norms a chance to operate. Reputation and portable identity is part of this, as are things like limited access (E.g., OAuth), rate limits, soft constraints, and user centric norm enforcement. (What would happen if the people on Robert's friends list were simply informed, in real time, that he was copying their data for an unknown purpose?)
(Nick Carr has a great post on this subject as well.)
--
Posted By John Panzer to Abstractioneer at 1/11/2008 02:23:00 PM
...the Warumungu have a set of protocols around objects and representations of people that restrict access to physical objects and photographs. Only elders may see or authorize viewing of sacred objects; other objects may be restricted by family or gender. Images of the deceased shouldn’t be viewed, and photographs are often physically effaced. When the Warumungu archive objects or images, they want to implement the same sort of restrictions.With an interesting twist:
People can also print images or burn CDs and thus allow the images to circulate more widely to others who live on outstations or in other areas. In fact, one of the top priorities in Mukurtu’s development was that it needed to allow people to take things with them, printing and burning were necessary to ensure circulation of the materials.What, then, prevents people from violating these norms?
Because the Murkurtu protocol-restrictions support community norms, rather than oppose them, the system can trust its users to take objects with them. If a member of the community chooses to show a picture to someone the machine would not have, his or her interpretation prevails — the machine doesn’t presume to capture or trump the nuance of the social protocol.People, relationships, and norms are fuzzy and messy, so maybe it's reasonable that a system to deal with them is fuzzy and messy too. What Murkurtu does is put enough useful friction in the way of disclosure to give community norms a chance to operate. You can't email an image out to a mailing list, but you can print it and show it to a reasonably small number of people at a time. The point is not to control distribution perfectly, but to give human-scale trust mechanisms a chance to operate correctly.
Who owns the data?
L'Affaire Scoble raised the question, who owns relationship data? Dare Obasanjo argues that his contact data is his, not Robert's. And he wants Facebook to enforce this.
I'd argue that we should un-ask the ownership question. As long as we're talking about ownership, we're heading down the road towards DRM that has worked out so well for the music business. I'd like to talk about community norms, and what kind of useful friction we should be thinking about in the pure digital realm to give community norms a chance to operate. Reputation and portable identity is part of this, as are things like limited access (E.g., OAuth), rate limits, soft constraints, and user centric norm enforcement. (What would happen if the people on Robert's friends list were simply informed, in real time, that he was copying their data for an unknown purpose?)
(Nick Carr has a great post on this subject as well.)
--
Posted By John Panzer to Abstractioneer at 1/11/2008 02:23:00 PM
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Shindig!
We've just made our first commit to the Apache Shindig project! This first version provides the basic substrate for running gadgets, which is useful by itself and is a prerequisite for running OpenSocial gadgets.
Sunday, December 9, 2007
Singularity to Launch from Adult Chat Room
You heard it here first. Based on this story about a chatbot passing the Turing Test, clearly the Vingean Singularity is just around the corner. CyberLover will acquire self-awareness soon after the Russian identity thieves deploy it on existing Russian botnets. Transcendence, and a technological singularity, is just a short hop and a jump from that point. Have fun chatting!
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
OpenID 2.0 Released!
Announced at IIW2007b today (and blog post by David Recordon). Congratulations to all! It's actually two specifications, OpenID Authentication 2.0 and OpenID Attribute Exchange 1.0. Attribute exchange in particular allows for some very interesting integration possibilities.
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
OAuth 1.0 Core Released!
December 4, 2007 – The OAuth Working Group is pleased to announce publication of the OAuth Core 1.0 Specification. OAuth (pronounced "Oh-Auth"), summarized as "your valet key for the web," enables developers of web-enabled software to integrate with web services on behalf of a user without requiring the user to share private credentials, such as passwords, between sites. The specification can be found at http://oauth.net/core/1.0 and supporting resources can be found at http://oauth.net.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
