this is old news for us so far.
politics online...using the massive communication and aggregation power of the internet. examples such as kenyan elections, antiwar demonstrations, moveon.org ect.
OK - here he goes...i hope
we need to be users not consumers -
consumers = passive recievers of what is broadcast by a few - radio, tv, movies, recorded music *sound familiar anyone?*
users= actively shape media, create as well as consume, link together for collective action.
howard warns we need to fight to remain users in the following areas -
politically: control of innovation under attack - already happened...think war
think war
technically: think about how to innovate in favour of user-power
we have to defend our freedom to invent - ahhh...here's an idea - a reserve of the electromagnetic spectrum available for experimentation.
applause...rheingold wants us to figure out the answer to the next business model for distributing music - without recording industry he suggests that music quality would be better.
we are really not being challenged with ideas here... we discuss this kinda thing over sandwiches in the park. more interesting discussion taking place on the discussion board.
ahh...trust and reputation have made it up on the slides - he poses the question -
will reputation evolve? social capital is just leaking into the air...we are not capturing it...
- just to expand a little on this - howard was talking about ubiquitous connectivity/mobility etc and how this could be used to transmit/gather social capital (ie. our voiced opinions/experiences etc). Not much detail just a slide.
need to fight for the right to contribute to the body of data
need to fight for access to body of data - eg. barcodes
- another example that howard gave. a friend of his has developed a mobile bar code reader that pulled in the product info from the universal product db and then lets you go google against any of the fields. So howard points it at a packet of prunes in his kitchen and gets the manufacturer name, googles it and finds that the first link is a news story about the manufacturer and case against it for political persuasion tactics (giving politicians packets of prunes!?)
effectively unique object identifiers or product identifiers like barcodes means that every "thing" has a story - we need to be able to both read and write these stories.
open source principles seem to be at the heart of what howard is talking about...plus social networks
question time:
how do we protect ourselves from each other in a world of individual connectivity?
only geeks play with defaults..so we have to make defaults easier to access, understand so that everyone can make informed decisions about how, when, where, what data is sent, gathered about and from them. we are already being "gathered" cctv? do we have control over this?
digital identity - in order to trust someone you need to know them - if we are going to see dID become prevalent - finding the balence between the power that dID provides and the personal protections required is key.
1st amendment and reputation
fuzzy answer
this has been unsatisfying...a real opportunity to push discussion but howard has kept things overly simplistic - fiona discribed accurately as too "101"
the room is very interested in reputation models...fundamentally how do we build trust in dIDs - keeps using ebay as example...but this is being knocked on the discussion group as being an example that does not move beyond a very simple model of reputation.
applause..all over... my brain cells have not been tickled.