Archive

Posts Tagged ‘World Wide Web’

IIW XIII: Personal Data Ecosystem Overview

October 20th, 2011
No comments

Good attendance, very diverse industry representation! Thanks Joseph from Broadridge for his chair in our crowded room, allowing me to take notes.

Kaliya showed a slide of PDEC landscape: Personal zone overlapping with Accountability “Trust” Frameworks which contained Personal Data Zone, also overlapping with the Market. At bottom of this landscape view: Governance through Legal, Code, Identifiers, and Peers–who act as framework creators.

Slide of PDEC Startup Circle. Joining is a peer-reviewed process, what open standards are they using, what’s their value space/where are they coming from. Leaders consider if group qualifies; trying to cultivate “an industry collaborative, engaging with technologists and business leaders from banking and finance, telecom, cable, web, advertising, media and other industries seeking to understand opportunities, launch pilot projects and ultimately offer service in the ecosystem.”

Discussion about who “manages” your data as your IDP, and what personal control individuals have over that data. Is this like a bank, where you go in to withdraw all your money and get the Bank’s response “that’s our money?” Or can you withdraw your funds and walk across the street to another institution and open a new account, because your money is portable? Why would a telco worry about risk? This is a most important concept for them. Similarly in banking: board-level view is that they’re not going to be the first ones to jump. Either all jump at once or they get killed. Risk in the US of having all your funds in one institution is higher than distributed accounts. Same thing with different kinds of data, e.g., health data vs spending.

Fair Information Practices (FTC standard used for enforcement): framework when they started back in the 1970s worked, but now systems are more complex, no notice and consent about which databases we’re now part of. About time for a FIPS refresh? Kaliya is working on a paper, what are core principles and guidelines that government could adopt? Where does the thinking need to be? We have more powerful devices in our pockets. Lots of privacy conversations are about do not track/store. OECD principles are not regulations, are technology neutral (data minimization, etc.) but they don’t make assumption about individual ownership & agency over own data.

Refreshing principles is a good exercise, but one thing missing from principles is concept of fairness. Control is about fairness, fair trade and equality. Striking assymetry today. Notice and consent is not working, people can’t do much about it.

Mary quickly reviewed Organizations stewarding user driven personal data and ID. Slide includes: ProjectVRM (an ethos and conversation), WEF, PDEC, Kantara Initiative, IDCommons, UMA, Information Sharing Working Group, Open Identity Exchange, The Data Portability Project, W3C, and microformats.

Shift in focus back to PDEC’s work: What’s personal data and what’s not? What’s self-asserted data?

Kaliya showed a map of personal data (link to come), then reviewed briefly what some of the companies do in the Startup Circle. Question about business models and how those companies plan to make money. (Some uncertainty here.) What are they hoping to do, how do they see working together? Respect, collaboratively working toward interoperability, for big players to adopt or use emerging standards. Faster adoption. Is this policy or protocol standards? PDEC is about conversation, discovery and education, document activities, and catalyzing an interactive collaborative market. Paint common pictures, evolve common language.

Note: If you’re interested in this space, check back for updated links to slides and graphics that were in progress during this session.

[del.icio.us] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Ma.gnolia] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Email] More »

future, history, records, tools , , , , , , , , , , ,

Trust, and Using You

August 10th, 2011
1 comment
Steve Woodruff's tutorial (graphic steps)

Click for Steve's tutorial

Steve Woodruff brings us a quick tutorial on how to reset LinkedIn’s new “Social Advertising” setting:

Apparently, LinkedIn has recently done us the “favor” of having a default setting whereby our names and photos can be used for third-party advertising. A friend forwarded me this alert (from a friend, from a friend…) this morning.

Since Facebook has been such a good model of creative “reuse” of our personal information, and consequent destruction of personal trust in social settings, it seems corporately fitting that LinkedIn would try the same.

Coaching moment: Doesn’t it bother you when people make self-serving assumptions about what you want to share with others? True, you did voluntarily share this information, but shouldn’t you be able to express clear limits on how this shared information is used—before it’s misused? I think so!

[del.icio.us] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Ma.gnolia] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Email] More »

friends/family, future, records , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Real Names

August 4th, 2011
No comments

representation of choices: color (The Commons) vs black and white (Business)Danah Boyd is an insightful researcher. She just wrote a post called “Real Names” Policies Are an Abuse of Power in which she takes Google to task for their changing policies and rather abrupt practice of kicking people off of Google Plus. I agree that being arbitrary is an abuse of power when it affects people so strongly (disabling an account removes the use of all services, not just Google Plus). However, there are two kinds of power: shared, and proprietary.

Google, along with Facebook, Twitter, and in fact nearly all Internet-based services (Amazon, eBay, your Internet service provider, etc.), are proprietary. These services are run by companies that:

  1. are private or beholden to shareholders (their “business model”),
  2. have one-sided Terms of Service and Policy documents that users are required to agree to, and
  3. are based on the selective delivery of their user base to their customers (usually advertisers).

A striking characteristic of these businesses is that they have a practice of reducing things to black and white. Our chosen (registered) name “is” or “is not” really us. See Doc’s post A Sense of Bewronging for more thought on this. In a simplified (business) sense, it is an abuse of social power to declare that many of us are not who we say we are, even if we’re known to many others by our chosen registered name.

Contrast this with a shared power model, like a commons, or services that are implemented according to open standards. The underlying Internet protocols (the apache web server, sendmail, TCP/IP, etc.) are not owned by anyone, everybody can use them, and anybody can improve them. These resources are shared—no terms of service is required to use the Internet or email with any device you choose, with any compatible software, from any location that has access. “Commons” is where you can be who you are, no matter what name you go by.

Coaching moment: This may be a non-issue for some. I have friends that use their name to create a “brand” for themselves—so people will recognize them everywhere, and know what they’re about. However, that’s not an option for people in sensitive situations. Think of it this way: Everyone has a moment when they choose not to disclose some bit of information to the world. Sometimes it’s a name. That’s not a bad thing, and it should be a choice.

[del.icio.us] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Ma.gnolia] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Email] More »

friends/family, records , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I Shared What?!?

November 27th, 2010
No comments

logo for I Shared What?!? websiteVoluntary personal information sharing comes naturally to most of us. When given an opportunity, a few tools, and a community in which we can share our most intimate details, many people don’t hesitate to document their every movement and mood. We readily identify our friends and our preferences, and even document our vices.

Facebook is the place right now where a great many people share the most detailed information about themselves. Are you on Facebook? If so, you might be interested in a new site called I Shared What?!? that will open a window for you into what Facebook sees–and lets others see.

Coaching moment: Did you know you were sharing this much information? Do you know who has access to it, for how long, and for what purposes? Does this make you uncomfortable? Why?

[del.icio.us] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Ma.gnolia] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Email] More »

friends/family, history, records, tools , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

What They Know

June 4th, 2010
No comments

looking through a lens (at a suspicious expression on girl's face)The information sharing industry is pretty opaque to most people. We have no idea what “they” know about us. Moreover, it can be infuriating when certain companies make assumptions about us that are clearly erroneous. It can be absolutely unnerving when total strangers strike a little too close to the bone.

It’s instructive to find out what they know! Several years ago (2006), my friends at Privacy Rights Clearinghouse wrote a post called For the New Year, Resolve to Check Yourself Out that will help you do this. Their list of resources will help you understand who you are from the perspectives of your:

  • Credit history
  • Medical Information
  • Bank account history
  • Insurance claims
  • Public records
  • Search engines

I’d add one point to their last bullet. If you have an account on Google, you can now go into your Google Account Settings (look for the link in the upper right corner to Settings). Under Personal Settings, look for Dashboard: View Data Stored with this Account. It’s a view of what Google knows about you.

Coaching moment: It can be both overwhelming and empowering to know this much about your world. Fortunately, the overwhelming feeling can be countered by putting the story together and taking control of the problems. You’re creating a story, a narrative of who you are. Fix your problems if you can. Imagine a world in which you controlled your own information and others came to you for it. That world might be highly customizable in ways that were unique to you. What would that look and feel like?

[del.icio.us] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Ma.gnolia] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Email] More »

future, history, records , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Switch to our mobile site