Anders, continuing our dialog,

1.  The point of having an embedded GL in a handheld device is not to
keep your books in it permanently, but that it can appear as a
subledger, and its data can be rolled up into your root ledger (or the
webledger or ASP you mentioned) .  Clearly, handheld devices are being
used to conduct business, hardwired to hosts. These hosts include
services acting for the owner (acting as Me), as well as trading
partners, or 3rd party intermediaries.  None of those scenarios require
a GL nor can a GL succeed anyway, since a portal is a portal, after all
and doesn't release data.

2.  I said, if you want a standard to be widely adopted then it must
respect the privacy and the sovereignty of the owner.  You replied,

"
>Again referring to the P-Card context, this is a matter of company
>policy as you are dealing with other peoples money."

That's also true.

One might consider this at a higher level of abstraction.  All
businesses, large and small, assign powers to various people and use
varying degrees of internal control.

The question is, does the corporate sector want to carry on
another 10 years beating its head against the wall with EDI and
centrally controlled systems?  They cannot achieving an efficient
back office, until most of the SMEs and individuals they touch
are conducting business electronically.

As a matter of self-interest, large companies should deploy
architectures that give the individual and smaller trading partner
privacy, autonomy, and processing efficiency.  Within that architecture,
certainly, the large corporation will find the internal control they
need, as well as back office efficiencies.

Again, what's stopping this vision is the camel who has gotten his
nose under the tent (portals, intermediaries, and yes banks.)

The technical architecture is not difficult to perceive, in which data
flows across company boundaries, and the same business process
standards, vocabulary, and software modules are used internally as
externally.  The May release from http://www.ebxml.org/ is entering
quite a new, exciting phase with whole new categories of goals,
such as business document definitions.

What's holding back progress is prevalence today of business software
that is designed to achieve an asymmetry of benefit for its owner, in
terms of the information itself.  There is a design decision NOT to
share information.

These software are not entirely unsuccessful.  When you look closely the
benefits are temporary.  Look at the history of capitalism itself;
enterprise moves from country to country looking for new cheap
workforces, who work for a generation or two before striking for higher
wages.  Similarly, the IT industry has for many years, mined the
ignorance from customer and supplier populations until it was depleted
like a mineral.  Yes, this is a long term business model, I suppose, not
temporary.

The end state of this progression is when substantially all of the
people in the market understand the value of information and stop giving
it away for free.  And when they understand that alternative customers
and suppliers exist, and stop obeying authority.

My goal is to find ways that the code itself can change the rules, and
allow some of us to "graduate" from this stage and move onto the next
stage without being held back by things like Passport, P-cards, credit
cards, paypal, or fifty other portal schemes that steal our privacy and
autonomy of action and prevent us from having our own independent
reputations.  Today only the financial institutions have a global
view of parties, their histories, who we buy and sell from, and
whether we pay our bills.  They have, in effect stolen our reputations,
and we want them back.  Financial institutions lobbying for
privacy laws means, only the banks shall know.  The small business
shall not know.  The small business shall not have the independent
means to evaluate credit, or the independent means to provide views
of their own history to gain credit approval from somebody besides
their own bank.

>I see a problem of having the general ledger in my PDA.  I think that
>you without any major problem can have data on an ASP/Portal etc.
>that serves as "the store".  This ASP is typically a company
>server (B2B) or [ultimately] a home server (B2C), that offers
>backup cap. and processing.
>
>P2P is a favorite of mine but I think that limiting the peer
>to a potentially stolen or failing device have too serious limitations
>to become the norm.
>I rather see PDAs as a *link* to the peer.  The peer itself should be as
>bullet-proof as justified by its value.  Note that the real boon with
>a PDA with strong auth. cap. is that you may have *many* peers.
>
>Like in   http://www.mobilephones-tng.com
>
>Using that scheme the only "true" P2P is really user identification.
>All other activities go through linked "fake-peers".

Yes I have observed your creations at
  http://www.google.com/search?q=anders+rundgren+cyberphone

My reaction is, you're doing something in parallel with MeT?  What
is the difference?  MeT has fifty huge corporations agreeing on
standards and building prototypes.   A vendor distributed samples
of the PTD at the May meeting. www.mobiletransactions.org
They are meeting today in Barcelona.   My company hopes to
allow MeT devices to sign financial transactions such as purchase
orders and payments directly from inside the accounting system.
You can send any arbitrary contract to the PTD for signature.

Anyway -these solutions are a different layer of the "stack" than
my job.   My job is to figure out how to *use* all these marvelous
tools.  I ask the question "What would an intelligent person do, to
use these existing technologies, NOT as they were intended by
the portal schemes of all these companies, but for independent gain?
How can we make gainful use of these things, in a way that gives
incremental benefit in the beginning?   And, what characteristics
should we look for, to predict the technology that will still be around
in 5 years?"   (I guess, autonomy and sovereignty, among others)

> >This AR/AP vision depends on sellers extending credit to customers.
> >Sellers need the independent means to check the creditworthiness
> >of customers.  This will come from traditional credit agencies only
> >as a last resort; reputation metrics instead will need to come from
> >webs of trust, and from ledger reputation metrics of the AR/AP
> >fabric itself.
>
>The web of trust seems like a wonderful idea in *theory* but few
>are really interested to vouch for other parties for *nothing*.  I.e. I have
>no problems saying that my friends are indeed are trustworthy folks,
>but that is not the same as saying I guarantee that these
>guys pays always their bills in time.  Technicalities like
>the hardships of PKI-deployment, also speak for collection
>of business data in spite of that this indeed is a "stinking"  business.
>
>Anders

I agree, nobody is going to reply to email requests, type letters of
recommendation etc. !   I got a laugh out of that idea!   The
mechanisms for reputation metrics is entirely theoretical but
it would have to be automatic of course; how else could it
be robust?  As Lawrence Lessig says, people don't follow rules,
the software code rules.

PKI also, is a real laugh.  You're not going to see global ecommerce
based on full PKI with all its key management.  PKI infra is for large
corps who need to maintain largescale control which are essentially
command systems.  My job is to figure out what 6 billion people are
going to do, not the global 2000 corporations.  They have all the
brilliant guys, maintaining their hierarchic command systems.
The economy will anyways, continue to dissolve into more and more
subcontractors and autonomous actors.

I think it would be a mistake to focus on who maintains keys and how
they are being maintained, because there are many fine solutions
in financial cryptography already.   What you want to focus on, is
who is trying to achieve an information advantage?  What are the
assymmetries of information access, access to markets etc.?

If you find architectures that are a level playing field, that don't confer
advantages where none existed before  --- those are the architectures
that have a long term life,

Hope I didn't offend anybody, this is my opinion only,
Respectfully,
Todd
Todd Boyle CPA  9745-128th Ave NE  Kirkland WA
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  425-827-3107
my employer www.netaccount.com
our project www.arapxml.net
  website www.gldialtone.com

Reply via email to