Patrick Durusau wrote:
Henry,
On 7/2/2010 6:03 AM, Henry Story wrote:
On 2 Jul 2010, at 11:57, Patrick Durusau wrote:
On 7/2/2010 5:27 AM, Ian Davis wrote:
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 10:19 AM, Patrick
Durusau<patr...@durusau.net> wrote:
I make this point in another post this morning but is your
argument that
investment by vendors =
I think I just answered it there, before reading this message. Let me
know if not!
I think you made a very good point about needing examples so user
can say: "I want to do that."
Which was one of the strong points of HTML.
Ok, what users will want is the Social Web. And here is the way to
convince people:
"The Social Network Privacy Mess: Why we Need the Social Web"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=994DvSJZyww&feature=channel
( This can of course be improved) The general ideas should be clear:
dystopia: we cannot have all social data centralised on one server.
utopia: there is a lot of money to be made in creating the social
web, and thereby
increasing democracy in the world.
This can ONLY be done with linked data. And there is a real need
for it.
Several presumptions:
1) "there is a lot of money to be made creating the social web" - ? On
what economic model? Advertising? Can't simply presume that money can
be made.
Shallowness of Web 2.0 doesn't apply to Web 3.0.
Business is ultimately about providing tangible value packaged and
delivered in appropriate for re. target audience.
Data by its very essence is amenable to a variety of business models
once messaging (story telling), problem palpability, and value
proposition articulation intersect.
2) "thereby increasing democracy in the world" - ??? Not real sure
what that has to do with social networks. However popular "increasing
democracy" may be as a slogan, it is like "fighting terrorism."
Simple slogan for social networking: Discover The Magic of Being You!
Value Prop: No matter how much data you may have on Facebook, Google,
LinkedIn, and wherever else, "You" are the one who holds the key to Your
Identity. You are the only one truly capable of creating effective
context for those data fragments loosely associated with you.
What I describe above has a number of productization style monikers
associated with it:
1. Personal Data Spaces -- how I see it
2. Personal Data Locker -- as Dave Siegel sees it
3. Personal Data Bank -- as Marc Davis sees it
4. Others..
What important here is that there is overwhelming evidence that the
"Social Network Privacy" mess is problem that's reached its palpability
point on a global scale. Thus, even though DBpedia may have bootstrapped
the Web of Linked Data, its signature effect is going to materialize via
fixing today's broken social networking landscape.
Different governments and populations have different definitions for
both. I have my own preferences but realize there are different
definitions used by others.
3) "can ONLY be done with linked data." Really? Seems like the phone
companies from your example did it long before linked data.
Of course not.
You need a Web of Structured Linked Data.
4) "there is a real need for it." ? I get as annoyed as anyone with
the multiple logins and universities do have some common logins for
their internal systems but I am not sure I would describe it as a
need. At least until some survey shows that a large number of users
are willing to pay for such a service.
People want to be able to truly control their own privacy, which means
control their vulnerabilities (many state transitions here), which very
dependent on controlling their data, which ultimately requires
verifiable identity in the form of a WebID + Data Access Policies.
Kingsley
Hope you are looking forward to a great weekend!
Patrick
Henry
--
Regards,
Kingsley Idehen
President & CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
