<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 3 tweets about Data ownership</title>
	<atom:link href="http://silona.org/3-tweets-about-data-ownership/2009/10/13/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://silona.org/3-tweets-about-data-ownership/2009/10/13/</link>
	<description>silona's central identity</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Mar 2012 20:02:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: jrep</title>
		<link>http://silona.org/3-tweets-about-data-ownership/2009/10/13/comment-page-1/#comment-72</link>
		<dc:creator>jrep</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 21:14:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://silona.org/3-tweets-about-data-ownership/2009/10/13/#comment-72</guid>
		<description>These tweets seem to be describing data &quot;creation,&quot; rather than &quot;ownership.&quot; While there&#039;s definitely a close relationship between the two ideas, I don&#039;t think they&#039;re identical. Some data whose ownership is worth disputing arises from non-participatory automated events, such as combining noted patterns to correlate identities among different interaction points. 

There&#039;s also a problem with your &quot;parties needed to verify&quot; idea, in that it seems to imply some degree of awareness or memory is required for &quot;ownership.&quot; But (just as with children!) one&#039;s relationship to data is not dependent on one&#039;s awareness that it was created, or recollection of the details.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>These tweets seem to be describing data &#8220;creation,&#8221; rather than &#8220;ownership.&#8221; While there&#8217;s definitely a close relationship between the two ideas, I don&#8217;t think they&#8217;re identical. Some data whose ownership is worth disputing arises from non-participatory automated events, such as combining noted patterns to correlate identities among different interaction points. </p>
<p>There&#8217;s also a problem with your &#8220;parties needed to verify&#8221; idea, in that it seems to imply some degree of awareness or memory is required for &#8220;ownership.&#8221; But (just as with children!) one&#8217;s relationship to data is not dependent on one&#8217;s awareness that it was created, or recollection of the details.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

