Archive for the ‘Social media’ Category

must read post by Ben Werdmuller

Monday, July 6th, 2009

Ben has put into words so many of the discussions I have been having for the past several years!  So good to see such common vocabulary.  And so glad to see things building to a proper implementation.

I cannot express how happy this makes me!

I will referring to pieces of this posting for awhile…


How to save the world in 3 easy steps

Tuesday, June 30th, 2009

This is the 10 year plan I created in 2004

1) transparent govt
2) transparent business
3) introduce checks and balances in behavior
and create legal constructs when social norms fail

I started on all this because I am “Silona Bonewald” the only one in the world and I am a database geek. So I realized with the nature of things as they become electronic – privacy thru obscurity is gone. We needed a new (might I say better) type of checks and balances. And decided to start making govt and businesses more transparent.

When I started I didn’t talk much about business – everyone thought I was crazy enough in regards to govt. But now with the crash and such… I am not looking as crazy.

This is why I do allllll the crazy projects I do…
this is my theme!


Good Social media habits

Saturday, June 20th, 2009

I think Social media Monitoring and data visualizations on the individual will be key to people learning how to take more ownership of their data.

Once they see visualizations of all their data and how it is used… they will become more conscious.  I do sincerely believe google did us a favor by making people see the tip of the iceburg in regards to all the data that could be instantly available on them.

We need more tools like this for awareness issues alone!

things like:
Context of organizations joined
Identity pooling issue (esp when wrong)
Context of commentary
Your “commerical” context identity
Swarm marketing and surround marketing
Behavioral profiling
Social identity mapping who you know and who knows you


has issues with authority…

Saturday, June 20th, 2009

Hmm was pondering this… how does a person that did so much work with “big companies”  and is really good at lobbying republican’s on technical issues get this tag line?

Well it isn’t what you think… it is not a rebellion.

I see the world in patterns.  I watch things interweave.  I have a HARD time writing papers that are longer than 5-10 pages.  It is because I do not see the world very linearly.  I do see the world as a multi dimensional mesh of connections with little electrical energies surging in many directions at once. (yea I am sure that is from some Sci-fi show I saw as a child.)

Because of this I see hierarchies as fluid.  If I can figure out a way to gain access without the traditional channels.  I will do so.  I normally get my ideas across. Though I have found it also means I rarely get paid… C’est la vie.

I don’t get foiled often.  The only way is to completely lock down your network.  It is sad when a group does do this.  it guarantees an echochamber effect.  Or an emporer’s new clothes reality…  And that makes me worry for them.


How to create negiotiable contracts?

Saturday, June 20th, 2009

I think the biggest current barrier to creating equitable relationships btn shared data in social networks btn the customers has to do with the contracts.  I mean B2B relationships wouldn’t put up with this all or nothing behavior.  So we have to fix this before a mesh of Social Net’s can occur.

Most contracts currently on the cloud are all or nothing arrangements.  Therefore people accept contracts that this non lawyer views as unreasonable and often enforceable… Simply because they have no option. They typically give up ALL RIGHTS to their data (please please post links here to any that don’t! as I would love to say THANKS!)

I do think we need an organization ala Creative Commons/eTrust to police these businesses.  ~4 yrs ago I registered in anticipation of such issues occurring. I just wish I could clone myself (and grant myself $20Mi) to pursue this idea too!

People only become aware of these severe inequalities when something fails on a social level say Kodak decides to delete all the data… This will happen more as more businesses on the Cloud fail.  That data means more to the individual at that point than it does to the business.  So deleting is the easy thing to do and fiscally makes sense for the business.

It seems that people only see the social contracts that are broken btn them and the organizations.  They do not notice the other forms of lack of control over their data…  Like Facebook and Beacon, people don’t care UNTIL this data is reflected back to their friends.  Then they care.  This doesn’t make sense from a data ownership point of view.  That is because we are short sighted creatures and few understand databases, data mining, and social behavioral metrics.  They cannot see this reflection and I am as guilty as the rest of them.  I also hope that society will take care of this issue.  But I worry and wonder what our “star of david” will be if will are not observant.

I would tentatively like to propose 3 settings for the contracts

  1. Transparent – All sharing ON CC enabled
  2. Paranoid – All sharing OFF only to members of friendlist explicitly granted?
  3. most popular settings- in the middle – not sure here… um Copyright all right reserved?

Maybe the Social Net’s or other products on the cloud can give different levels of features to encourage people to choose transparent…  but really the big thing that I would point out is that the most necessary piece is to be OPEN about the data being collected.  I did issue this challenge to Mark Hindsbo at Microsoft for the new cloud they are creating.  They have the ability and power to do it right.  I hope society will also reward them for doing so…

I know these need work but I still think it is a good starting point of discussion. having met the attorney at several of these businesses they are looking for guidance too.  Businesses are become wise to the fact that people often lie in inequitable relationships…


Mutual ownership of data – B2B B2C P2P O2O O2P

Monday, June 15th, 2009

So how did I get here?  this concept of mutual ownership of data.  To be honest I did not get there from the perspective of the individual.  I got here because I wanted to figure out how to create a mesh of social nets so that I could have multiple personas.

The big piece is getting groups that control the Social nets to share the data.  I had to create something so that competitive groups would share data.  That is when I realized

business 2 business

org 2 org

business 2 client

and org 2 patron and even person to person

were all the same issue.  Setting up a TRUST relationship and keeping that balanced.  To do that mutual ownership must be acknowledged then maybe we can begin to negotiate what might be an equivalent relationship to create that trust.

Trusting without recourse… isn’t very smart in business though as people we do it naturally (and I think it is why we are losing our data left and right and suffering the advertising overload consequences.)  good fences make good neighborhoods.  good contracts make good business partners just by SETTING EXPECTATIONS.

I honestly believe that a mesh of Federating Social Nets cannot exist without this mutual ownership of data.  How else do we get Businesses and organization to share data?

Mike Neuenschwander wrote an awesome blog post about the equivalence issue – and explains it better than I in business terminology.

He calls it the law of relational symmetry.  I should state here too that one of my top five movies is “Brazil.”  Also Princess Bride, Dune (6hr version NOT TV), Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, and The Fifth Element.  But that did not bias me to his article :-)

Sometimes I am upset that we do not learn to barter in this country.  I think this aspect of figuring out the relational symmetry of ownership of data would be more intuitive if we realized – Data is money therefore negiogate cash for its release!


Mutual ownership of data – FSN

Monday, June 15th, 2009

the most basic problem in social nets today ( and actually MOST data)

is that it is rare that data is actually owned by one party.  It is typically owned by at least two (see my previous example of friendship in social nets)

So this mutual ownership – this “child” data has responsibilities.  The problems typically occur when inequalities exist.  Typically I think most problems today are because of the fact that one entity believes they are the sole owner of the data.  For example, Facebook and Beacon,  they believed that purchase data was theirs to do as they pleased with it.  The funny thing is people were/are foolishly happy with letting facebook gather it.  The only became unhappy when facebook used it foolishly by revealing purchases to their peers.   Then many left or threatened to leave if facebook didn’t fix the issue.  Perfectly illustrating the joint ownership of that data.

So the normal facebook data as potentially as useful as it maybe isn’t an extreme example of inequality.  I think banks and Credit cards are an even better example.  That shared bank account  they view the data to be theirs.  When they do the security threat analysis they do not factor in YOUR cost as the individuals if your identity is stolen?  If they did view the data as mutual, they would need to add that to the equation.  Then there would be accountability for that data and banks could more easily be held legally accountable for their actions.  Nothing better than a mob of hundreds of thousands pissed off and filing a law suit of identity theft.

So how do we deal with these issues of inequality of risk in regards to this mutually owned data?  well for that we need to turn to the law.  First contracts…. (hello Lessig are you reading this?)  We need a standard of mutual data ownership – a contract to create first the acknowledgment of shared data and secondly to balance the inequality of responsibility (perhaps thru lawsuits not sure what this looks like.)

Though honestly I think the biggest issues is people’s inherent lack of awareness in regards to these inequalities…  Google has done them the public a favor in my opinion by making their transparency obvious in a social way.  Facebook’s mistakes as well.  Though I do know Google trying to protect people’s data – at the same time I am pissed because they teach BAD HABITS in regards to sharing.

And to those (I know you are reading this) that claim “I am transparent on the net!  I have nothing to hide!”  I ask…

So where’s that nekkid pic of you on the net?  Where are your bank account records?  Where are your medical records?

I don’t know anyone that is completely transparent except maybe the invisible man…



Monday, June 15th, 2009

Crisiscamp was big fun but now my brain is full of interesting projects.

Some possible ones are:
Crisispreparedness Badges for Facebook
1) It would inspire people to become educated in regards to crisis preparedness. Perhaps even having them fulfill specific tasks.
2) it would educate people’s friends and hopefully inspire them to train or do preparedness tasks
3) it would provide a list of trained people and their contact info to the crisis organizers

Creating an Emergency Tech Corp of responders
w Google, Microsoft and Yahoo and Burners without Borders.
The head of the LA fire Dept invited them down in the Fall for first hand training and use cases.

doing FOSS software for crisis handling and preparedness

and the craziest one…
Traveling Instant WIFI
like an RV w a gennie that has a satellite hookup that could provide instant wifi to all wifi enabled phones and computers.

a dictionary of crisis terminology
seeded with folkonomies from google or amazon
since common vocab seemed a severe issue (to me at least)

Yep it was a fun weekend!


Social networking and Govt 2.0

Thursday, June 4th, 2009

This is my favorite presentation i have given so far and wanted to see how my new widget was working… so here we go

I can’t believe it is 2 and half years since I gave this presentation!


Something new? I don’t think so

Wednesday, June 3rd, 2009

So here I am working on my Federated Social network concept for a presentation in DC next week. And Again I find I am not original…

See the way I do things is I come up with an idea and then I look for stuff to justify what I think “feels right.” Yea sorry it’s just how my backassward brain thinks.

Why do I do it – backwards? I am unknown and lack in reputation. So no one believes what I say unless I can prove it. So I cheat and use others reputation points to prove my concept :-)

So here I am falling in love with Feynman again. And As I am researching the concepts about my peer review process, I find some other amazing gems…

this equation makes me happier than I can ever explain!
PS_1 -> TT_1 -> EE_1 -> PS_2
“In response to a given problem situation (PS1), a number of competing conjectures, or tentative theories (TT), are systematically subjected to the most rigorous attempts at falsification possible. This process, error elimination (EE), performs a similar function for science that natural selection performs for biological evolution. Theories that better survive the process of refutation are not more true, but rather, more “fit”—in other words, more applicable to the problem situation at hand (PS1)”

an equation for evolution of ideas (and well evolution period)

which then leads me to and Tarski’s “semantic theory of truth”!

yea – my brain is happy and feeling validated…

now to work on my wallet