Re: [projectvrm] Concepts | Apache Unomi

[Guy Jarvis < >]

Stephen Hick's book, Explaining Postmodernism, comes to mind,
particularly Chart 1 on page 8 that provides a list of key
differentiators between premodern and modern in order to help define
postmodernism.

See http://www.stephenhicks.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Hicks-EP-Full.pdf

What I take from this comparison is that (in the "western" context at
least) cultural history is pendular ie pre- and post- modern represent
unmodern and this provides a useful framing of the self-sovereignty vs
mass collective compliance relationship.

So if we accept that post modernist thinking has been in the ascendent
for the past century then to my mind this means what western societies
at least have been experiencing is a return to feudality which
technology helps to foster eg the surveillance society, the digital
plantation.

To take a different analogy, if we consider a graph of the potency
ratio between the self-defensive tools/tech available to the
individual vs those at the disposal of the state against time, then
there appears to be an interesting correlation between the ascendency
of modernism with its focus on the self-sovereignty and those periods
when individuals have been most closely matched to the state.

For example, in both the English Civil War and the American
Revolution, the individual citizen had access to approximately the
same defensive tools (eg muskets) as was available to state actors and
that rough parity enabled self-sovereignty, through free association
with like minds, to challenge and defeat the status quo ((Bill of
Rights, US Constitution).

Whereas pre- and post- these periods, the big players (state,
corporate) possessed a winning advantage over individuals (eg medieval
knights and nukes respectively).

Now I'm not suggesting that every individual seeks to do a Kim (Jon
Un) literally by tooling up with actinides, however as an analogy for
effective VRM pushback against those big players then perhaps the
self-sovereign individual needs an equivalent technological leveller
to create the conditions for mutual respect, otherwise there is little
to no incentive for vendors to countenance their relationship being
managed.

Guy

On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 5:34 PM, Devon Loffreto 
<
 >
 wrote:
> Amazing story, didn't know that, and wouldn't have guessed it, but makes
> sense why you are so keen on appreciating self-sovereign ideas in HC and
> generally.
>
> I have a close cousin who went to Russia when Gorbachev made perestroika and
> glasnost a thing and started a newspaper there. You might imagine how
> provocative that was, and the chaotic stories and emotional experiences that
> produced.
>
> Asia in general, China in specific is fascinating to me. I studied Japanese
> Business Management at GMU in early 90's, and focused on Entrepreneurship
> until departing with my own venture early. Being in Fairfax, VA at that
> time, I met Steve Case and had conversations with Vint Cerf while he was at
> MCI. As a student, I asked him why ownership at the infrastructure level did
> not happen wrt identity and tcp/ip, and learned it was "considered in 1976,
> but discarded".. presumably as impractical from that time basis. Sometimes
> we just dont think big enough, and IPv4 needs IPv6 to course correct... silo
> busting had priorities at DARPA, but civil Rights via ID was not one of
> them.
>
> Obviously China is changing rapidly, and history has a heavy hand
> influencing behavior. Society is only capable of so much change in
> short-time. And historic ideas certainly weigh in to the notion of what is
> permissible by any culture.
>
> Which is the startling point concerning America. When it comes down to it,
> looking at "America" through the lens of an immigrant, there really are
> relatively few people that function as an "American" would/should. This is
> one of the points my friends from Asia and China specifically make
> repeatedly. The apathy of people to willingly sacrifice "Individual Liberty"
> and "Personal Security" in operational terms stems in large part to the
> massive influence of employee-thinking in our Society.
>
> Public schools do a couple things really bad in America... things that are
> fundamental to functional literacy... 1) Entrepreneurial thinking and
> knowledge of free enterprise, 2) Computational thinking and knowledge of
> computer systems. Going to school to get good grades, so you can get a
> degree, so you can get a job so you can climb a bureaucratic ladder so you
> can retire on pension benefits has dominated our public infrastructure. K-17
> EDU is less a learning system as it is an employment system.
>
> When something as egregious as the "Individual Mandate" is presented as a
> solution to health care access and delivery, people in large numbers have no
> context of its meaning, treating people as property of the State under
> penalty of Law and taxation. Lose-lose. Meanwhile, social-entrepreneurs can
> fix most of that problem independently, and the systemically failing
> components stand apart as failures of our mis-represented bureaucracy than
> actual problems. Its just sad to experience.
>
> But try telling that to a system that operates as though Individuals are a
> problem rather than a solution path.
>
> The good news is that Individual leaders can make an impact. Self-Sovereign
> identity is a known & actively considered thing among Superintendents across
> NY State because of real pain points and patient presentation of methods
> that can be casually discussed without stress or media-hype. As an indie
> developer, I am already working with partners managing over $3 billion in
> budgetary funding from the State, State Senators, and other State funding
> entities that are engaging these conversations in practical ways, and
> looking at the road map ahead and considering what it means for changing how
> public EDU is organized. I wrote a PR piece not long ago titled "Overcoming
> the Great Firewall of Public Education" because China has got nothing on
> American public schools in 2018.
>
> Structure yields results...
>
> Our Society will not course correct as customers of services, especially in
> relationship to our Gov. That is not the American structure of participation
> that matters.
>
> Origin of human authority... ownership of personal markets with both
> BUY/SELL integrity... these are the structures that matter. Evidence of
> progress is everywhere. In fact the head of technology for the WEF has his
> kid in my learning program at kidOYO, and we discuss self-Sovereign ID and
> its implications globally from time-to-time... but the mere fact he is aware
> of the concept is a win in my book... time & effort.
>
> There are many on this list to thank for that progress..
>
> Dev
>
> On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 11:51 AM, Adrian Gropper 
> <
 >
> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks, Devon. I'm being serious.
>>
>> I was born behind the Iron Curtain and experienced, mostly through my
>> parents, what it means to live in a surveillance society. My parents would
>> travel to other communist countries when I was little. They were afraid to
>> be noticed for having enough money to travel and so they would tell me that
>> they were in the hospital so that's what I would share with my colleagues 
>> in
>> school. Then, when they returned from "the hospital" they would bring me 
>> the
>> most amazing toys!
>>
>> My serious point is that people adjust to universal surveillance and that
>> China and the US and everywhere else are experiments in progress.
>>
>> Adrian
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 10:13 AM, Devon Loffreto 
>> <
 >
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Is that a real question or are you being humorous? Its going as you might
>>> expect. Compliance is a social norm. Individual liberty is not, at mass
>>> scale.
>>>
>>> I have a team walking factory floors across China currently. One is
>>> returning home after 5 years in US. Immediate reaction to seeing role of
>>> WeChat domination was startling. From city to deep rural, cash is
>>> disappearing. Social structure drives operational results.
>>>
>>> People seek convenience. Individual liberty is never easy. Compliance is
>>> always easy, until its not. State planning in China is a force w/o limit,
>>> and alternative models are breaking w/ ease b/c "easy" wins mass-adoption.
>>>
>>> Credit.. still optional.
>>>
>>> Devon
>>>
>>>
>>> On Feb 7, 2018 9:50 AM, "Adrian Gropper" 
>>> <
 >
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> The experiment Guy describes is already being run in China with social
>>> credit scoring. Does anyone have an update on how that's going?
>>>
>>> Adrian
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 4:51 PM, Guy Jarvis 
>>> <
 >
>>>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>> At a conceptual level, what instantly occurred to me was "udontnomi"
>>>> which might be achieved through a couple of different pathways.
>>>>
>>>> The first perhaps more obvious route is to (attempt to) block unomi
>>>> from gathering any personal data, the main drawback that comes to mind
>>>> is that blocking may prevent access to a desired resource
>>>>
>>>> The second route is to appear to willingly accept unomi then poison it
>>>> with junk data to render unomi worthless.
>>>>
>>>> In the latter case, I guess the programmatical challenge is
>>>> client-side browser coding to fool the server-side unomi, plus some
>>>> means of p2p sharing junk between clients.
>>>>
>>>> Guy
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 6:56 PM, Tom Barnett 
>>>> <
 >
>>>>  wrote:
>>>> > http://unomi.incubator.apache.org/versions/1.2/concepts.html
>>>> >
>>>> > I wondered if anyone had any views on this?
>>>> >
>>>> > '
>>>> >
>>>> > Profiles
>>>> >
>>>> > By processing events, Unomi progressively builds a picture of who the
>>>> > user
>>>> > is and how they behave. This knowledge is embedded in Profile object.
>>>> > A
>>>> > profile is an Item with any number of properties and optional segments
>>>> > and
>>>> > scores. Unomi provides default properties to cover common data (name,
>>>> > last
>>>> > name, age, email, etc.) as well as default segments to categorize
>>>> > users.
>>>> > Unomi users are, however, free and even encouraged to create
>>>> > additional
>>>> > properties and segments to better suit their needs.
>>>> >
>>>> > Contrary to other Unomi items, profiles are not part of a scope since
>>>> > we
>>>> > want to be able to track the associated user across applications. For
>>>> > this
>>>> > reason, data collected for a given profile in a specific scope is
>>>> > still
>>>> > available to any scoped item that accesses the profile information.
>>>> >
>>>> > It is interesting to note that there is not necessarily a one to one
>>>> > mapping
>>>> > between users and profiles as users can be captured across
>>>> > applications and
>>>> > different observation contexts. As identifying information might not
>>>> > be
>>>> > available in all contexts in which data is collected, resolving
>>>> > profiles to
>>>> > a single physical user can become complex because physical users are
>>>> > not
>>>> > observed directly. Rather, their portrait is progressively patched
>>>> > together
>>>> > and made clearer as Unomi captures more and more traces of their
>>>> > actions.
>>>> > Unomi will merge related profiles as soon as collected data permits
>>>> > positive
>>>> > association between distinct profiles, usually as a result of the user
>>>> > performing some identifying action in a context where the user hadn’t
>>>> > already been positively identified.'
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Adrian Gropper MD
>>>
>>> PROTECT YOUR FUTURE - RESTORE Health Privacy!
>>> HELP us fight for the right to control personal health data.
>>> DONATE: https://patientprivacyrights.org/donate-3/
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Adrian Gropper MD
>>
>> PROTECT YOUR FUTURE - RESTORE Health Privacy!
>> HELP us fight for the right to control personal health data.
>> DONATE: https://patientprivacyrights.org/donate-3/
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Devon Loffreto
>
> Founder/ Developer/ Mentor
>
> kidOYO/ OYOclass.com
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> Important: This electronic mail message and any attached files contain
> information intended for the exclusive use of the party or parties to whom
> it is addressed and may contain information that is proprietary, privileged,
> confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are
> not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any viewing,
> copying, disclosure or distribution of this information may be subject to
> legal restriction or sanction. Please notify the sender, by electronic mail
> or telephone, of any unintended recipients and delete the original message
> without making any copies.