Text archives Help


Re: [projectvrm] Re: [personal-clouds] Gartner Goes Scifi on Security - But what if we also had VRM?


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Guy Higgins < >
  • To: Kaliya Identity Woman < >, John Light < >
  • Cc: Dan Blum < >, ProjectVRM list < >, " " < >
  • Subject: Re: [projectvrm] Re: [personal-clouds] Gartner Goes Scifi on Security - But what if we also had VRM?
  • Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2013 18:15:03 -0600
I agree.  I was introduced to the Cynefin framework several years (compliments of Robert).  I have found it to be an extremely valuable tool in sense making and in decision making.  It has helped me explain to people why "best practices" aren't always a best practice.

Guy


I met David Snowden several years ago now at a Knowledge Management event Verna Allee - the Value Network Mapping and Analysis inventor put on in San Francisco for(http://www.valuenetworksandcollaboration.com/)

I think his model for understanding systems is incredibly valuable. 

I wrote about it relative to our emerging ecosystem last year in our journal - articles are now coming out on the web…I pushed this one live just now to feed into this thread. 

I would invite watching this video first….on how to Organized a children's birthday party "using the jargon of complexity theory" 

and then the one about the cynefin framework (said Ken-e-vin) 

Then Appollo 13

Then longitude

Then SenseMaker..the tool to figure out complex systems



On Sep 20, 2013, at 12:19 AM, John Light < "> > wrote:

Dan, thanks a lot for sharing, I found the presentation and your blog post about it very thought-provoking. I think you're right that there's certainly room for a more positive outcome, one which I think personal clouds, peer reputation systems, p2p technology in general can help manifest. In keeping with the Wicked Simple Email format, I'll be writing a blog post this weekend elaborating on my thoughts about this because it's a topic I'm very much interested in exploring in depth.


On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Dan Blum < " target="_blank"> > wrote:
(I had to send this twice because I message up the links the first time - sorry :-)

In the Gartner Goes Scifi: Four Future Security Scenarios  blog post this morning I review a cool webinar from Gartner wherein they use scenario-based analysis to project what will happen in the next five years given the targeting of cyberattacks on individuals and well as enterprises and the conflicting forces for authority. 

Cliff notes: 
Two "government run amok" scenarios are: Regulated Risk, Controlling Parent
Two "chaos rules" scenarios are: Coalition Rules, Neighborhood Watch

I think folks on this list would really like Richard Hunter (who was the speaker, although I know that creating these scenarios was a group effort). He's one of the most ethical analysts I know. However, while In the post above, I pretty much just admired the webinar, I do have some reservations about what might have been missed.

Richard said that one of the cardinal errors in scenario-based planning is not pushing far enough into the corners of the scenarios. In pushing towards the corners, Gartner's work comes up with what he admits are some pretty morally or economically repugnant projections. The "neighborhood watch" scenario, for example, projects that government authority will decline, cybercrime will run amok, and individuals will form e-militias so that we kind of end up like the "Gangs of New York." In this gloomy corner case, it seems like empowering individuals, the democratization of IT, has been a bad thing. And indeed, since governments and large institutions experience individual empowerment as chaos (and Gartner's audience is those large enterprises) that's understandable.

But I thought I'd bounce this off the VRM and pcloud lists because what I love about the participants is the generally optimistic view that empowering individuals can be a good thing. What if we could re-imagine Gartner's "neighborhood watch" or any of the other quadrants in another way?

Perhaps in scenario planning it can be just as much an error to not push into the center as it is to not push into the corners. Because one needs to at least think about all the possibilities before concluding. What if empowered individuals, enterprises and authorities pushed toward the center and came up with non-repugnant fusion of the good elements of the four corners?

Please, friends, check out my Gartner Goes Scifi post and the webinar as well and let me know what you think. 

Let's imagine together!

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
      ">
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
      ">

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.pde.cc/lists/info/personal-clouds




--
This conversation is not private unless it's encrypted. By default, an email is more like a postcard than a letter in an envelope. Use my public key to encrypt private messages to me using public key cryptography software such as PGP or GPG and include your public key with your message so I can encrypt my response.
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     ">
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     ">

For all list information and functions, see:
    http://lists.pde.cc/lists/info/personal-clouds

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.