From timothy.holborn at gmail.com  Sat Jul 14 21:56:50 2018
From: timothy.holborn at gmail.com (Timothy Holborn)
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2018 21:56:50 +1000
Subject: [Kbi-webcivics] Secretary-General Appoints High-Level Panel on
 Digital Cooperation | Meetings Coverage and Press Releases
Message-ID: <CAM1Sok33+PCaiZc3ksuarAnB_H+sz1uFe9TCc2QxD=WpDe8q6Q@mail.gmail.com>

FYI: https://www.un.org/press/en/2018/sga1817.doc.htm

Twitter: https://twitter.com/UNSGdigicoop

(Noting implicitly therein;
https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/?Text=&Goal=16&Target=16.9 )

Do we know if any Aussies are involved?

Cheers,

Tim.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180714/d8dd388a/attachment.html>

From narellec at gmail.com  Mon Jul 16 13:27:20 2018
From: narellec at gmail.com (Narelle Clark)
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2018 13:27:20 +1000
Subject: [Kbi-webcivics] [IA - members] Secretary-General Appoints
 High-Level Panel on Digital Cooperation | Meetings Coverage and Press
 Releases
In-Reply-To: <CAM1Sok33+PCaiZc3ksuarAnB_H+sz1uFe9TCc2QxD=WpDe8q6Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAM1Sok33+PCaiZc3ksuarAnB_H+sz1uFe9TCc2QxD=WpDe8q6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACRMD1HT_aTihOw9ok90Xx6HZmCDVNL+Zshpx0-ThnM-FskP1w@mail.gmail.com>

There is one Aussie, but I don't think he's been here for years (dual UK
based in South Africa). It would be good to touch base and get a meet up
should he make it here, though.

cheers

Narelle

On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 9:57 PM Timothy Holborn via members <
members at lists.internet.org.au> wrote:

> FYI: https://www.un.org/press/en/2018/sga1817.doc.htm
>
> Twitter: https://twitter.com/UNSGdigicoop
>
> (Noting implicitly therein;
> https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/?Text=&Goal=16&Target=16.9 )
>
> Do we know if any Aussies are involved?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tim.
>


-- 


Narelle
narellec at gmail.com

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180716/504d8768/attachment.html>

From timothy.holborn at gmail.com  Mon Jul 16 15:13:22 2018
From: timothy.holborn at gmail.com (Timothy Holborn)
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2018 15:13:22 +1000
Subject: [Kbi-webcivics] {Disarmed} Re: [IA - members] Secretary-General
 Appoints High-Level Panel on Digital Cooperation | Meetings Coverage and
 Press Releases
In-Reply-To: <CACRMD1HT_aTihOw9ok90Xx6HZmCDVNL+Zshpx0-ThnM-FskP1w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAM1Sok33+PCaiZc3ksuarAnB_H+sz1uFe9TCc2QxD=WpDe8q6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACRMD1HT_aTihOw9ok90Xx6HZmCDVNL+Zshpx0-ThnM-FskP1w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAM1Sok31J8U+LtNqdBxTgiKqLU_ANtbAwoNVtxVODBOWQ8aWDQ@mail.gmail.com>

(apologies if its' a bit of a rant - typing it - is helping to orientate me)

On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 at 13:27 Narelle Clark <narellec at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> There is one Aussie, but I don't think he's been here for years (dual UK
> based in South Africa). It would be good to touch base and get a meet up
> should he make it here, though.
>

I think the US/China leadership thing is quite strategic.  It would be
great to meet the Australian man noted to be involved.  I wonder how
CivicUS is similar in any way to my works on WebCivics...   Interestingly:
https://www.trustfactory.net/ is part of https://www.isolvtech.com/ which
is based in SA. Which is a bit different to the local version...

 they do a bunch of stuff around 'plausible deniability' which is always
interesting ;)


>
> cheers
>
> Narelle
>
>
MY LONGER RESPONSE

Thoughts;

[image: trust.jpg]

It is most important solutions are defined rapidly. I think waiting for
people to catch-up, isn't going to help them. I hope we can continue to
pursue leadership in Australia but not at the cost of ensuring a
well-formed solution is made available in a timely manner.

In Vint's recent presentation in Australia (perhaps in future - an
announcement to members might be made as to ensure the opportunity to know
these things are on); Vint remarked,

“We have a big problem – I call it the digital dark age – in that we don’t
curate our digital content with much care until we realise its too late. So
I’m a big fan of trying to create and preserve data, to assure ourselves
that digital content can be moved from one medium to another – that we are
able to preserve software. Creating a sophisticated regime for curating,
preserving and accessing our data is just as important as preserving the
original bits of data.”
source:
https://newsroom.unsw.edu.au/news/science-tech/internet-past-and-present-vint-cerf-conversation-toby-walsh



Negotiating the validity of Universal Human Rights (
http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ ); where those rights may be
appropriated or denied by way of new medium - as to render meaningful
service to proprietary commercial interests of a party (ie: rent-seeking
behaviours) isn't something to be entertained lightly; One might place bets
on the manifest characteristics through which the qualities of a mediums
characteristics to maintain good data-hygiene in some areas; and be allowed
to deteriorate in others, will continue to manifest, without good advocacy
support - enabling the means to discern the intricacies of good policy vs.
old ones, in our emergent 'knowledge economy'.

Societies and their systems of government need verifiable claims - imagine
an agenda that wilfully sought to undermine the social purpose of a
court-room. Imagine being subjugated for seeking to protect the relevance
of a court of law. Maybe South Africa will be more progressive in these
areas than we are... maybe we're simply not equipped.

If we're planning for a society that in a realm of dynamic data - is sought
to rely upon a basis of hear-say, due to a decline of available options,
perhaps the intended representation is that people don't really need
courts... these sorts of facetious objects are not entirely without
merit... When i was preparing for the TF conference, Anni was curating her
WebScience conference (held in Canberra) around the concept of getting
people to 'wake up'. (
https://www.thinknpc.org/publications/represents-human-digital-age/ )

I think if we're able to step it up, get the right framework of leadership
support as required for international engagement, international leadership;
a framework that can be engaged and relied upon in a manner that has both
funding and momentum; we might have a chance...

IMHO - It is NOT going to work is otherwise gainfully employed persons
(including but not exclusive to academics) wait until the risk-profile
lowers as to raise an internal project, off the back of the work done by
unpaid volunteers...

It's impossible to parse the knowledge amassed by 'thought leaders'...
Things need to be done today, like updating the 'how to build a solid App'
hello world documents available https://github.com/solid/ to support those
working http://gitter.im/solid/ | whose work is spoken about (to some
degree)
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/07/the-man-who-created-the-world-wide-web-has-some-regrets
|
https://www.economist.com/special-report/2018/06/28/how-to-fix-what-has-gone-wrong-with-the-internet
| and as far as almost anyone knows,

There are no Australians involved in that project. I think TimBL might be
in AU soon? But that's hear-say... either-way, i'd prefer to see a greater
investment made into AU leadership in this knowledge economy area. I read a
big investment in this area was recently made:
https://www.themandarin.com.au/95308-australian-government-and-big-blue-mint-1-billion-advanced-technologies-deal/
To which whilst i have concerns about the sociological lock-ins, some of
these decisions may bring about by way of how information management
systems are designed to be mandatorily used - talking to myself ain't going
to help... indeed, even when influences are made, without recognition for
contributions - without good provenance systems in place - the underlying
foundations used to build these 'knowledge economy ecosystems' are still
broken. It changes the nature of the debate, from an Australia where
universal income needs to be factored into their design decisions; where
changes to health-policy to rationalise whether a royal commission into
health (particularly mental health) services is cheaper / better than
considering the impact to the reality of services provided as medicare
fails to meet the needs of good doctors and patients who need clinicians
who take an interest in them; more than the person managing the automatic
check-out machine at the local super market.

Choices are being made - i see very little conversation about it. I think
this illustrates clearly - something is very wrong.

IMHO - It is imperative for all commercial undertakings that a binding
commitments to human rights by way of an open forum, the means to make use
of appropriate infrastructure such as IETF (whilst it would be nice if they
supported RDF) as to ensure a commercially agnostic & non-binding info
sphere environment for socioeconomic support of life (and the natural
world). It is my opinion one of the very few means to do this in a manner
that works with government, but is not bound to the obligations of a
government department to defend its position where the needs of government
(inc. "rule of law", security, tax & revenue protection) are at odds to the
needs of the people, of citizens. Sometimes the problem is about the
behaviours of an agent, sometimes its the nuances of an actor

Some help with
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xKHONGoepiq29r7NMB9T6yd6kPcfWY2JsaDzK6OqnHE/edit?usp=sharing
would be useful. i think it needs to be broken down into a memorandum or
introductory document; followed by the SIG TOR & perhaps a 3rd elements
about working-group objects? not sure.

It's progressed a bit from the 2013 document:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_-AWWDVv3V2SVpVR3E4T1hETlE/view?usp=sharing

(which might help others with background) and is less dense than explaining
the theoretical (and provenance, from 2000) relationship with
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-consciousness/#3.2

So, FWIW: I think its important to get the TOR done, before starting a
conversation with the banking sector about machine readable itemised tax
receipts; or other potential scopes of work, that i think are all quite
important and extremely complex.

Meanwhile - i'm still of the thought that speaking about ensuring UHD Sport
is delivered freely to 'consumers' is an easier way to get people thinking
about the relationship between their homes and families; and data. This is
in-turn saying - let arrogance, of operators, be considered immutable -
'long live consumers' (not that they really think, what that accolade made
for a pay-packet actually means in areas beyond their field of expertise,
like health. perhaps media people think medical people are happy to
subjugate themselves because they are expected to live by a different set
of moral rules - perhaps they don't understand the pressures put upon
them...)

I have stated very clearly over many years (sadly in past, to deaf ears)
that ISOC-AU is the place to start making significant progress on these
issues. I am pleased new energy has started to grow, but it is very
fragile... These works don't do themselves, people need to wake-up, ISOC-AU
needs to improve its collaboration environment pronto.  Honestly, atm, i'm
really not sure how to fund it.  which is troubling me.   It is alot easier
to send a series of issues / problem statements '/ high-level solutions, to
others overseas who are funded to do the work involved in getting
work-product done.  Indeed also, in an environment where there is a severe
drought of appropriately supported resources - its actually better to do
things that way...   But it distorts the market.  It makes people think,
less energy is expended than is real; it does not proportionately
illustrate a value-matrix around work-product; it distorts it, which leads
to reliability / security issues.  A bunch of major websites, and the ones
made before them had no revenue or moreover certainly - not enough.  The
investments made led to
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1bHmB8_f7ASRHm97TwhZmmEQnTKU -
noting the distinction between those developed in the floppy disk age - vs.
those that developed as online data storage became a thing --> in this next
envisaged shift - i'd like to see how the Australian Banking Sector remains
a local industry.  I would like to ensure the definition of a great many
things, remain local.  it seems others also have concerns:
http://about.abc.net.au/speeches/an-abc-fit-for-the-future/

But perhaps these works need to uplift themselves, out of the gutter.  I'm
not entirely sure what to do next.  Am very interested in more help.
https://doodle.com/poll/idt7tyxwcpugkdha should help - I've also created a
new invite link for the WebCivics Slack set-up:
https://join.slack.com/t/webcivics/shared_invite/enQtMzk5MDA2NTMyMDk4LTU0OGQzMGI1ZGIzODBiMDBjYmMzNDRkMmE1ODI0YzBiNTdmMzY2MGQ3NDNlYzhkYzU1OTU3NjMzYmU5YjY1ZTc


Cheers,

Tim.


>
> On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 9:57 PM Timothy Holborn via members <
> members at lists.internet.org.au> wrote:
>
>> FYI: https://www.un.org/press/en/2018/sga1817.doc.htm
>>
>> Twitter: https://twitter.com/UNSGdigicoop
>>
>> (Noting implicitly therein;
>> https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/?Text=&Goal=16&Target=16.9 )
>>
>> Do we know if any Aussies are involved?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Tim.
>>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Narelle
> narellec at gmail.com
>

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180716/a54a619c/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: trust.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 35049 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180716/a54a619c/attachment-0001.jpg>

From todd.hubers at gmail.com  Tue Jul 17 10:09:58 2018
From: todd.hubers at gmail.com (Todd Hubers)
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 10:09:58 +1000
Subject: [Kbi-webcivics] {Disarmed} Re: [IA - members] {Disarmed} Re:
 Secretary-General Appoints High-Level Panel on Digital Cooperation |
 Meetings Coverage and Press Releases
In-Reply-To: <CAM1Sok31J8U+LtNqdBxTgiKqLU_ANtbAwoNVtxVODBOWQ8aWDQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAM1Sok33+PCaiZc3ksuarAnB_H+sz1uFe9TCc2QxD=WpDe8q6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACRMD1HT_aTihOw9ok90Xx6HZmCDVNL+Zshpx0-ThnM-FskP1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok31J8U+LtNqdBxTgiKqLU_ANtbAwoNVtxVODBOWQ8aWDQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CABO3BC1bg7uX3XKHgfLoJoD8nt9ARKK4D=NBkEOO4bGRvqivng@mail.gmail.com>

Interesting stuff Tim,

I had a look at CivicUS, and their platform is what worries me about
Digital, Internet, and similar advocacy groups: they have almost unlimited
scope, delving into youth, gender, and climate change. They have many
"activities" around those focus areas. This is a clear departure from
"focus". Not only is the scope broad, but it's also politically partisan,
with no olive branch to gently coax in, and convince the ~50% of
populations who lean conservatively.

I think the benefit of the internet is the fact that all those political
issues may be freely discussed. It's the freedom of the internet that must
be a central focus, not social issues.

So Tim rightly points out a key tool for that, TOR. But where is the pinned
TOR headline on the CivicUS website. But that's something that should be
the outcome of a correctly and narrowly defined mission, and a strong
strategy for reaching goals.

So it looks like CivicUS is something very different to what is needed
globally to tackle the real problems of the world, but certainly a part of
the solution.




On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 at 15:22, Timothy Holborn via members <
members at lists.internet.org.au> wrote:

>
> (apologies if its' a bit of a rant - typing it - is helping to orientate
> me)
>
> On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 at 13:27 Narelle Clark <narellec at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> There is one Aussie, but I don't think he's been here for years (dual UK
>> based in South Africa). It would be good to touch base and get a meet up
>> should he make it here, though.
>>
>
> I think the US/China leadership thing is quite strategic.  It would be
> great to meet the Australian man noted to be involved.  I wonder how
> CivicUS is similar in any way to my works on WebCivics...   Interestingly:
> https://www.trustfactory.net/ is part of https://www.isolvtech.com/ which
> is based in SA. Which is a bit different to the local version...
>
>  they do a bunch of stuff around 'plausible deniability' which is always
> interesting ;)
>
>
>>
>> cheers
>>
>> Narelle
>>
>>
> MY LONGER RESPONSE
>
> Thoughts;
>
> [image: trust.jpg]
>
> It is most important solutions are defined rapidly. I think waiting for
> people to catch-up, isn't going to help them. I hope we can continue to
> pursue leadership in Australia but not at the cost of ensuring a
> well-formed solution is made available in a timely manner.
>
> In Vint's recent presentation in Australia (perhaps in future - an
> announcement to members might be made as to ensure the opportunity to know
> these things are on); Vint remarked,
>
> “We have a big problem – I call it the digital dark age – in that we don’t
> curate our digital content with much care until we realise its too late. So
> I’m a big fan of trying to create and preserve data, to assure ourselves
> that digital content can be moved from one medium to another – that we are
> able to preserve software. Creating a sophisticated regime for curating,
> preserving and accessing our data is just as important as preserving the
> original bits of data.”
> source:
> https://newsroom.unsw.edu.au/news/science-tech/internet-past-and-present-vint-cerf-conversation-toby-walsh
>
>
>
> Negotiating the validity of Universal Human Rights (
> http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ ); where those rights may be
> appropriated or denied by way of new medium - as to render meaningful
> service to proprietary commercial interests of a party (ie: rent-seeking
> behaviours) isn't something to be entertained lightly; One might place bets
> on the manifest characteristics through which the qualities of a mediums
> characteristics to maintain good data-hygiene in some areas; and be allowed
> to deteriorate in others, will continue to manifest, without good advocacy
> support - enabling the means to discern the intricacies of good policy vs.
> old ones, in our emergent 'knowledge economy'.
>
> Societies and their systems of government need verifiable claims - imagine
> an agenda that wilfully sought to undermine the social purpose of a
> court-room. Imagine being subjugated for seeking to protect the relevance
> of a court of law. Maybe South Africa will be more progressive in these
> areas than we are... maybe we're simply not equipped.
>
> If we're planning for a society that in a realm of dynamic data - is
> sought to rely upon a basis of hear-say, due to a decline of available
> options, perhaps the intended representation is that people don't really
> need courts... these sorts of facetious objects are not entirely without
> merit... When i was preparing for the TF conference, Anni was curating her
> WebScience conference (held in Canberra) around the concept of getting
> people to 'wake up'. (
> https://www.thinknpc.org/publications/represents-human-digital-age/ )
>
> I think if we're able to step it up, get the right framework of leadership
> support as required for international engagement, international leadership;
> a framework that can be engaged and relied upon in a manner that has both
> funding and momentum; we might have a chance...
>
> IMHO - It is NOT going to work is otherwise gainfully employed persons
> (including but not exclusive to academics) wait until the risk-profile
> lowers as to raise an internal project, off the back of the work done by
> unpaid volunteers...
>
> It's impossible to parse the knowledge amassed by 'thought leaders'...
> Things need to be done today, like updating the 'how to build a solid App'
> hello world documents available https://github.com/solid/ to support
> those working http://gitter.im/solid/ | whose work is spoken about (to
> some degree)
> https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/07/the-man-who-created-the-world-wide-web-has-some-regrets
> |
> https://www.economist.com/special-report/2018/06/28/how-to-fix-what-has-gone-wrong-with-the-internet
> | and as far as almost anyone knows,
>
> There are no Australians involved in that project. I think TimBL might be
> in AU soon? But that's hear-say... either-way, i'd prefer to see a greater
> investment made into AU leadership in this knowledge economy area. I read a
> big investment in this area was recently made:
> https://www.themandarin.com.au/95308-australian-government-and-big-blue-mint-1-billion-advanced-technologies-deal/
> To which whilst i have concerns about the sociological lock-ins, some of
> these decisions may bring about by way of how information management
> systems are designed to be mandatorily used - talking to myself ain't going
> to help... indeed, even when influences are made, without recognition for
> contributions - without good provenance systems in place - the underlying
> foundations used to build these 'knowledge economy ecosystems' are still
> broken. It changes the nature of the debate, from an Australia where
> universal income needs to be factored into their design decisions; where
> changes to health-policy to rationalise whether a royal commission into
> health (particularly mental health) services is cheaper / better than
> considering the impact to the reality of services provided as medicare
> fails to meet the needs of good doctors and patients who need clinicians
> who take an interest in them; more than the person managing the automatic
> check-out machine at the local super market.
>
> Choices are being made - i see very little conversation about it. I think
> this illustrates clearly - something is very wrong.
>
> IMHO - It is imperative for all commercial undertakings that a binding
> commitments to human rights by way of an open forum, the means to make use
> of appropriate infrastructure such as IETF (whilst it would be nice if they
> supported RDF) as to ensure a commercially agnostic & non-binding info
> sphere environment for socioeconomic support of life (and the natural
> world). It is my opinion one of the very few means to do this in a manner
> that works with government, but is not bound to the obligations of a
> government department to defend its position where the needs of government
> (inc. "rule of law", security, tax & revenue protection) are at odds to the
> needs of the people, of citizens. Sometimes the problem is about the
> behaviours of an agent, sometimes its the nuances of an actor
>
> Some help with
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xKHONGoepiq29r7NMB9T6yd6kPcfWY2JsaDzK6OqnHE/edit?usp=sharing
> would be useful. i think it needs to be broken down into a memorandum or
> introductory document; followed by the SIG TOR & perhaps a 3rd elements
> about working-group objects? not sure.
>
> It's progressed a bit from the 2013 document: *MailScanner has detected
> definite fraud in the website at "drive.google.com". Do not trust this
> website:*
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_-AWWDVv3V2SVpVR3E4T1hETlE/view?usp=sharing
> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_-AWWDVv3V2SVpVR3E4T1hETlE/view?usp=sharing>
>
> (which might help others with background) and is less dense than
> explaining the theoretical (and provenance, from 2000) relationship with
> https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-consciousness/#3.2
>
> So, FWIW: I think its important to get the TOR done, before starting a
> conversation with the banking sector about machine readable itemised tax
> receipts; or other potential scopes of work, that i think are all quite
> important and extremely complex.
>
> Meanwhile - i'm still of the thought that speaking about ensuring UHD
> Sport is delivered freely to 'consumers' is an easier way to get people
> thinking about the relationship between their homes and families; and data.
> This is in-turn saying - let arrogance, of operators, be considered
> immutable - 'long live consumers' (not that they really think, what that
> accolade made for a pay-packet actually means in areas beyond their field
> of expertise, like health. perhaps media people think medical people are
> happy to subjugate themselves because they are expected to live by a
> different set of moral rules - perhaps they don't understand the pressures
> put upon them...)
>
> I have stated very clearly over many years (sadly in past, to deaf ears)
> that ISOC-AU is the place to start making significant progress on these
> issues. I am pleased new energy has started to grow, but it is very
> fragile... These works don't do themselves, people need to wake-up, ISOC-AU
> needs to improve its collaboration environment pronto.  Honestly, atm, i'm
> really not sure how to fund it.  which is troubling me.   It is alot easier
> to send a series of issues / problem statements '/ high-level solutions, to
> others overseas who are funded to do the work involved in getting
> work-product done.  Indeed also, in an environment where there is a severe
> drought of appropriately supported resources - its actually better to do
> things that way...   But it distorts the market.  It makes people think,
> less energy is expended than is real; it does not proportionately
> illustrate a value-matrix around work-product; it distorts it, which leads
> to reliability / security issues.  A bunch of major websites, and the ones
> made before them had no revenue or moreover certainly - not enough.  The
> investments made led to
> https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1bHmB8_f7ASRHm97TwhZmmEQnTKU -
> noting the distinction between those developed in the floppy disk age - vs.
> those that developed as online data storage became a thing --> in this next
> envisaged shift - i'd like to see how the Australian Banking Sector remains
> a local industry.  I would like to ensure the definition of a great many
> things, remain local.  it seems others also have concerns:
> http://about.abc.net.au/speeches/an-abc-fit-for-the-future/
>
> But perhaps these works need to uplift themselves, out of the gutter.  I'm
> not entirely sure what to do next.  Am very interested in more help.
> https://doodle.com/poll/idt7tyxwcpugkdha should help - I've also created
> a new invite link for the WebCivics Slack set-up:
> https://join.slack.com/t/webcivics/shared_invite/enQtMzk5MDA2NTMyMDk4LTU0OGQzMGI1ZGIzODBiMDBjYmMzNDRkMmE1ODI0YzBiNTdmMzY2MGQ3NDNlYzhkYzU1OTU3NjMzYmU5YjY1ZTc
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tim.
>
>
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 9:57 PM Timothy Holborn via members <
>> members at lists.internet.org.au> wrote:
>>
>>> FYI: https://www.un.org/press/en/2018/sga1817.doc.htm
>>>
>>> Twitter: https://twitter.com/UNSGdigicoop
>>>
>>> (Noting implicitly therein;
>>> https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/?Text=&Goal=16&Target=16.9 )
>>>
>>> Do we know if any Aussies are involved?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Tim.
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> Narelle
>> narellec at gmail.com
>>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is
> believed to be clean. _______________________________________________
> members mailing list
> members at lists.internet.org.au
> http://lists.internet.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/members
>


-- 
--
Todd Hubers

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180717/ee7558a5/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: trust.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 35049 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180717/ee7558a5/attachment-0001.jpg>

From todd.hubers at gmail.com  Tue Jul 17 10:50:05 2018
From: todd.hubers at gmail.com (Todd Hubers)
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 10:50:05 +1000
Subject: [Kbi-webcivics] {Disarmed} Re: [IA - members] {Disarmed} Re:
 {Disarmed} Re: Secretary-General Appoints High-Level Panel on Digital
 Cooperation | Meetings Coverage and Press Releases
In-Reply-To: <emb6d2b138-36cd-46b3-bb15-ba1d48d06e72@laptop-93l8qkek>
References: <CAM1Sok33+PCaiZc3ksuarAnB_H+sz1uFe9TCc2QxD=WpDe8q6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACRMD1HT_aTihOw9ok90Xx6HZmCDVNL+Zshpx0-ThnM-FskP1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok31J8U+LtNqdBxTgiKqLU_ANtbAwoNVtxVODBOWQ8aWDQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABO3BC1bg7uX3XKHgfLoJoD8nt9ARKK4D=NBkEOO4bGRvqivng@mail.gmail.com>
 <emb6d2b138-36cd-46b3-bb15-ba1d48d06e72@laptop-93l8qkek>
Message-ID: <CABO3BC2iH7LiqNwyo4=iBExBRwCytpZwmYN0rr3b1Di11CSmYA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Ian,

Good point. I notice that CivicUS isn't really supposed to be digitally
focused. My bad. So in that regard, they do have a particular purpose and
part to play.

Does ISOC-NZ have any interest in furthering ANZAC interests?

On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 at 10:46, ian.peter at ianpeter.com <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>
wrote:

> Civicus is a well respected international grassroots NGO and I am glad to
> see them on such a committee to provide focus on matters that concern them,
> such as surveillance, privacy, human rights etc. That is a perspective
> certainly needed on this committee. I am also glad to see members with
> specific knowledge around blockchain, artificial intelligence and other
> emerging technologies being at the table. I think the business interests
> there are good - with tech giants such as Alibaba, Microsoft, Ebay and
> Google at the table, along with a reasonable cross section of nation states.
>
> So all in all I don't think it is too bad. Better representation of the
> global south might be able to be argued for, and I hope the committee calls
> on some of the resources from the old "usual suspect" internet governance
> interest groups for their inputs - although I think their lack of presence
> on the committee itself might actually be advantageous.
>
> Ian Peter
>
> ------ Original Message ------
> From: "Todd Hubers via members" <members at lists.internet.org.au>
> To: "Internet Australia" <members at lists.internet.org.au>
> Cc: "Todd Hubers" <todd.hubers at gmail.com>;
> kbi-webcivics at lists.internet.org.au
> Sent: 17/07/2018 10:09:58 AM
> Subject: [IA - members] {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} Re: Secretary-General
> Appoints High-Level Panel on Digital Cooperation | Meetings Coverage and
> Press Releases
>
> Interesting stuff Tim,
>
> I had a look at CivicUS, and their platform is what worries me about
> Digital, Internet, and similar advocacy groups: they have almost unlimited
> scope, delving into youth, gender, and climate change. They have many
> "activities" around those focus areas. This is a clear departure from
> "focus". Not only is the scope broad, but it's also politically partisan,
> with no olive branch to gently coax in, and convince the ~50% of
> populations who lean conservatively.
>
> I think the benefit of the internet is the fact that all those political
> issues may be freely discussed. It's the freedom of the internet that must
> be a central focus, not social issues.
>
> So Tim rightly points out a key tool for that, TOR. But where is the
> pinned TOR headline on the CivicUS website. But that's something that
> should be the outcome of a correctly and narrowly defined mission, and a
> strong strategy for reaching goals.
>
> So it looks like CivicUS is something very different to what is needed
> globally to tackle the real problems of the world, but certainly a part of
> the solution.
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 at 15:22, Timothy Holborn via members <
> members at lists.internet.org.au> wrote:
>
>>
>> (apologies if its' a bit of a rant - typing it - is helping to orientate
>> me)
>>
>> On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 at 13:27 Narelle Clark <narellec at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> There is one Aussie, but I don't think he's been here for years (dual UK
>>> based in South Africa). It would be good to touch base and get a meet up
>>> should he make it here, though.
>>>
>>
>> I think the US/China leadership thing is quite strategic.  It would be
>> great to meet the Australian man noted to be involved.  I wonder how
>> CivicUS is similar in any way to my works on WebCivics...   Interestingly:
>> https://www.trustfactory.net/ is part of https://www.isolvtech.com/
>> which is based in SA. Which is a bit different to the local version...
>>
>>  they do a bunch of stuff around 'plausible deniability' which is always
>> interesting ;)
>>
>>
>>>
>>> cheers
>>>
>>> Narelle
>>>
>>>
>> MY LONGER RESPONSE
>>
>> Thoughts;
>>
>> [image: trust.jpg]
>>
>> It is most important solutions are defined rapidly. I think waiting for
>> people to catch-up, isn't going to help them. I hope we can continue to
>> pursue leadership in Australia but not at the cost of ensuring a
>> well-formed solution is made available in a timely manner.
>>
>> In Vint's recent presentation in Australia (perhaps in future - an
>> announcement to members might be made as to ensure the opportunity to know
>> these things are on); Vint remarked,
>>
>> “We have a big problem – I call it the digital dark age – in that we
>> don’t curate our digital content with much care until we realise its too
>> late. So I’m a big fan of trying to create and preserve data, to assure
>> ourselves that digital content can be moved from one medium to another –
>> that we are able to preserve software. Creating a sophisticated regime for
>> curating, preserving and accessing our data is just as important as
>> preserving the original bits of data.”
>> source:
>> https://newsroom.unsw.edu.au/news/science-tech/internet-past-and-present-vint-cerf-conversation-toby-walsh
>>
>>
>>
>> Negotiating the validity of Universal Human Rights (
>> http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ ); where those rights may be
>> appropriated or denied by way of new medium - as to render meaningful
>> service to proprietary commercial interests of a party (ie: rent-seeking
>> behaviours) isn't something to be entertained lightly; One might place bets
>> on the manifest characteristics through which the qualities of a mediums
>> characteristics to maintain good data-hygiene in some areas; and be allowed
>> to deteriorate in others, will continue to manifest, without good advocacy
>> support - enabling the means to discern the intricacies of good policy vs.
>> old ones, in our emergent 'knowledge economy'.
>>
>> Societies and their systems of government need verifiable claims -
>> imagine an agenda that wilfully sought to undermine the social purpose of a
>> court-room. Imagine being subjugated for seeking to protect the relevance
>> of a court of law. Maybe South Africa will be more progressive in these
>> areas than we are... maybe we're simply not equipped.
>>
>> If we're planning for a society that in a realm of dynamic data - is
>> sought to rely upon a basis of hear-say, due to a decline of available
>> options, perhaps the intended representation is that people don't really
>> need courts... these sorts of facetious objects are not entirely without
>> merit... When i was preparing for the TF conference, Anni was curating her
>> WebScience conference (held in Canberra) around the concept of getting
>> people to 'wake up'. (
>> https://www.thinknpc.org/publications/represents-human-digital-age/ )
>>
>> I think if we're able to step it up, get the right framework of
>> leadership support as required for international engagement, international
>> leadership; a framework that can be engaged and relied upon in a manner
>> that has both funding and momentum; we might have a chance...
>>
>> IMHO - It is NOT going to work is otherwise gainfully employed persons
>> (including but not exclusive to academics) wait until the risk-profile
>> lowers as to raise an internal project, off the back of the work done by
>> unpaid volunteers...
>>
>> It's impossible to parse the knowledge amassed by 'thought leaders'...
>> Things need to be done today, like updating the 'how to build a solid App'
>> hello world documents available https://github.com/solid/ to support
>> those working http://gitter.im/solid/ | whose work is spoken about (to
>> some degree)
>> https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/07/the-man-who-created-the-world-wide-web-has-some-regrets
>> |
>> https://www.economist.com/special-report/2018/06/28/how-to-fix-what-has-gone-wrong-with-the-internet
>> | and as far as almost anyone knows,
>>
>> There are no Australians involved in that project. I think TimBL might be
>> in AU soon? But that's hear-say... either-way, i'd prefer to see a greater
>> investment made into AU leadership in this knowledge economy area. I read a
>> big investment in this area was recently made:
>> https://www.themandarin.com.au/95308-australian-government-and-big-blue-mint-1-billion-advanced-technologies-deal/
>> To which whilst i have concerns about the sociological lock-ins, some of
>> these decisions may bring about by way of how information management
>> systems are designed to be mandatorily used - talking to myself ain't going
>> to help... indeed, even when influences are made, without recognition for
>> contributions - without good provenance systems in place - the underlying
>> foundations used to build these 'knowledge economy ecosystems' are still
>> broken. It changes the nature of the debate, from an Australia where
>> universal income needs to be factored into their design decisions; where
>> changes to health-policy to rationalise whether a royal commission into
>> health (particularly mental health) services is cheaper / better than
>> considering the impact to the reality of services provided as medicare
>> fails to meet the needs of good doctors and patients who need clinicians
>> who take an interest in them; more than the person managing the automatic
>> check-out machine at the local super market.
>>
>> Choices are being made - i see very little conversation about it. I think
>> this illustrates clearly - something is very wrong.
>>
>> IMHO - It is imperative for all commercial undertakings that a binding
>> commitments to human rights by way of an open forum, the means to make use
>> of appropriate infrastructure such as IETF (whilst it would be nice if they
>> supported RDF) as to ensure a commercially agnostic & non-binding info
>> sphere environment for socioeconomic support of life (and the natural
>> world). It is my opinion one of the very few means to do this in a manner
>> that works with government, but is not bound to the obligations of a
>> government department to defend its position where the needs of government
>> (inc. "rule of law", security, tax & revenue protection) are at odds to the
>> needs of the people, of citizens. Sometimes the problem is about the
>> behaviours of an agent, sometimes its the nuances of an actor
>>
>> Some help with
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xKHONGoepiq29r7NMB9T6yd6kPcfWY2JsaDzK6OqnHE/edit?usp=sharing
>> would be useful. i think it needs to be broken down into a memorandum or
>> introductory document; followed by the SIG TOR & perhaps a 3rd elements
>> about working-group objects? not sure.
>>
>> It's progressed a bit from the 2013 document: *MailScanner has detected
>> definite fraud in the website at "drive.google.com". Do not trust this
>> website:* *MailScanner has detected definite fraud in the website at
>> "drive.google.com". Do not trust this website:*
>> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_-AWWDVv3V2SVpVR3E4T1hETlE/view?usp=sharing
>> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_-AWWDVv3V2SVpVR3E4T1hETlE/view?usp=sharing>
>>
>> (which might help others with background) and is less dense than
>> explaining the theoretical (and provenance, from 2000) relationship with
>> https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-consciousness/#3.2
>>
>> So, FWIW: I think its important to get the TOR done, before starting a
>> conversation with the banking sector about machine readable itemised tax
>> receipts; or other potential scopes of work, that i think are all quite
>> important and extremely complex.
>>
>> Meanwhile - i'm still of the thought that speaking about ensuring UHD
>> Sport is delivered freely to 'consumers' is an easier way to get people
>> thinking about the relationship between their homes and families; and data.
>> This is in-turn saying - let arrogance, of operators, be considered
>> immutable - 'long live consumers' (not that they really think, what that
>> accolade made for a pay-packet actually means in areas beyond their field
>> of expertise, like health. perhaps media people think medical people are
>> happy to subjugate themselves because they are expected to live by a
>> different set of moral rules - perhaps they don't understand the pressures
>> put upon them...)
>>
>> I have stated very clearly over many years (sadly in past, to deaf ears)
>> that ISOC-AU is the place to start making significant progress on these
>> issues. I am pleased new energy has started to grow, but it is very
>> fragile... These works don't do themselves, people need to wake-up, ISOC-AU
>> needs to improve its collaboration environment pronto.  Honestly, atm, i'm
>> really not sure how to fund it.  which is troubling me.   It is alot easier
>> to send a series of issues / problem statements '/ high-level solutions, to
>> others overseas who are funded to do the work involved in getting
>> work-product done.  Indeed also, in an environment where there is a severe
>> drought of appropriately supported resources - its actually better to do
>> things that way...   But it distorts the market.  It makes people think,
>> less energy is expended than is real; it does not proportionately
>> illustrate a value-matrix around work-product; it distorts it, which leads
>> to reliability / security issues.  A bunch of major websites, and the ones
>> made before them had no revenue or moreover certainly - not enough.  The
>> investments made led to
>> https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1bHmB8_f7ASRHm97TwhZmmEQnTKU -
>> noting the distinction between those developed in the floppy disk age - vs.
>> those that developed as online data storage became a thing --> in this next
>> envisaged shift - i'd like to see how the Australian Banking Sector remains
>> a local industry.  I would like to ensure the definition of a great many
>> things, remain local.  it seems others also have concerns:
>> http://about.abc.net.au/speeches/an-abc-fit-for-the-future/
>>
>> But perhaps these works need to uplift themselves, out of the gutter.
>> I'm not entirely sure what to do next.  Am very interested in more help.
>> https://doodle.com/poll/idt7tyxwcpugkdha should help - I've also created
>> a new invite link for the WebCivics Slack set-up:
>> https://join.slack.com/t/webcivics/shared_invite/enQtMzk5MDA2NTMyMDk4LTU0OGQzMGI1ZGIzODBiMDBjYmMzNDRkMmE1ODI0YzBiNTdmMzY2MGQ3NDNlYzhkYzU1OTU3NjMzYmU5YjY1ZTc
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Tim.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 9:57 PM Timothy Holborn via members <
>>> members at lists.internet.org.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>> FYI: https://www.un.org/press/en/2018/sga1817.doc.htm
>>>>
>>>> Twitter: https://twitter.com/UNSGdigicoop
>>>>
>>>> (Noting implicitly therein;
>>>> https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/?Text=&Goal=16&Target=16.9 )
>>>>
>>>> Do we know if any Aussies are involved?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Tim.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>> Narelle
>>> narellec at gmail.com
>>>
>>
>> --
>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and
>> is
>> believed to be clean. _______________________________________________
>> members mailing list
>> members at lists.internet.org.au
>> http://lists.internet.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/members
>>
>
>
> --
> --
> Todd Hubers
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is
> believed to be clean.
>
>

-- 
--
Todd Hubers

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180717/ae9f4d6d/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: trust.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 35049 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180717/ae9f4d6d/attachment-0002.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: trust.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 35049 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180717/ae9f4d6d/attachment-0003.jpg>

From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Tue Jul 17 10:46:12 2018
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (ian.peter at ianpeter.com)
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 00:46:12 +0000
Subject: [Kbi-webcivics] {Disarmed} Re: [IA - members] {Disarmed} Re:
 {Disarmed} Re: Secretary-General Appoints High-Level Panel on Digital
 Cooperation | Meetings Coverage and Press Releases
In-Reply-To: <CABO3BC1bg7uX3XKHgfLoJoD8nt9ARKK4D=NBkEOO4bGRvqivng@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAM1Sok33+PCaiZc3ksuarAnB_H+sz1uFe9TCc2QxD=WpDe8q6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACRMD1HT_aTihOw9ok90Xx6HZmCDVNL+Zshpx0-ThnM-FskP1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok31J8U+LtNqdBxTgiKqLU_ANtbAwoNVtxVODBOWQ8aWDQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABO3BC1bg7uX3XKHgfLoJoD8nt9ARKK4D=NBkEOO4bGRvqivng@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <emb6d2b138-36cd-46b3-bb15-ba1d48d06e72@laptop-93l8qkek>

Civicus is a well respected international grassroots NGO and I am glad 
to see them on such a committee to provide focus on matters that concern 
them, such as surveillance, privacy, human rights etc. That is a 
perspective certainly needed on this committee. I am also glad to see 
members with specific knowledge around blockchain, artificial 
intelligence and other emerging technologies being at the table. I think 
the business interests there are good - with tech giants such as 
Alibaba, Microsoft, Ebay and Google at the table, along with a 
reasonable cross section of nation states.

So all in all I don't think it is too bad. Better representation of the 
global south might be able to be argued for, and I hope the committee 
calls on some of the resources from the old "usual suspect" internet 
governance interest groups for their inputs - although I think their 
lack of presence on the committee itself might actually be advantageous.

Ian Peter

------ Original Message ------
From: "Todd Hubers via members" <members at lists.internet.org.au>
To: "Internet Australia" <members at lists.internet.org.au>
Cc: "Todd Hubers" <todd.hubers at gmail.com>; 
kbi-webcivics at lists.internet.org.au
Sent: 17/07/2018 10:09:58 AM
Subject: [IA - members] {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} Re: Secretary-General 
Appoints High-Level Panel on Digital Cooperation | Meetings Coverage and 
Press Releases

>Interesting stuff Tim,
>
>I had a look at CivicUS, and their platform is what worries me about 
>Digital, Internet, and similar advocacy groups: they have almost 
>unlimited scope, delving into youth, gender, and climate change. They 
>have many "activities" around those focus areas. This is a clear 
>departure from "focus". Not only is the scope broad, but it's also 
>politically partisan, with no olive branch to gently coax in, and 
>convince the ~50% of populations who lean conservatively.
>
>I think the benefit of the internet is the fact that all those 
>political issues may be freely discussed. It's the freedom of the 
>internet that must be a central focus, not social issues.
>
>So Tim rightly points out a key tool for that, TOR. But where is the 
>pinned TOR headline on the CivicUS website. But that's something that 
>should be the outcome of a correctly and narrowly defined mission, and 
>a strong strategy for reaching goals.
>
>So it looks like CivicUS is something very different to what is needed 
>globally to tackle the real problems of the world, but certainly a part 
>of the solution.
>
>
>
>
>On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 at 15:22, Timothy Holborn via members 
><members at lists.internet.org.au> wrote:
>>
>>(apologies if its' a bit of a rant - typing it - is helping to 
>>orientate me)
>>
>>On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 at 13:27 Narelle Clark <narellec at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>There is one Aussie, but I don't think he's been here for years (dual 
>>>UK based in South Africa). It would be good to touch base and get a 
>>>meet up should he make it here, though.
>>
>>I think the US/China leadership thing is quite strategic.  It would be 
>>great to meet the Australian man noted to be involved.  I wonder how 
>>CivicUS is similar in any way to my works on WebCivics...   
>>Interestingly: https://www.trustfactory.net/ is part of 
>>https://www.isolvtech.com/ which is based in SA. Which is a bit 
>>different to the local version...
>>
>>  they do a bunch of stuff around 'plausible deniability' which is 
>>always interesting ;)
>>
>>>
>>>cheers
>>>
>>>Narelle
>>>
>>
>>MY LONGER RESPONSE
>>
>>Thoughts;
>>
>>
>>
>>It is most important solutions are defined rapidly. I think waiting 
>>for people to catch-up, isn't going to help them. I hope we can 
>>continue to pursue leadership in Australia but not at the cost of 
>>ensuring a well-formed solution is made available in a timely manner.
>>
>>In Vint's recent presentation in Australia (perhaps in future - an 
>>announcement to members might be made as to ensure the opportunity to 
>>know these things are on); Vint remarked,
>>
>>“We have a big problem – I call it the digital dark age – in that we 
>>don’t curate our digital content with much care until we realise its 
>>too late. So I’m a big fan of trying to create and preserve data, to 
>>assure ourselves that digital content can be moved from one medium to 
>>another – that we are able to preserve software. Creating a 
>>sophisticated regime for curating, preserving and accessing our data 
>>is just as important as preserving the original bits of data.”
>>source: 
>>https://newsroom.unsw.edu.au/news/science-tech/internet-past-and-present-vint-cerf-conversation-toby-walsh
>>
>>
>>Negotiating the validity of Universal Human Rights ( 
>>http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ ); where those rights may be 
>>appropriated or denied by way of new medium - as to render meaningful 
>>service to proprietary commercial interests of a party (ie: 
>>rent-seeking behaviours) isn't something to be entertained lightly; 
>>One might place bets on the manifest characteristics through which the 
>>qualities of a mediums characteristics to maintain good data-hygiene 
>>in some areas; and be allowed to deteriorate in others, will continue 
>>to manifest, without good advocacy support - enabling the means to 
>>discern the intricacies of good policy vs. old ones, in our emergent 
>>'knowledge economy'.
>>
>>Societies and their systems of government need verifiable claims - 
>>imagine an agenda that wilfully sought to undermine the social purpose 
>>of a court-room. Imagine being subjugated for seeking to protect the 
>>relevance of a court of law. Maybe South Africa will be more 
>>progressive in these areas than we are... maybe we're simply not 
>>equipped.
>>
>>If we're planning for a society that in a realm of dynamic data - is 
>>sought to rely upon a basis of hear-say, due to a decline of available 
>>options, perhaps the intended representation is that people don't 
>>really need courts... these sorts of facetious objects are not 
>>entirely without merit... When i was preparing for the TF conference, 
>>Anni was curating her WebScience conference (held in Canberra) around 
>>the concept of getting people to 'wake up'. ( 
>>https://www.thinknpc.org/publications/represents-human-digital-age/ )
>>
>>I think if we're able to step it up, get the right framework of 
>>leadership support as required for international engagement, 
>>international leadership; a framework that can be engaged and relied 
>>upon in a manner that has both funding and momentum; we might have a 
>>chance...
>>
>>IMHO - It is NOT going to work is otherwise gainfully employed persons 
>>(including but not exclusive to academics) wait until the risk-profile 
>>lowers as to raise an internal project, off the back of the work done 
>>by unpaid volunteers...
>>
>>It's impossible to parse the knowledge amassed by 'thought leaders'... 
>>Things need to be done today, like updating the 'how to build a solid 
>>App' hello world documents available https://github.com/solid/ to 
>>support those working http://gitter.im/solid/ | whose work is spoken 
>>about (to some degree) 
>>https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/07/the-man-who-created-the-world-wide-web-has-some-regrets 
>>| 
>>https://www.economist.com/special-report/2018/06/28/how-to-fix-what-has-gone-wrong-with-the-internet 
>>| and as far as almost anyone knows,
>>
>>There are no Australians involved in that project. I think TimBL might 
>>be in AU soon? But that's hear-say... either-way, i'd prefer to see a 
>>greater investment made into AU leadership in this knowledge economy 
>>area. I read a big investment in this area was recently made: 
>>https://www.themandarin.com.au/95308-australian-government-and-big-blue-mint-1-billion-advanced-technologies-deal/ 
>>To which whilst i have concerns about the sociological lock-ins, some 
>>of these decisions may bring about by way of how information 
>>management systems are designed to be mandatorily used - talking to 
>>myself ain't going to help... indeed, even when influences are made, 
>>without recognition for contributions - without good provenance 
>>systems in place - the underlying foundations used to build these 
>>'knowledge economy ecosystems' are still broken. It changes the nature 
>>of the debate, from an Australia where universal income needs to be 
>>factored into their design decisions; where changes to health-policy 
>>to rationalise whether a royal commission into health (particularly 
>>mental health) services is cheaper / better than considering the 
>>impact to the reality of services provided as medicare fails to meet 
>>the needs of good doctors and patients who need clinicians who take an 
>>interest in them; more than the person managing the automatic 
>>check-out machine at the local super market.
>>
>>Choices are being made - i see very little conversation about it. I 
>>think this illustrates clearly - something is very wrong.
>>
>>IMHO - It is imperative for all commercial undertakings that a binding 
>>commitments to human rights by way of an open forum, the means to make 
>>use of appropriate infrastructure such as IETF (whilst it would be 
>>nice if they supported RDF) as to ensure a commercially agnostic & 
>>non-binding info sphere environment for socioeconomic support of life 
>>(and the natural world). It is my opinion one of the very few means to 
>>do this in a manner that works with government, but is not bound to 
>>the obligations of a government department to defend its position 
>>where the needs of government (inc. "rule of law", security, tax & 
>>revenue protection) are at odds to the needs of the people, of 
>>citizens. Sometimes the problem is about the behaviours of an agent, 
>>sometimes its the nuances of an actor
>>
>>Some help with 
>>https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xKHONGoepiq29r7NMB9T6yd6kPcfWY2JsaDzK6OqnHE/edit?usp=sharing 
>>would be useful. i think it needs to be broken down into a memorandum 
>>or introductory document; followed by the SIG TOR & perhaps a 3rd 
>>elements about working-group objects? not sure.
>>
>>It's progressed a bit from the 2013 document: MailScanner has detected 
>>definite fraud in the website at "drive.google.com". Do not trust this 
>>website:MailScanner has detected definite fraud in the website at 
>>"drive.google.com". Do not trust this website: 
>>https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_-AWWDVv3V2SVpVR3E4T1hETlE/view?usp=sharing 
>><https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_-AWWDVv3V2SVpVR3E4T1hETlE/view?usp=sharing>
>>(which might help others with background) and is less dense than 
>>explaining the theoretical (and provenance, from 2000) relationship 
>>with https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-consciousness/#3.2
>>
>>So, FWIW: I think its important to get the TOR done, before starting a 
>>conversation with the banking sector about machine readable itemised 
>>tax receipts; or other potential scopes of work, that i think are all 
>>quite important and extremely complex.
>>
>>Meanwhile - i'm still of the thought that speaking about ensuring UHD 
>>Sport is delivered freely to 'consumers' is an easier way to get 
>>people thinking about the relationship between their homes and 
>>families; and data. This is in-turn saying - let arrogance, of 
>>operators, be considered immutable - 'long live consumers' (not that 
>>they really think, what that accolade made for a pay-packet actually 
>>means in areas beyond their field of expertise, like health. perhaps 
>>media people think medical people are happy to subjugate themselves 
>>because they are expected to live by a different set of moral rules - 
>>perhaps they don't understand the pressures put upon them...)
>>
>>I have stated very clearly over many years (sadly in past, to deaf 
>>ears) that ISOC-AU is the place to start making significant progress 
>>on these issues. I am pleased new energy has started to grow, but it 
>>is very fragile... These works don't do themselves, people need to 
>>wake-up, ISOC-AU needs to improve its collaboration environment 
>>pronto.  Honestly, atm, i'm really not sure how to fund it.  which is 
>>troubling me.   It is alot easier to send a series of issues / problem 
>>statements '/ high-level solutions, to others overseas who are funded 
>>to do the work involved in getting work-product done.  Indeed also, in 
>>an environment where there is a severe drought of appropriately 
>>supported resources - its actually better to do things that way...   
>>But it distorts the market.  It makes people think, less energy is 
>>expended than is real; it does not proportionately illustrate a 
>>value-matrix around work-product; it distorts it, which leads to 
>>reliability / security issues.  A bunch of major websites, and the 
>>ones made before them had no revenue or moreover certainly - not 
>>enough.  The investments made led to 
>>https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1bHmB8_f7ASRHm97TwhZmmEQnTKU 
>>- noting the distinction between those developed in the floppy disk 
>>age - vs. those that developed as online data storage became a thing 
>>--> in this next envisaged shift - i'd like to see how the Australian 
>>Banking Sector remains a local industry.  I would like to ensure the 
>>definition of a great many things, remain local.  it seems others also 
>>have concerns: 
>>http://about.abc.net.au/speeches/an-abc-fit-for-the-future/
>>
>>But perhaps these works need to uplift themselves, out of the gutter.  
>>I'm not entirely sure what to do next.  Am very interested in more 
>>help. https://doodle.com/poll/idt7tyxwcpugkdha should help - I've also 
>>created a new invite link for the WebCivics Slack set-up: 
>>https://join.slack.com/t/webcivics/shared_invite/enQtMzk5MDA2NTMyMDk4LTU0OGQzMGI1ZGIzODBiMDBjYmMzNDRkMmE1ODI0YzBiNTdmMzY2MGQ3NDNlYzhkYzU1OTU3NjMzYmU5YjY1ZTc
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Tim.
>>
>>>
>>>On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 9:57 PM Timothy Holborn via members 
>>><members at lists.internet.org.au> wrote:
>>>>FYI: https://www.un.org/press/en/2018/sga1817.doc.htm
>>>>
>>>>Twitter: https://twitter.com/UNSGdigicoop
>>>>
>>>>(Noting implicitly therein; 
>>>>https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/?Text=&Goal=16&Target=16.9 )
>>>>
>>>>Do we know if any Aussies are involved?
>>>>
>>>>Cheers,
>>>>
>>>>Tim.
>>>
>>>
>>>--
>>>
>>>
>>>Narelle
>>>narellec at gmail.com
>>
>>--
>>This message has been scanned for viruses and
>>dangerous content by MailScanner <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and 
>>is
>>believed to be clean. _______________________________________________
>>members mailing list
>>members at lists.internet.org.au
>>http://lists.internet.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/members
>
>
>--
>--
>Todd Hubers
>
>--
>This message has been scanned for viruses and
>dangerous content by MailScanner <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is
>believed to be clean.
-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180717/2ede0ae1/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: trust.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 35049 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180717/2ede0ae1/attachment-0001.jpg>

From timothy.holborn at gmail.com  Tue Jul 17 17:16:10 2018
From: timothy.holborn at gmail.com (Timothy Holborn)
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 17:16:10 +1000
Subject: [Kbi-webcivics] MyHealth Record
Message-ID: <CAM1Sok1_bmQJY14_kQRuLatG4jdUBEmRvndA0t7uZFKc8jjKxw@mail.gmail.com>

I was alerted to the health-records 'opt-out' situation going on, and note
it is an area of interest; whilst also considering, the area to be 'high
stakes' in nature and therefore not a preferred innovation field at first
glance.

*TL;DR summary:* heath is a tricky area - if anyone is interested in
work-shopping solutions around this area, in relation to the beneficial
owner of health information relating to a 'data subject' being the 'data
subject' (aka - knowledge banking SIG work) let me know.

For those not currently on the Knowledge Banking SIG list - please fine
link: http://lists.internet.org.au/mailman/listinfo/kbi-webcivics

*Long-form* *series;* of thoughts and considerations below,

The problem thereafter becomes, that whilst dignity preserving intentions
are to get things right before messing with peoples health; the 'status
quo' processes underway may not be so considerate of others.  It is
certainly my experience that there are alot of flaws in the area; noting,
my family have been involved in the healthcare sector for many generations
and through this heritage, i have an awareness of the health-records
systems and related processes, since i was a child; noting,

pathology companies needed a way to disseminate results as quickly as
possible.  Indeed, my homework was often done in the room filled with old
green-screened data-entry workstations...  with my mother answering the
phone, for inbound emergency requests by clinicians.

I believe the 'opt-out' process is soon closing, but find link here[1].

I think there are a variety of issues in this area; and am interested to
hear if people are interested in work-shopping it.   There are massive
problems with ensuring timely supply of good healthcare services; there are
also massive problems with data-quality, data-hygiene, the means to correct
false statements made, the means for the interests of citizens to be
represented on an individual basis; where the industry and government seek
to ensure an isolation based approach, which means, the means for people -
particularly those without any medical industry knowledge in their families
- to get good healthcare outcomes (rather than rent-seeking behaviours) is
increasingly more difficult.

>From my own observations, i have been concerned about the manner in which
medicare billing codes have seemingly been made use of commercially to
limit, the means in which medical services attend to patient issues; based
on a practice method, of solely responding to the request outlined by the
particular medicare billing code.

conversely; my grandfather, in the 80's/90's, had a microscope, a bunch of
slides and books; and the microscope was connected to a camera and
monitor.  I'm fairly sure, whether it be autopsies, tissue or fluid samples
- whatever he was trying to figure out clinically - he wanted to figure it
out, without caring too much about the 'medicare billing code' that related
to how he needed to go through a method of enquiry to figure it out.

Australia is currently making a migration to RDF (knowledge banking
compatible - structured data formats) by way of SNOMED CT‑AU which provides
the ontological structures required to map everything out.  I was involved
in a project briefly, donating my time to some young doctors who wanted to
make an OSCE[2] app and found many worrying issues; that make alot of
sense, from a 'consumer' point of view.

I am particularly worried about doing serious work in this area, given the
enormous powers at play; and overall, the stakes.  but if others are
interested in looking at how to explore the means in which the beneficial
ownership of data relating to your health and welfare may be considered to
be beneficially owned by you, rather than you being defined by others,
based on the interests of their business systems (and the failing of such
apparatus) - let me know.

It's certainly a big problem area - particularly in relation to mental
health which has direct relationships to many security, crime and welfare
issues moreover.

Whilst i state again - it is my view, that testing systems out is better
done on things like - who is watching the footy, or what ad's you want to
get when your watching it, or what the relationship is between your
'opt-in' to get a test-drive of a car you might buy, and the privacy
framework relating to the use of that TV by yourself, your children and
your friends.

the other fields relating to health include statistics.  I am aware of
several areas of complex social-studies where no reasonably good level of
statistics are available, to which the statement is that its either too
expensive or too hard due to privacy.  Health is a dignity issue, keeping
someone unhealthy as to preserve their privacy does not improve quality of
life and is in my opinion, a breach of the hippocratic oath -noting, i'm
not sure what the equivalent of this oath is, for those involved in
web-science / data-science, and the governance of such capabilities in the
interests of public good.

Having an unconscious trauma patient die, due to not being aware of
important facts that could be made known by way of a medical records system
- isn't a good outcome.

Having a misdiagnosis by a person working in a hospital who is not
qualified to make diagnosis, in a manner that contravenes those that do, as
to provide external parties false and misleading information, that is
in-turn stored in their databases; whereby the subsequent cost of
negligence and the means to resolve what has been formed is left without
consideration, as it is not in the interests of the insurance policy /
provider, held by the organisation responsible for any such bad-agent;
that's no good either.

and what happens if everyone reads and starts to take control of their own
medical records... how many people want to talk about these very sensitive
personal matters, particularly if they say things in those records that
could prevent those people from their current standing of gainful
employment.  If it means, on medical grounds, they're unable to engage in
their field of professional endeavour.  What if the misdiagnosis, results
in the would-be patient being left without treatment for something that is
treatable, but different to what they'd been harmed by having it stated,
with impunity, they suffered from.

What if it's not that they're crazy, but that they've got blood pressure
problems and no-one checked.  What is the responsibility of the patient,
and the responsibility of the clinicians and the staff that support their
functions.  What is the responsibility of government, to ensure appropriate
tests are made available; rather than forming means to have founded any way
in which public funds are in-effect, misused, through the continued
treatment of symptoms for a treatable circumstance of condition.

What if those processes; are politically inconvenient, but that it is made
by structure - to ensure the voices of others do not count.

We can issue (and rescind) credentials in dynamic and complex ways..   I
don't think those working on these problems in government, feel as though
they have the support they need; to get the job done in a manner they're
more comfortable with having participated in doing; therein, that it is
important to understand the distinction between the role, and the forum.

right now - i believe we have an insufficient capacity to form forum; and
my now long-email, is certainly looking for expressions of interest, to
make progress.  As previously noted -  the SIG TOR is under development[3]
please feel welcome to contribute.  Additionally, i've set-up the Slack
group[4] as an interim measure.

Tim.

[1]
https://www.myhealthrecord.gov.au/for-you-your-family/opt-out-my-health-record

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objective_structured_clinical_examination
[3]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xKHONGoepiq29r7NMB9T6yd6kPcfWY2JsaDzK6OqnHE/edit?usp=sharing

[4]
https://join.slack.com/t/webcivics/shared_invite/enQtMzk5MDA2NTMyMDk4LTU0OGQzMGI1ZGIzODBiMDBjYmMzNDRkMmE1ODI0YzBiNTdmMzY2MGQ3NDNlYzhkYzU1OTU3NjMzYmU5YjY1ZTc

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180717/b6519828/attachment.html>

From timothy.holborn at gmail.com  Tue Jul 17 13:55:48 2018
From: timothy.holborn at gmail.com (Timothy Holborn)
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 13:55:48 +1000
Subject: [Kbi-webcivics] {Disarmed} Re: [IA - members] {Disarmed} Re:
 {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} Re: Secretary-General Appoints High-Level Panel
 on Digital Cooperation | Meetings Coverage and Press Releases
In-Reply-To: <emb6d2b138-36cd-46b3-bb15-ba1d48d06e72@laptop-93l8qkek>
References: <CAM1Sok33+PCaiZc3ksuarAnB_H+sz1uFe9TCc2QxD=WpDe8q6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACRMD1HT_aTihOw9ok90Xx6HZmCDVNL+Zshpx0-ThnM-FskP1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok31J8U+LtNqdBxTgiKqLU_ANtbAwoNVtxVODBOWQ8aWDQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABO3BC1bg7uX3XKHgfLoJoD8nt9ARKK4D=NBkEOO4bGRvqivng@mail.gmail.com>
 <emb6d2b138-36cd-46b3-bb15-ba1d48d06e72@laptop-93l8qkek>
Message-ID: <CAM1Sok3ZvZV=xhm3BSoMp3sVTReLahNHpOR8WRP7pjG1_4YiLA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Ian,

I've used your email to brainstorm a little more of my thoughts.  I
apologise for the length of it, but selfishly, its helpful to me (whilst
the hope is, that its also helpful for others).

In summary - yes.  its good to see movement, its good to see some level of
professional endorsement, i do wonder why the man who (co-)founded internet
society didn't make use of it - i've had various discussions with him in
past - ISOC is aware of my intention (as it has been for some time) to
establish a global sig, which i believe is the appropriate means to
engage.  I am working on communications infrastructure, local SIG
structural requirements and the 'invest-ability' frameworks required to
set-up this ISOC based global initiative, noting i have tried before and
failed - hopefully, it'll be different this time.  Around the time of an
earlier attempt (as described below)
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/04/05/ota_isoc_merger/ was established.
 The statements most often made to me, is why would you want to do this in
Australia.

My response is always, because i'm Australian. (alongside the implicit
considerations made, therein).

With respect to your capacities - I am aware of an array of functionality
that's going to come-about with 5G radios.  I can imagine them managing the
'hyper-space' of environments.  The notes about IPv6 being made use of;
seems a little historical for me, and the context of
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_Broadband_Radio_Service also perhaps
less understood in relation to spectrum efficiency and the future SWOT
frameworks around various wireless communications technologies.  At
present, WiFi devices are reporting back to WWW / App providers over HTTP;
whereas 3g/4g have means to report a little differently.  ideally, the
sanity of a home as a private space is preserved and the emergent issues
are made to be decided by an informed public.

I'm not sure how many people ceremonially wear a fit bit to bed; i'm not
sure what the demographics are for doing so, and i'm not sure how many
mothers and fathers of teenage children would want an alert, as to make a
phone-call if they see a heart-rate spike, when apparently those children
are having a sleep over with a friend; similarly, i'm not sure how doctors
might treat 'depression' of elderly persons where no spikes are present, or
indeed, how their practice management software - might make suggestions
about treatment options.

(i couldn't figure out a better way of explaining the privacy issue)

It has been my view for some time that IPv6 has a very important role to
play, alongside related DNSSEC, DANE and other related built-in
functionality; that can influence things.  I have also been of a view, that
the idea of allocating IPv6 address blocks to persons or property (ie: buy
a house, get an IPv6 address block) is not nonsensical; over many years,
the issues of relating the publicly routable relations between the
beneficial owner of property (et.al.) and the IP Address that property
relates, is not easily facilitated by any other means that i am aware of.
Domain Policies are annualised subscriptions, not life-time subscriptions;
with built-in support for geology related use after death (or
virtualisation of that person, by way of the information contained within
their inforg).

It would be good to figure out how to form a more comprehensive framework
of timely considerations about these matters.  I also envisage a disruptive
influence to come about in relation to emergent institutional trust
foundries - whereby the banking and telecommunications sectors in
particular have cross-over; media sectors, in different ways also.
Obviously, a problem is not a problem - if no one knows about it.  I think,
the intention is to define fewer 'zero-day' events, but at this stage, i
cannot be sure..

*RESPONSE IN GREATER DETAIL:*
I was able to discover the solid 'hello world' app last night, and for
those interested in making statements with working code -
https://github.com/WebCivics/solid-yo - always happy to help.

I haven't been aware of CivicUS, whilst noting the area is becoming a
hotspot for innovation and risk-management through the lens of various
interests.  I hope to find and catch-up with Dr Dhananjayan (Danny)
Sriskandarajah in due-course.

Personally, i have flights of frustration which are somewhat like a flight
of ideas - but they're more concrete in nature.  historically, i remember
back in ~2000-2 making first attempts and both watching and being dismayed
by the way silos developed as intended choices; without the funds available
to produce the apparatus needed to support 'alternative futures'; noting
also, the world before smart phones and the rapid and wonderful engagement
of women into the field of computer science related influences on society;
aongside the broader level of maturity in relation to computer scientists
and the implications of their 'mushrooming' activities (ie: staying up late
at night to the light of a computer monitor) imho - really helps us to
curate improved understandings; if we should so choose to, and i'm entirely
devoted to seeking that out.

I suspect one of the critical issues has been in resourcing the pathway
where the 'commons' considerations are able to be undertaken by
unencumbered agents.  Whilst i know i am not alone - it is my belief, that
my experience of building 'parts' has been quite unusual; in that, my
contributions to various W3C standards development activities, have not
been governed by an institution of any form - which is particularly
relevent where it comes to the laser focus expected of agents working on
behalf of large corporate bodies - such as microsoft, google, etc.  Indeed
it is the case that the Bill and melinda Gates foundation, alongside
alibaba, visa and many others have already been integrally involved in
these works. nonetheless, i am a little haunted by the times where someone
contacted me after a teleconference to express their regret for not having
been able to support my statements on that official call, only to seek to
ensure i understood their sentiments on an unofficial basis afterwards.

end of the day - people work to support more important outcomes, like happy
kids.  being unentitled to gainful employment in a specialised field,
doesn't help to promote the day to day activities of keeping ones promise
to support kids, to be happy; neither do the burdens of forced,
undocumented secrets designed to undermine their welfare in future through
acts that compromise purpose of the individual actors; and all involved,
make mistakes - are human, and most often bound to the narrow text of
responsibilities outlined by way of various constituents of law in relation
to domicile,

I am still unsure how data stored under foreign law on a commercial basis -
relates privacy by mandate, to legal aliens of those foreign operators.
End of the day, seems to me to be a complex trust model, with various
modalities...   but the circle making decisions on behalf of the worlds
population, responsible moreover for the natural world - in this area of
defining how one may declare what is truth, to show fact - this group of
individual actors, is far too small, in my opinion...


On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 at 11:17 ian.peter--- via members <
members at lists.internet.org.au> wrote:

> Civicus is a well respected international grassroots NGO and I am glad to
> see them on such a committee to provide focus on matters that concern them,
> such as surveillance, privacy, human rights etc. That is a perspective
> certainly needed on this committee. I am also glad to see members with
> specific knowledge around blockchain, artificial intelligence and other
> emerging technologies being at the table. I think the business interests
> there are good - with tech giants such as Alibaba, Microsoft, Ebay and
> Google at the table, along with a reasonable cross section of nation states.
>

- As noted above - looking forward to finding out more about civicus.
- Blockchain / decentralised ledgers and related technologies - provide an
invaluable method to decentralise discovery.  the function, commonly known
as 'search', centralises the infosphere and the use of structured data /
artificial intelligence, to specified operators.  We have issues with
archiving, the maintenance of resources such as wikipedia (and being able
to identify the action-context of an article editor); and increasingly
require these forms of resources (ie: see - http://lod-cloud.net/ ) to make
use of human knowledge in every day life, with a variety of preferences of
how this is done; whether it be through a payment wall, serviced via
various means (ie: free by way of advertising + "your data", Subscription
API, etc.)  or whether we're able to ensure the institutions managing these
services on behalf of their stakeholders, are able to build in the cost of
doing so into the business model.

People generally don't need to pay for opening a bank-account and being
sent a payment instrument.  i don't see why it should cost any more for a
person to be provided the beneficial use of their legal identity.

What makes less sense to me; as is an area of conjecture with respect to
the use of blockchain - is for human identity to be defined by way of a
blockchain, set of attributes applied to that 'data subject' on the
blockchain, by way of institutional actors ("legal personalities"); then
made use of commercially (and by governments) through the application of AI
algorithmically initiated processes, that apply specified 'norms' - against
those 'identity constructs'.

What i did not talk about much in those works over the years, was about
inforgs.  that you, in life, have the beneficial ownership over the
decisions you make in how you interact with other agents (sameAs:
http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#term_Agent ); that these definitions made by
you, are dynamic, temporally cognisant; and the nature of your
relationships with others neither forms a 'source of truth' for the
definition of you, or others.  that you have the right to
self-determination, but that indeed also - you have responsibilities, that
in ledger form - translate to be accountabilities.

Therein - gets complicated.

*USE CASE*
A financial crimes professional knows - to be good as a criminal actor -
its important to make money, leave no fingerprints, maintain plausible
deniability and an insurance strategy.  If you want to do tax fraud, by
issuing an invoice to claim the GST between two companies; get two people
whose testimony will not be received to do it for you, make the sum low
enough to invalidate investigation, and work from the outset in destroying
their reputation whilst making friends through the use of the funds created
in so doing - to compromise others, to make the cost of accountability too
high...

*DERIVATIVE*
If these systems focus solely on the target identified by way of reporting
an issue, or having carried out an issue; to the exclusion of all others;
and/or, if the systems make the cost of enquiry too prohibitively expensive
(inc. seek to get foreign agents involved in sovereign / state affairs)
then new criminal business models are made able to flourish.

*Considerations*
Whilst a great deal of work was done via W3C, there was a trend that
no-matter who involved made attempts - their limited scope failed to attend
to issues that even cause threats to their own purposes, their own charters
- and, imho, it was just all considered to be 'too hard'.  In this way,
arguably over ~20 years, whilst leadership is often sought - where that
role is sought to simply be in front of others; the outcomes are not the
same.  I do not believe it was this sense of operationally ideological
leadership, that brought several nations, including Australia, into a forum
that post WW2 established the UN UDHR.

Sadly also - it can sometimes be the case that advocacy organisations
seeking to improve the situation for citizens, can end-up leading the
charge towards establishing works that make the situation worse; or may act
to fix one set of problems, whilst introducing new ones.  The image of
Narelle was taken at a conference i put together in 2017 'trust factory' -
in that conference, Andrew Mcleod[1] spoke about his experience working
with the UN, and how to influence change in this area[2].  We were let-down
with the production equipment required to produce the intended youtube
videos (short-form) on the day; but thankfully, Dave Lorenzini[3] captured
it for me.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLjlq8X3Pwk
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbgtUZ0gkoM
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Keyhole,_Inc&oldid=733479836


> So all in all I don't think it is too bad. Better representation of the
> global south might be able to be argued for, and I hope the committee calls
> on some of the resources from the old "usual suspect" internet governance
> interest groups for their inputs - although I think their lack of presence
> on the committee itself might actually be advantageous.
>

My take on it, without seeking to be bound to any singular perspective on
this very multifaceted complex cross-section of international development;

Is that there is serious money influenced by the implications of these
works, and that the disruptive influence on ecosystems established for
international 'cloud' information management systems - is enormous.  Whilst
in some cases, they could simply change their Terms of Reference to ensure
the citizens data is stored in relation to their choice of law - by default
- this suggestion has been met with resistance, and i'm not sure what our
government representatives who are privvy to the complexities of these
matters are able to tell their stakeholders - ie: the Australian People.

I believe the establishment of this group is both very good, but also
something to be considered as 'early days'.  it is challenging to undertake
work, and not care about the projected provenance of the outcome - it is
most challenging for those who conditionally invest on the basis of a good
business model, of some sort.

the 'one world government' actors, whether by way of incompetence of
intentional acts - are indeed threatening freedom of thought in a manner
where they seek seek to usurp the rights of others, for a little coin, on a
basis of 'all care, no responsibility'...  The issues are not new - ie:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKOk4Y4inVY

But they'll be processed as 'emerging issues'...  The US has been at war
for a very long time.  I'm not easily able to reference the war-time law
constituents, but with all wars there are casualties.  peace, requires
ceremony and the means for people from difference places to convene and
communicate to each-other, the nuances they have in their interpretations
of moral grammar[4].  I think, i know where this needs to be done[5] and i
think i have some sense of why that's not a silly idea[7] and i'm not
particularly fussed about whether or not people generally understand
why[8], whilst noting, freedom of thought - is reliant upon the means to
ensure the algorithms that interfere with our reality, the ones that retain
the lowest distortion values - like an SNR ( signal to noise ratio )
evaluation - I think it is very important those techniques, those
technologies - are produced as commons and not the proprietary intellectual
property for a particular group, of commercial actors by way of a legal
personality.

I think this objective is still beyond the realm of what could be achieved
by the Australian Government; even if it threw billions of dollars at
data61 / CSIRO to make an attempt in the traditional way.   I think the way
this can work,

is by inviting the world to a table, to a room - to a place governed by our
custodianship, as Australians, to figure out how we can do it together.  My
thoughts are that to achieve this long-term goal - we have needed firstly,
to collaborate locally; and through that lens, form an international topic
based global chapter ("web civics") as to continue to pursue this
leadership position, that i have been making the attempt to garnish; on the
basis, that i've been working on this knowledge banking 'thing' for 20
years, and never envisaged that i would have been given a free satellite
connection, with a dish from the community, whilst living in a paddock
forming working relationships with the people who invented the internet -
getting the build process done for 'verifiable claims' and the
infrastructure needed for people to store those claims; which frankly, is
about far more than simply - the money; whilst noting, getting this right -
setting up an effective 'knowledge economy' marketplace internationally,

If it works, there is not a lack of money, of socioeconomic value flowing
through it.  I think amongst the first things that have needed to be
attended to, is the kindness equation[9]; but perhaps therein, we also need
to get past the hurdle of expectations that this 'stuff' should be easily
understood in a paragraph.

in future, i think there will be libraries dedicated to the topic; but
we're not going to benefit from those resources, if we want to be involved
in inventing it to begin wth.  there will be no available undergrad courses
that qualify people in it; the practice of invention, means taking on the
burden for forming art; which when done on a global scale, is far better
than eh.

;)

Tim.

[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kr2K8mo-A5g&t=4898s
[5]
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rKMzkKf6Xf6TUqPw0S9PurFMtrA_na0f/view?usp=sharing

[6] https://vimeo.com/30416090
[7] http://thecommonwealth.org/our-charter
[8] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-consciousness/#3.2
[9]
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/reinventing-kindness-equation-timothy-holborn/



>
> Ian Peter
>
> ------ Original Message ------
> From: "Todd Hubers via members" <members at lists.internet.org.au>
> To: "Internet Australia" <members at lists.internet.org.au>
> Cc: "Todd Hubers" <todd.hubers at gmail.com>;
> kbi-webcivics at lists.internet.org.au
> Sent: 17/07/2018 10:09:58 AM
> Subject: [IA - members] {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} Re: Secretary-General
> Appoints High-Level Panel on Digital Cooperation | Meetings Coverage and
> Press Releases
>
> Interesting stuff Tim,
>
> I had a look at CivicUS, and their platform is what worries me about
> Digital, Internet, and similar advocacy groups: they have almost unlimited
> scope, delving into youth, gender, and climate change. They have many
> "activities" around those focus areas. This is a clear departure from
> "focus". Not only is the scope broad, but it's also politically partisan,
> with no olive branch to gently coax in, and convince the ~50% of
> populations who lean conservatively.
>
> I think the benefit of the internet is the fact that all those political
> issues may be freely discussed. It's the freedom of the internet that must
> be a central focus, not social issues.
>
> So Tim rightly points out a key tool for that, TOR. But where is the
> pinned TOR headline on the CivicUS website. But that's something that
> should be the outcome of a correctly and narrowly defined mission, and a
> strong strategy for reaching goals.
>
> So it looks like CivicUS is something very different to what is needed
> globally to tackle the real problems of the world, but certainly a part of
> the solution.
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 at 15:22, Timothy Holborn via members <
> members at lists.internet.org.au> wrote:
>
>>
>> (apologies if its' a bit of a rant - typing it - is helping to orientate
>> me)
>>
>> On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 at 13:27 Narelle Clark <narellec at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> There is one Aussie, but I don't think he's been here for years (dual UK
>>> based in South Africa). It would be good to touch base and get a meet up
>>> should he make it here, though.
>>>
>>
>> I think the US/China leadership thing is quite strategic.  It would be
>> great to meet the Australian man noted to be involved.  I wonder how
>> CivicUS is similar in any way to my works on WebCivics...   Interestingly:
>> https://www.trustfactory.net/ is part of https://www.isolvtech.com/
>> which is based in SA. Which is a bit different to the local version...
>>
>>  they do a bunch of stuff around 'plausible deniability' which is always
>> interesting ;)
>>
>>
>>>
>>> cheers
>>>
>>> Narelle
>>>
>>>
>> MY LONGER RESPONSE
>>
>> Thoughts;
>>
>> [image: trust.jpg]
>>
>> It is most important solutions are defined rapidly. I think waiting for
>> people to catch-up, isn't going to help them. I hope we can continue to
>> pursue leadership in Australia but not at the cost of ensuring a
>> well-formed solution is made available in a timely manner.
>>
>> In Vint's recent presentation in Australia (perhaps in future - an
>> announcement to members might be made as to ensure the opportunity to know
>> these things are on); Vint remarked,
>>
>> “We have a big problem – I call it the digital dark age – in that we
>> don’t curate our digital content with much care until we realise its too
>> late. So I’m a big fan of trying to create and preserve data, to assure
>> ourselves that digital content can be moved from one medium to another –
>> that we are able to preserve software. Creating a sophisticated regime for
>> curating, preserving and accessing our data is just as important as
>> preserving the original bits of data.”
>> source:
>> https://newsroom.unsw.edu.au/news/science-tech/internet-past-and-present-vint-cerf-conversation-toby-walsh
>>
>>
>>
>> Negotiating the validity of Universal Human Rights (
>> http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ ); where those rights may be
>> appropriated or denied by way of new medium - as to render meaningful
>> service to proprietary commercial interests of a party (ie: rent-seeking
>> behaviours) isn't something to be entertained lightly; One might place bets
>> on the manifest characteristics through which the qualities of a mediums
>> characteristics to maintain good data-hygiene in some areas; and be allowed
>> to deteriorate in others, will continue to manifest, without good advocacy
>> support - enabling the means to discern the intricacies of good policy vs.
>> old ones, in our emergent 'knowledge economy'.
>>
>> Societies and their systems of government need verifiable claims -
>> imagine an agenda that wilfully sought to undermine the social purpose of a
>> court-room. Imagine being subjugated for seeking to protect the relevance
>> of a court of law. Maybe South Africa will be more progressive in these
>> areas than we are... maybe we're simply not equipped.
>>
>> If we're planning for a society that in a realm of dynamic data - is
>> sought to rely upon a basis of hear-say, due to a decline of available
>> options, perhaps the intended representation is that people don't really
>> need courts... these sorts of facetious objects are not entirely without
>> merit... When i was preparing for the TF conference, Anni was curating her
>> WebScience conference (held in Canberra) around the concept of getting
>> people to 'wake up'. (
>> https://www.thinknpc.org/publications/represents-human-digital-age/ )
>>
>> I think if we're able to step it up, get the right framework of
>> leadership support as required for international engagement, international
>> leadership; a framework that can be engaged and relied upon in a manner
>> that has both funding and momentum; we might have a chance...
>>
>> IMHO - It is NOT going to work is otherwise gainfully employed persons
>> (including but not exclusive to academics) wait until the risk-profile
>> lowers as to raise an internal project, off the back of the work done by
>> unpaid volunteers...
>>
>> It's impossible to parse the knowledge amassed by 'thought leaders'...
>> Things need to be done today, like updating the 'how to build a solid App'
>> hello world documents available https://github.com/solid/ to support
>> those working http://gitter.im/solid/ | whose work is spoken about (to
>> some degree)
>> https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/07/the-man-who-created-the-world-wide-web-has-some-regrets
>> |
>> https://www.economist.com/special-report/2018/06/28/how-to-fix-what-has-gone-wrong-with-the-internet
>> | and as far as almost anyone knows,
>>
>> There are no Australians involved in that project. I think TimBL might be
>> in AU soon? But that's hear-say... either-way, i'd prefer to see a greater
>> investment made into AU leadership in this knowledge economy area. I read a
>> big investment in this area was recently made:
>> https://www.themandarin.com.au/95308-australian-government-and-big-blue-mint-1-billion-advanced-technologies-deal/
>> To which whilst i have concerns about the sociological lock-ins, some of
>> these decisions may bring about by way of how information management
>> systems are designed to be mandatorily used - talking to myself ain't going
>> to help... indeed, even when influences are made, without recognition for
>> contributions - without good provenance systems in place - the underlying
>> foundations used to build these 'knowledge economy ecosystems' are still
>> broken. It changes the nature of the debate, from an Australia where
>> universal income needs to be factored into their design decisions; where
>> changes to health-policy to rationalise whether a royal commission into
>> health (particularly mental health) services is cheaper / better than
>> considering the impact to the reality of services provided as medicare
>> fails to meet the needs of good doctors and patients who need clinicians
>> who take an interest in them; more than the person managing the automatic
>> check-out machine at the local super market.
>>
>> Choices are being made - i see very little conversation about it. I think
>> this illustrates clearly - something is very wrong.
>>
>> IMHO - It is imperative for all commercial undertakings that a binding
>> commitments to human rights by way of an open forum, the means to make use
>> of appropriate infrastructure such as IETF (whilst it would be nice if they
>> supported RDF) as to ensure a commercially agnostic & non-binding info
>> sphere environment for socioeconomic support of life (and the natural
>> world). It is my opinion one of the very few means to do this in a manner
>> that works with government, but is not bound to the obligations of a
>> government department to defend its position where the needs of government
>> (inc. "rule of law", security, tax & revenue protection) are at odds to the
>> needs of the people, of citizens. Sometimes the problem is about the
>> behaviours of an agent, sometimes its the nuances of an actor
>>
>> Some help with
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xKHONGoepiq29r7NMB9T6yd6kPcfWY2JsaDzK6OqnHE/edit?usp=sharing
>> would be useful. i think it needs to be broken down into a memorandum or
>> introductory document; followed by the SIG TOR & perhaps a 3rd elements
>> about working-group objects? not sure.
>>
>> It's progressed a bit from the 2013 document: *MailScanner has detected
>> definite fraud in the website at "drive.google.com". Do not trust this
>> website:* *MailScanner has detected definite fraud in the website at
>> "drive.google.com". Do not trust this website:* *MailScanner has
>> detected definite fraud in the website at "drive.google.com". Do not trust
>> this website:*
>> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_-AWWDVv3V2SVpVR3E4T1hETlE/view?usp=sharing
>> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_-AWWDVv3V2SVpVR3E4T1hETlE/view?usp=sharing>
>>
>> (which might help others with background) and is less dense than
>> explaining the theoretical (and provenance, from 2000) relationship with
>> https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-consciousness/#3.2
>>
>> So, FWIW: I think its important to get the TOR done, before starting a
>> conversation with the banking sector about machine readable itemised tax
>> receipts; or other potential scopes of work, that i think are all quite
>> important and extremely complex.
>>
>> Meanwhile - i'm still of the thought that speaking about ensuring UHD
>> Sport is delivered freely to 'consumers' is an easier way to get people
>> thinking about the relationship between their homes and families; and data.
>> This is in-turn saying - let arrogance, of operators, be considered
>> immutable - 'long live consumers' (not that they really think, what that
>> accolade made for a pay-packet actually means in areas beyond their field
>> of expertise, like health. perhaps media people think medical people are
>> happy to subjugate themselves because they are expected to live by a
>> different set of moral rules - perhaps they don't understand the pressures
>> put upon them...)
>>
>> I have stated very clearly over many years (sadly in past, to deaf ears)
>> that ISOC-AU is the place to start making significant progress on these
>> issues. I am pleased new energy has started to grow, but it is very
>> fragile... These works don't do themselves, people need to wake-up, ISOC-AU
>> needs to improve its collaboration environment pronto.  Honestly, atm, i'm
>> really not sure how to fund it.  which is troubling me.   It is alot easier
>> to send a series of issues / problem statements '/ high-level solutions, to
>> others overseas who are funded to do the work involved in getting
>> work-product done.  Indeed also, in an environment where there is a severe
>> drought of appropriately supported resources - its actually better to do
>> things that way...   But it distorts the market.  It makes people think,
>> less energy is expended than is real; it does not proportionately
>> illustrate a value-matrix around work-product; it distorts it, which leads
>> to reliability / security issues.  A bunch of major websites, and the ones
>> made before them had no revenue or moreover certainly - not enough.  The
>> investments made led to
>> https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1bHmB8_f7ASRHm97TwhZmmEQnTKU -
>> noting the distinction between those developed in the floppy disk age - vs.
>> those that developed as online data storage became a thing --> in this next
>> envisaged shift - i'd like to see how the Australian Banking Sector remains
>> a local industry.  I would like to ensure the definition of a great many
>> things, remain local.  it seems others also have concerns:
>> http://about.abc.net.au/speeches/an-abc-fit-for-the-future/
>>
>> But perhaps these works need to uplift themselves, out of the gutter.
>> I'm not entirely sure what to do next.  Am very interested in more help.
>> https://doodle.com/poll/idt7tyxwcpugkdha should help - I've also created
>> a new invite link for the WebCivics Slack set-up:
>> https://join.slack.com/t/webcivics/shared_invite/enQtMzk5MDA2NTMyMDk4LTU0OGQzMGI1ZGIzODBiMDBjYmMzNDRkMmE1ODI0YzBiNTdmMzY2MGQ3NDNlYzhkYzU1OTU3NjMzYmU5YjY1ZTc
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Tim.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 9:57 PM Timothy Holborn via members <
>>> members at lists.internet.org.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>> FYI: https://www.un.org/press/en/2018/sga1817.doc.htm
>>>>
>>>> Twitter: https://twitter.com/UNSGdigicoop
>>>>
>>>> (Noting implicitly therein;
>>>> https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/?Text=&Goal=16&Target=16.9 )
>>>>
>>>> Do we know if any Aussies are involved?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Tim.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>> Narelle
>>> narellec at gmail.com
>>>
>>
>> --
>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and
>> is
>> believed to be clean. _______________________________________________
>> members mailing list
>> members at lists.internet.org.au
>> http://lists.internet.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/members
>>
>
>
> --
> --
> Todd Hubers
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is
> believed to be clean.
>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is
> believed to be clean.
> _______________________________________________
> members mailing list
> members at lists.internet.org.au
> http://lists.internet.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/members
>

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180717/975f984a/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: trust.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 35049 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180717/975f984a/attachment-0001.jpg>

From timothy.holborn at gmail.com  Wed Jul 18 12:57:48 2018
From: timothy.holborn at gmail.com (Timothy Holborn)
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 12:57:48 +1000
Subject: [Kbi-webcivics] [IA - members] MyHealth Record
In-Reply-To: <CAO7c6sg4dRpKWBWPdxWm5o-3gDYi6Mj8MGocKnBAEzSR8W_ytg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAM1Sok1_bmQJY14_kQRuLatG4jdUBEmRvndA0t7uZFKc8jjKxw@mail.gmail.com>
 <p06240842d773690bae9e@192.168.2.186>
 <CAO7c6shUxeBuokjdU17z5T0oNpYPU7Cu2Y1tPEfygTLZWkuMVA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok3jVYne2jjj5_cB-v55C=HeY8vN5fcWNAfUzGVFSGyxdg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO7c6sjzOA8-89Hny_9TWGCauG-zFiBRjaKpPeSzxufFvEiCSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1531838502.10995.48.camel@biplane.com.au>
 <CAO7c6sgQwMH0NOh8a7VFm_73yad4V92QhpSCekgaXGiyj94WgA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok2CqXV2uPpWZHLcaNoTneWWaTx4XF9D8tnGfO4Dg=gDCQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO7c6sha1PKKMtND6E22ETy76xrVWK7YmMnm=S1NnwQZ=XaoDg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok3yB9aT9zetHsgujTajfaXvJxQ_ROxD7GitPYUF0c0rNg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO7c6sg4dRpKWBWPdxWm5o-3gDYi6Mj8MGocKnBAEzSR8W_ytg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAM1Sok0Aj3tWBhKtk1FA7ZrmY9x=7TgEuA015+oR-QiKj1yU-A@mail.gmail.com>

I would call it data dignity, noting in my opinion, the best person to fix
that is the internationally extraordinary Hon. Michael Kirby, but we'll
need to do some internal work prior to making best use of his time.

On Wed., 18 Jul. 2018, 12:40 pm Ian Mann, <ianmann897 at gmail.com> wrote:

> I fully appreciate your concerns about data privacy and control. I
> recall in Germany in before WW2 all Jews had to register, and that
> registry was used later to exterminate them.
>

I am sure the registries were full of all sorts of claims made by the
government at the time...

The temporal process, through which "verifiable claims" are evaluated is
hygienic, but also a series of features that may be considered "out of
scope".

It is not the job or public servants to fix that. It's the job of the
people to do so, in any working democracy with a functional system of
government.

One might wonder how functional ours is, if reasonable considered today.
Do public servants understand the legal rules in which their work as agent
relates?  Does it not matter, as most data is governed by international
contract law + support for foreign affairs / law enforcement workers ..

Do they believe reducing the available funding for civil society groups
will improve the results formed in their eco-chambers?

The worst thing, in my opinion, that they did to jews in WW2 was not death;
it was the requirements put upon them on the basis they sought to continue
to live and what that did you their humanity, what was required of them to
decide, agreeing upon a set of human rights was a good idea.

Even still, even today, we're defending those decisions...   Go figure.
It's a police prosecutors job to defend the actions of police, it is not
their job to uphold the law.  That's why access to lawyers is prohibitively
expensive, as to diminish the means for a judge, a court to hear about
unfairness...

Same series of beliefs are manifesting in our health system and it'll be
more expensive than the cost born by way of the failures of our legal
systems.

Imho & cheers,

Tim.

On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 at 12:36, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > It is my opinion that the manner in which someone, or group of people,
> store your data...
> >
> > They'll be able to review your decisions, temporally, as they've been
> made in past with increasingly improved resolution.
> >
> > My view is that you, or those nominated in your last will and testament,
> should be the people who control how this 'inforg' works.  You should not
> be limited as to what you can store in it, but rather, how and what others
> see; and whether their able to rely upon it, to make decisions that affect
> you and others.
> >
> > I think this is an important decision to make.  I think currently, there
> is very little technology services (if any)to make it.
> >
> > Facebook is default.  Government seems to be making attempts to compete,
> rather than redesign.  It's a marketplace problem, We need one.  We need to
> define the rules of engagement, what "fair dealings" means, "in good
> faith", for the information age...
> >
> > Tim.
> >
> > On Wed., 18 Jul. 2018, 12:28 pm Ian Mann, <ianmann897 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Yes Tim a lot of beneficial things have arrived as your introductory
> >> paragraph says.
> >>
> >> I am sure some not so beneficial things are there too, but on balance
> >> I would never wish to return to the past days even if it were
> >> possible.
> >>
> >> I watched a documentary called Ghost land a while ago where they took
> >> Kalahari Bushmen to Germany. The first part of the documentary shows
> >> the Bushman current life.
> >> Then hey go to Germany and vist their first city ever.Once our own
> >> ancestors lived that way I thought.
> >>
> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCfcxAbbShY
>
>
>
> --
> Ian Mann
> Mobile 04 7859 7859
> International +61 4 7859 7859
> Home International +61 2 4873 5444
> 10 John Street, GOULBURN NSW 2580
>

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180718/d2271d73/attachment.html>

From timothy.holborn at gmail.com  Thu Jul 19 11:41:48 2018
From: timothy.holborn at gmail.com (Timothy Holborn)
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 11:41:48 +1000
Subject: [Kbi-webcivics] [IA - members] MyHealth Record
In-Reply-To: <CABO3BC1AaYa=1KeKLWL497wCPWzuED61ksY_SvcojZeLsDA8Rw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAM1Sok1_bmQJY14_kQRuLatG4jdUBEmRvndA0t7uZFKc8jjKxw@mail.gmail.com>
 <p06240842d773690bae9e@192.168.2.186>
 <CAO7c6shUxeBuokjdU17z5T0oNpYPU7Cu2Y1tPEfygTLZWkuMVA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok3jVYne2jjj5_cB-v55C=HeY8vN5fcWNAfUzGVFSGyxdg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO7c6sjzOA8-89Hny_9TWGCauG-zFiBRjaKpPeSzxufFvEiCSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1531838502.10995.48.camel@biplane.com.au>
 <CAO7c6sgQwMH0NOh8a7VFm_73yad4V92QhpSCekgaXGiyj94WgA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok2CqXV2uPpWZHLcaNoTneWWaTx4XF9D8tnGfO4Dg=gDCQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO7c6sha1PKKMtND6E22ETy76xrVWK7YmMnm=S1NnwQZ=XaoDg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok3yB9aT9zetHsgujTajfaXvJxQ_ROxD7GitPYUF0c0rNg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO7c6sg4dRpKWBWPdxWm5o-3gDYi6Mj8MGocKnBAEzSR8W_ytg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok0Aj3tWBhKtk1FA7ZrmY9x=7TgEuA015+oR-QiKj1yU-A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABO3BC1AaYa=1KeKLWL497wCPWzuED61ksY_SvcojZeLsDA8Rw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAM1Sok3Nvq0GANNvwR7YURDS2X_sMs3S8pNgze_RDrqHproH7Q@mail.gmail.com>

The term "self-sovereign" Comes from Christopher Allan, who has more
recently become intrinsically involved with the credentials work I helped
establish, with a few others a few years ago.

https://www.w3.org/community/credentials/2014/08/06/call-for-participation-in-credentials-community-group/

His writings are worthy of having a good look at:
http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2016/04/the-path-to-self-soverereign-identity.html.
As are the rather extensive amount of writings available on the relevant
GitHub pages.

They originally worked on a concept called "respect network" which had a
centralised username method for login. This was first worked on via oasis,
prior to the takeover of the w3 credentials work, around the time the main
person driving the work got SBIR funding with the US department of Homeland
Security.

I am not a subscriber to "self sovereign" methods, they are aware of our
differences of opinion in this area.  They are not currently "solid
compatible" or part of that stack, they have a broader different means
which is not an inforg (no point telling people everything, where the claim
may be made that those doing so, aren't meaningfully contributing ;))

The nature of human identity is different to the identifiers and related
works, somewhat formatively illustrated very well by our own Roger Clarke
whose materials I find serve as a great "reality check" resources, with
good provonance heritage to boot!

http://www.rogerclarke.com/ID/

With respect to existing catalogues of data, I think people are simply not
aware.  Whilst a movement of people seeking to live without
telecommunications / computers / database records about them (whilst
seeking to retaining personhood) might be a great experiment for TV, it's
not very practical.

More soon.

Tim.

On Thu., 19 Jul. 2018, 11:15 am Todd Hubers, <todd.hubers at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Tim,
>
> As usual, you have plenty of insightful things to say. The improvement of
> healthcare is truly a worthy goal, but not if that means dragnetting data
> against citizens. But with so much information and ideas to cover: I think
> progress would be achieved with goals and a strategy.
>
> Strategically, there is a limited amount of impact I believe we could have
> in this particular group. I would also suggest that "Privacy" alone isn't
> enough of a reason for the majority of the population, so that line of
> conversation will benefit the privacy-concerned, but won't appeal much
> broader than that.
>
> If you can summarise distinct problems in dot-point forms that would be a
> great asset. Here are some of my own to kick-start:
>
> 1. *Can a citizen "withdraw"?* - There is a lot of talk about opt-out and
> a deadline. One would think that a person's situation and beliefs are not
> static. If withdrawal is not a planned mechanism, that's very problematic.
> Actions would be: highlighting this to relevant groups to lobby for such a
> mechanism to be created.
>
> 2. *Is there a better design?* - I would think that a self-sovereign
> (SOLID?) framework would be a more direct 1:1 digital conversion. It would
> be one where you have total control over the data, and choose who can
> "view". Currently, people manually carry records (and quite a lot are sent
> digitally Org to Org directly). Actions would be: signalling the open
> source development of a self-sovereign platform, and have people opt-out,
> not because they are concerned about privacy, but because they want to
> influence the Government to evolve to the better solution.
>
> Any more high-level points?
>
> (I was involved way back with NeHTA, PHR, and other related systems. There
> is much controversy beyond an "opt-out" model. But I do hope that something
> will succeed given that over $1bn was spent on this.)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Todd
>
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 at 12:58, Timothy Holborn via members <
> members at lists.internet.org.au> wrote:
>
>> I would call it data dignity, noting in my opinion, the best person to
>> fix that is the internationally extraordinary Hon. Michael Kirby, but we'll
>> need to do some internal work prior to making best use of his time.
>>
>> On Wed., 18 Jul. 2018, 12:40 pm Ian Mann, <ianmann897 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I fully appreciate your concerns about data privacy and control. I
>>> recall in Germany in before WW2 all Jews had to register, and that
>>> registry was used later to exterminate them.
>>>
>>
>> I am sure the registries were full of all sorts of claims made by the
>> government at the time...
>>
>> The temporal process, through which "verifiable claims" are evaluated is
>> hygienic, but also a series of features that may be considered "out of
>> scope".
>>
>> It is not the job or public servants to fix that. It's the job of the
>> people to do so, in any working democracy with a functional system of
>> government.
>>
>> One might wonder how functional ours is, if reasonable considered today.
>> Do public servants understand the legal rules in which their work as agent
>> relates?  Does it not matter, as most data is governed by international
>> contract law + support for foreign affairs / law enforcement workers ..
>>
>> Do they believe reducing the available funding for civil society groups
>> will improve the results formed in their eco-chambers?
>>
>> The worst thing, in my opinion, that they did to jews in WW2 was not
>> death; it was the requirements put upon them on the basis they sought to
>> continue to live and what that did you their humanity, what was required of
>> them to decide, agreeing upon a set of human rights was a good idea.
>>
>> Even still, even today, we're defending those decisions...   Go figure.
>> It's a police prosecutors job to defend the actions of police, it is not
>> their job to uphold the law.  That's why access to lawyers is prohibitively
>> expensive, as to diminish the means for a judge, a court to hear about
>> unfairness...
>>
>> Same series of beliefs are manifesting in our health system and it'll be
>> more expensive than the cost born by way of the failures of our legal
>> systems.
>>
>> Imho & cheers,
>>
>> Tim.
>>
>> On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 at 12:36, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > It is my opinion that the manner in which someone, or group of people,
>>> store your data...
>>> >
>>> > They'll be able to review your decisions, temporally, as they've been
>>> made in past with increasingly improved resolution.
>>> >
>>> > My view is that you, or those nominated in your last will and
>>> testament, should be the people who control how this 'inforg' works.  You
>>> should not be limited as to what you can store in it, but rather, how and
>>> what others see; and whether their able to rely upon it, to make decisions
>>> that affect you and others.
>>> >
>>> > I think this is an important decision to make.  I think currently,
>>> there is very little technology services (if any)to make it.
>>> >
>>> > Facebook is default.  Government seems to be making attempts to
>>> compete, rather than redesign.  It's a marketplace problem, We need one.
>>> We need to define the rules of engagement, what "fair dealings" means, "in
>>> good faith", for the information age...
>>> >
>>> > Tim.
>>> >
>>> > On Wed., 18 Jul. 2018, 12:28 pm Ian Mann, <ianmann897 at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Yes Tim a lot of beneficial things have arrived as your introductory
>>> >> paragraph says.
>>> >>
>>> >> I am sure some not so beneficial things are there too, but on balance
>>> >> I would never wish to return to the past days even if it were
>>> >> possible.
>>> >>
>>> >> I watched a documentary called Ghost land a while ago where they took
>>> >> Kalahari Bushmen to Germany. The first part of the documentary shows
>>> >> the Bushman current life.
>>> >> Then hey go to Germany and vist their first city ever.Once our own
>>> >> ancestors lived that way I thought.
>>> >>
>>> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCfcxAbbShY
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Ian Mann
>>> Mobile 04 7859 7859
>>> International +61 4 7859 7859
>>> Home International +61 2 4873 5444
>>> 10 John Street, GOULBURN NSW 2580
>>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=10+John+Street,+GOULBURN+NSW+2580&entry=gmail&source=g>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and
>> is
>> believed to be clean. _______________________________________________
>> members mailing list
>> members at lists.internet.org.au
>> http://lists.internet.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/members
>>
>
>
> --
> --
> Todd Hubers
>

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180719/46f5507f/attachment-0001.html>

From todd.hubers at gmail.com  Thu Jul 19 12:17:35 2018
From: todd.hubers at gmail.com (Todd Hubers)
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 12:17:35 +1000
Subject: [Kbi-webcivics] [IA - members] MyHealth Record
In-Reply-To: <CAM1Sok3Nvq0GANNvwR7YURDS2X_sMs3S8pNgze_RDrqHproH7Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAM1Sok1_bmQJY14_kQRuLatG4jdUBEmRvndA0t7uZFKc8jjKxw@mail.gmail.com>
 <p06240842d773690bae9e@192.168.2.186>
 <CAO7c6shUxeBuokjdU17z5T0oNpYPU7Cu2Y1tPEfygTLZWkuMVA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok3jVYne2jjj5_cB-v55C=HeY8vN5fcWNAfUzGVFSGyxdg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO7c6sjzOA8-89Hny_9TWGCauG-zFiBRjaKpPeSzxufFvEiCSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1531838502.10995.48.camel@biplane.com.au>
 <CAO7c6sgQwMH0NOh8a7VFm_73yad4V92QhpSCekgaXGiyj94WgA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok2CqXV2uPpWZHLcaNoTneWWaTx4XF9D8tnGfO4Dg=gDCQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO7c6sha1PKKMtND6E22ETy76xrVWK7YmMnm=S1NnwQZ=XaoDg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok3yB9aT9zetHsgujTajfaXvJxQ_ROxD7GitPYUF0c0rNg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO7c6sg4dRpKWBWPdxWm5o-3gDYi6Mj8MGocKnBAEzSR8W_ytg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok0Aj3tWBhKtk1FA7ZrmY9x=7TgEuA015+oR-QiKj1yU-A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABO3BC1AaYa=1KeKLWL497wCPWzuED61ksY_SvcojZeLsDA8Rw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok3Nvq0GANNvwR7YURDS2X_sMs3S8pNgze_RDrqHproH7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CABO3BC2EVAnbYcUn7_bc93tQYopcK-=Mssb7twKDikXpeviq0A@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Tim,

When I say "self-sovereign" I would suggest that actually has two parts:

   - Identity - which is what you must be thinking now.
   - Data - which is what I was mostly thinking about. The ability for one
   to own the data, and have it encrypted locally and stored in a cloud data
   bucket.

This might be incompatible with the agreed definition of "self-sovereign",
but it just shows what I was thinking in my last email.

I hope my important points are not lost in the minutiae, so I'll recap:

*1. Can a citizen withdraw?*
*2. Is there a better design?*
3. *More?*

Thanks

On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 at 11:42, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn at gmail.com>
wrote:

> The term "self-sovereign" Comes from Christopher Allan, who has more
> recently become intrinsically involved with the credentials work I helped
> establish, with a few others a few years ago.
>
>
> https://www.w3.org/community/credentials/2014/08/06/call-for-participation-in-credentials-community-group/
>
> His writings are worthy of having a good look at:
> http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2016/04/the-path-to-self-soverereign-identity.html.
> As are the rather extensive amount of writings available on the relevant
> GitHub pages.
>
> They originally worked on a concept called "respect network" which had a
> centralised username method for login. This was first worked on via oasis,
> prior to the takeover of the w3 credentials work, around the time the main
> person driving the work got SBIR funding with the US department of Homeland
> Security.
>
> I am not a subscriber to "self sovereign" methods, they are aware of our
> differences of opinion in this area.  They are not currently "solid
> compatible" or part of that stack, they have a broader different means
> which is not an inforg (no point telling people everything, where the claim
> may be made that those doing so, aren't meaningfully contributing ;))
>
> The nature of human identity is different to the identifiers and related
> works, somewhat formatively illustrated very well by our own Roger Clarke
> whose materials I find serve as a great "reality check" resources, with
> good provonance heritage to boot!
>
> http://www.rogerclarke.com/ID/
>
> With respect to existing catalogues of data, I think people are simply not
> aware.  Whilst a movement of people seeking to live without
> telecommunications / computers / database records about them (whilst
> seeking to retaining personhood) might be a great experiment for TV, it's
> not very practical.
>
> More soon.
>
> Tim.
>
> On Thu., 19 Jul. 2018, 11:15 am Todd Hubers, <todd.hubers at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Tim,
>>
>> As usual, you have plenty of insightful things to say. The improvement of
>> healthcare is truly a worthy goal, but not if that means dragnetting data
>> against citizens. But with so much information and ideas to cover: I think
>> progress would be achieved with goals and a strategy.
>>
>> Strategically, there is a limited amount of impact I believe we could
>> have in this particular group. I would also suggest that "Privacy" alone
>> isn't enough of a reason for the majority of the population, so that line
>> of conversation will benefit the privacy-concerned, but won't appeal much
>> broader than that.
>>
>> If you can summarise distinct problems in dot-point forms that would be a
>> great asset. Here are some of my own to kick-start:
>>
>> 1. *Can a citizen "withdraw"?* - There is a lot of talk about opt-out
>> and a deadline. One would think that a person's situation and beliefs are
>> not static. If withdrawal is not a planned mechanism, that's very
>> problematic. Actions would be: highlighting this to relevant groups to
>> lobby for such a mechanism to be created.
>>
>> 2. *Is there a better design?* - I would think that a self-sovereign
>> (SOLID?) framework would be a more direct 1:1 digital conversion. It would
>> be one where you have total control over the data, and choose who can
>> "view". Currently, people manually carry records (and quite a lot are sent
>> digitally Org to Org directly). Actions would be: signalling the open
>> source development of a self-sovereign platform, and have people opt-out,
>> not because they are concerned about privacy, but because they want to
>> influence the Government to evolve to the better solution.
>>
>> Any more high-level points?
>>
>> (I was involved way back with NeHTA, PHR, and other related systems.
>> There is much controversy beyond an "opt-out" model. But I do hope that
>> something will succeed given that over $1bn was spent on this.)
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Todd
>>
>> On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 at 12:58, Timothy Holborn via members <
>> members at lists.internet.org.au> wrote:
>>
>>> I would call it data dignity, noting in my opinion, the best person to
>>> fix that is the internationally extraordinary Hon. Michael Kirby, but we'll
>>> need to do some internal work prior to making best use of his time.
>>>
>>> On Wed., 18 Jul. 2018, 12:40 pm Ian Mann, <ianmann897 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I fully appreciate your concerns about data privacy and control. I
>>>> recall in Germany in before WW2 all Jews had to register, and that
>>>> registry was used later to exterminate them.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I am sure the registries were full of all sorts of claims made by the
>>> government at the time...
>>>
>>> The temporal process, through which "verifiable claims" are evaluated is
>>> hygienic, but also a series of features that may be considered "out of
>>> scope".
>>>
>>> It is not the job or public servants to fix that. It's the job of the
>>> people to do so, in any working democracy with a functional system of
>>> government.
>>>
>>> One might wonder how functional ours is, if reasonable considered
>>> today.  Do public servants understand the legal rules in which their work
>>> as agent relates?  Does it not matter, as most data is governed by
>>> international contract law + support for foreign affairs / law enforcement
>>> workers ..
>>>
>>> Do they believe reducing the available funding for civil society groups
>>> will improve the results formed in their eco-chambers?
>>>
>>> The worst thing, in my opinion, that they did to jews in WW2 was not
>>> death; it was the requirements put upon them on the basis they sought to
>>> continue to live and what that did you their humanity, what was required of
>>> them to decide, agreeing upon a set of human rights was a good idea.
>>>
>>> Even still, even today, we're defending those decisions...   Go figure.
>>> It's a police prosecutors job to defend the actions of police, it is not
>>> their job to uphold the law.  That's why access to lawyers is prohibitively
>>> expensive, as to diminish the means for a judge, a court to hear about
>>> unfairness...
>>>
>>> Same series of beliefs are manifesting in our health system and it'll be
>>> more expensive than the cost born by way of the failures of our legal
>>> systems.
>>>
>>> Imho & cheers,
>>>
>>> Tim.
>>>
>>> On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 at 12:36, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > It is my opinion that the manner in which someone, or group of
>>>> people, store your data...
>>>> >
>>>> > They'll be able to review your decisions, temporally, as they've been
>>>> made in past with increasingly improved resolution.
>>>> >
>>>> > My view is that you, or those nominated in your last will and
>>>> testament, should be the people who control how this 'inforg' works.  You
>>>> should not be limited as to what you can store in it, but rather, how and
>>>> what others see; and whether their able to rely upon it, to make decisions
>>>> that affect you and others.
>>>> >
>>>> > I think this is an important decision to make.  I think currently,
>>>> there is very little technology services (if any)to make it.
>>>> >
>>>> > Facebook is default.  Government seems to be making attempts to
>>>> compete, rather than redesign.  It's a marketplace problem, We need one.
>>>> We need to define the rules of engagement, what "fair dealings" means, "in
>>>> good faith", for the information age...
>>>> >
>>>> > Tim.
>>>> >
>>>> > On Wed., 18 Jul. 2018, 12:28 pm Ian Mann, <ianmann897 at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Yes Tim a lot of beneficial things have arrived as your introductory
>>>> >> paragraph says.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I am sure some not so beneficial things are there too, but on balance
>>>> >> I would never wish to return to the past days even if it were
>>>> >> possible.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I watched a documentary called Ghost land a while ago where they took
>>>> >> Kalahari Bushmen to Germany. The first part of the documentary shows
>>>> >> the Bushman current life.
>>>> >> Then hey go to Germany and vist their first city ever.Once our own
>>>> >> ancestors lived that way I thought.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCfcxAbbShY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Ian Mann
>>>> Mobile 04 7859 7859
>>>> International +61 4 7859 7859
>>>> Home International +61 2 4873 5444
>>>> 10 John Street, GOULBURN NSW 2580
>>>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=10+John+Street,+GOULBURN+NSW+2580&entry=gmail&source=g>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>>> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and
>>> is
>>> believed to be clean. _______________________________________________
>>> members mailing list
>>> members at lists.internet.org.au
>>> http://lists.internet.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/members
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> --
>> Todd Hubers
>>
>

-- 
--
Todd Hubers

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180719/3f4778db/attachment.html>

From timothy.holborn at gmail.com  Thu Jul 19 12:37:53 2018
From: timothy.holborn at gmail.com (Timothy Holborn)
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 12:37:53 +1000
Subject: [Kbi-webcivics] [IA - members] MyHealth Record
In-Reply-To: <CABO3BC2EVAnbYcUn7_bc93tQYopcK-=Mssb7twKDikXpeviq0A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAM1Sok1_bmQJY14_kQRuLatG4jdUBEmRvndA0t7uZFKc8jjKxw@mail.gmail.com>
 <p06240842d773690bae9e@192.168.2.186>
 <CAO7c6shUxeBuokjdU17z5T0oNpYPU7Cu2Y1tPEfygTLZWkuMVA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok3jVYne2jjj5_cB-v55C=HeY8vN5fcWNAfUzGVFSGyxdg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO7c6sjzOA8-89Hny_9TWGCauG-zFiBRjaKpPeSzxufFvEiCSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1531838502.10995.48.camel@biplane.com.au>
 <CAO7c6sgQwMH0NOh8a7VFm_73yad4V92QhpSCekgaXGiyj94WgA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok2CqXV2uPpWZHLcaNoTneWWaTx4XF9D8tnGfO4Dg=gDCQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO7c6sha1PKKMtND6E22ETy76xrVWK7YmMnm=S1NnwQZ=XaoDg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok3yB9aT9zetHsgujTajfaXvJxQ_ROxD7GitPYUF0c0rNg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO7c6sg4dRpKWBWPdxWm5o-3gDYi6Mj8MGocKnBAEzSR8W_ytg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok0Aj3tWBhKtk1FA7ZrmY9x=7TgEuA015+oR-QiKj1yU-A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABO3BC1AaYa=1KeKLWL497wCPWzuED61ksY_SvcojZeLsDA8Rw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok3Nvq0GANNvwR7YURDS2X_sMs3S8pNgze_RDrqHproH7Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABO3BC2EVAnbYcUn7_bc93tQYopcK-=Mssb7twKDikXpeviq0A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAM1Sok0wPEkxCaCqfxbU345RuUKxiVAkq5oFEAtMDtWZeZNR5w@mail.gmail.com>

Self Sovereign has a specified meaning, in the identity technology space
worldwide as discussed.

It's like talking about WWW and saying it's ok if your using the term to
describe something that's designed for gopher.

Re; the validity of choice,

I keep thinking about an ostrich with their head in the sand.  I've also
thought about how to put an Aussie spin on it.  Perhaps a campaign, it's ok
to be an emu.

The imagery is all about an emu with its head in the sand.  The campaign is
about saying, there's all the information out there, being used in relation
to your life.

But if you don't want to know about it, thats ok.

Blind trust, is an acceptable position.  Just be sure you know what
decisions you're making and the implications of them, or not.

It's ok to opt-out of that too..  knowledge, is an opt-in concept...

Et.al.

Tim



On Thu., 19 Jul. 2018, 12:17 pm Todd Hubers, <todd.hubers at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Tim,
>
> When I say "self-sovereign" I would suggest that actually has two parts:
>
>    - Identity - which is what you must be thinking now.
>    - Data - which is what I was mostly thinking about. The ability for
>    one to own the data, and have it encrypted locally and stored in a cloud
>    data bucket.
>
> This might be incompatible with the agreed definition of "self-sovereign",
> but it just shows what I was thinking in my last email.
>
> I hope my important points are not lost in the minutiae, so I'll recap:
>
> *1. Can a citizen withdraw?*
> *2. Is there a better design?*
> 3. *More?*
>
> Thanks
>
> On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 at 11:42, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> The term "self-sovereign" Comes from Christopher Allan, who has more
>> recently become intrinsically involved with the credentials work I helped
>> establish, with a few others a few years ago.
>>
>>
>> https://www.w3.org/community/credentials/2014/08/06/call-for-participation-in-credentials-community-group/
>>
>> His writings are worthy of having a good look at:
>> http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2016/04/the-path-to-self-soverereign-identity.html.
>> As are the rather extensive amount of writings available on the relevant
>> GitHub pages.
>>
>> They originally worked on a concept called "respect network" which had a
>> centralised username method for login. This was first worked on via oasis,
>> prior to the takeover of the w3 credentials work, around the time the main
>> person driving the work got SBIR funding with the US department of Homeland
>> Security.
>>
>> I am not a subscriber to "self sovereign" methods, they are aware of our
>> differences of opinion in this area.  They are not currently "solid
>> compatible" or part of that stack, they have a broader different means
>> which is not an inforg (no point telling people everything, where the claim
>> may be made that those doing so, aren't meaningfully contributing ;))
>>
>> The nature of human identity is different to the identifiers and related
>> works, somewhat formatively illustrated very well by our own Roger Clarke
>> whose materials I find serve as a great "reality check" resources, with
>> good provonance heritage to boot!
>>
>> http://www.rogerclarke.com/ID/
>>
>> With respect to existing catalogues of data, I think people are simply
>> not aware.  Whilst a movement of people seeking to live without
>> telecommunications / computers / database records about them (whilst
>> seeking to retaining personhood) might be a great experiment for TV, it's
>> not very practical.
>>
>> More soon.
>>
>> Tim.
>>
>> On Thu., 19 Jul. 2018, 11:15 am Todd Hubers, <todd.hubers at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Tim,
>>>
>>> As usual, you have plenty of insightful things to say. The improvement
>>> of healthcare is truly a worthy goal, but not if that means dragnetting
>>> data against citizens. But with so much information and ideas to cover: I
>>> think progress would be achieved with goals and a strategy.
>>>
>>> Strategically, there is a limited amount of impact I believe we could
>>> have in this particular group. I would also suggest that "Privacy" alone
>>> isn't enough of a reason for the majority of the population, so that line
>>> of conversation will benefit the privacy-concerned, but won't appeal much
>>> broader than that.
>>>
>>> If you can summarise distinct problems in dot-point forms that would be
>>> a great asset. Here are some of my own to kick-start:
>>>
>>> 1. *Can a citizen "withdraw"?* - There is a lot of talk about opt-out
>>> and a deadline. One would think that a person's situation and beliefs are
>>> not static. If withdrawal is not a planned mechanism, that's very
>>> problematic. Actions would be: highlighting this to relevant groups to
>>> lobby for such a mechanism to be created.
>>>
>>> 2. *Is there a better design?* - I would think that a self-sovereign
>>> (SOLID?) framework would be a more direct 1:1 digital conversion. It would
>>> be one where you have total control over the data, and choose who can
>>> "view". Currently, people manually carry records (and quite a lot are sent
>>> digitally Org to Org directly). Actions would be: signalling the open
>>> source development of a self-sovereign platform, and have people opt-out,
>>> not because they are concerned about privacy, but because they want to
>>> influence the Government to evolve to the better solution.
>>>
>>> Any more high-level points?
>>>
>>> (I was involved way back with NeHTA, PHR, and other related systems.
>>> There is much controversy beyond an "opt-out" model. But I do hope that
>>> something will succeed given that over $1bn was spent on this.)
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Todd
>>>
>>> On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 at 12:58, Timothy Holborn via members <
>>> members at lists.internet.org.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I would call it data dignity, noting in my opinion, the best person to
>>>> fix that is the internationally extraordinary Hon. Michael Kirby, but we'll
>>>> need to do some internal work prior to making best use of his time.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed., 18 Jul. 2018, 12:40 pm Ian Mann, <ianmann897 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I fully appreciate your concerns about data privacy and control. I
>>>>> recall in Germany in before WW2 all Jews had to register, and that
>>>>> registry was used later to exterminate them.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am sure the registries were full of all sorts of claims made by the
>>>> government at the time...
>>>>
>>>> The temporal process, through which "verifiable claims" are evaluated
>>>> is hygienic, but also a series of features that may be considered "out of
>>>> scope".
>>>>
>>>> It is not the job or public servants to fix that. It's the job of the
>>>> people to do so, in any working democracy with a functional system of
>>>> government.
>>>>
>>>> One might wonder how functional ours is, if reasonable considered
>>>> today.  Do public servants understand the legal rules in which their work
>>>> as agent relates?  Does it not matter, as most data is governed by
>>>> international contract law + support for foreign affairs / law enforcement
>>>> workers ..
>>>>
>>>> Do they believe reducing the available funding for civil society groups
>>>> will improve the results formed in their eco-chambers?
>>>>
>>>> The worst thing, in my opinion, that they did to jews in WW2 was not
>>>> death; it was the requirements put upon them on the basis they sought to
>>>> continue to live and what that did you their humanity, what was required of
>>>> them to decide, agreeing upon a set of human rights was a good idea.
>>>>
>>>> Even still, even today, we're defending those decisions...   Go
>>>> figure.  It's a police prosecutors job to defend the actions of police, it
>>>> is not their job to uphold the law.  That's why access to lawyers is
>>>> prohibitively expensive, as to diminish the means for a judge, a court to
>>>> hear about unfairness...
>>>>
>>>> Same series of beliefs are manifesting in our health system and it'll
>>>> be more expensive than the cost born by way of the failures of our legal
>>>> systems.
>>>>
>>>> Imho & cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Tim.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 at 12:36, Timothy Holborn <
>>>>> timothy.holborn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > It is my opinion that the manner in which someone, or group of
>>>>> people, store your data...
>>>>> >
>>>>> > They'll be able to review your decisions, temporally, as they've
>>>>> been made in past with increasingly improved resolution.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > My view is that you, or those nominated in your last will and
>>>>> testament, should be the people who control how this 'inforg' works.  You
>>>>> should not be limited as to what you can store in it, but rather, how and
>>>>> what others see; and whether their able to rely upon it, to make decisions
>>>>> that affect you and others.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I think this is an important decision to make.  I think currently,
>>>>> there is very little technology services (if any)to make it.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Facebook is default.  Government seems to be making attempts to
>>>>> compete, rather than redesign.  It's a marketplace problem, We need one.
>>>>> We need to define the rules of engagement, what "fair dealings" means, "in
>>>>> good faith", for the information age...
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Tim.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On Wed., 18 Jul. 2018, 12:28 pm Ian Mann, <ianmann897 at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Yes Tim a lot of beneficial things have arrived as your introductory
>>>>> >> paragraph says.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> I am sure some not so beneficial things are there too, but on
>>>>> balance
>>>>> >> I would never wish to return to the past days even if it were
>>>>> >> possible.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> I watched a documentary called Ghost land a while ago where they
>>>>> took
>>>>> >> Kalahari Bushmen to Germany. The first part of the documentary shows
>>>>> >> the Bushman current life.
>>>>> >> Then hey go to Germany and vist their first city ever.Once our own
>>>>> >> ancestors lived that way I thought.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCfcxAbbShY
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Ian Mann
>>>>> Mobile 04 7859 7859
>>>>> International +61 4 7859 7859
>>>>> Home International +61 2 4873 5444
>>>>> 10 John Street, GOULBURN NSW 2580
>>>>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=10+John+Street,+GOULBURN+NSW+2580&entry=gmail&source=g>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>>>> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and
>>>> is
>>>> believed to be clean. _______________________________________________
>>>> members mailing list
>>>> members at lists.internet.org.au
>>>> http://lists.internet.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/members
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> --
>>> Todd Hubers
>>>
>>
>
> --
> --
> Todd Hubers
>

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180719/87ae0903/attachment-0001.html>

From timothy.holborn at gmail.com  Thu Jul 19 13:12:19 2018
From: timothy.holborn at gmail.com (Timothy Holborn)
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:12:19 +1000
Subject: [Kbi-webcivics] {Disarmed} Re: [IA - members] MyHealth Record
In-Reply-To: <CAM1Sok0wPEkxCaCqfxbU345RuUKxiVAkq5oFEAtMDtWZeZNR5w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAM1Sok1_bmQJY14_kQRuLatG4jdUBEmRvndA0t7uZFKc8jjKxw@mail.gmail.com>
 <p06240842d773690bae9e@192.168.2.186>
 <CAO7c6shUxeBuokjdU17z5T0oNpYPU7Cu2Y1tPEfygTLZWkuMVA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok3jVYne2jjj5_cB-v55C=HeY8vN5fcWNAfUzGVFSGyxdg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO7c6sjzOA8-89Hny_9TWGCauG-zFiBRjaKpPeSzxufFvEiCSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1531838502.10995.48.camel@biplane.com.au>
 <CAO7c6sgQwMH0NOh8a7VFm_73yad4V92QhpSCekgaXGiyj94WgA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok2CqXV2uPpWZHLcaNoTneWWaTx4XF9D8tnGfO4Dg=gDCQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO7c6sha1PKKMtND6E22ETy76xrVWK7YmMnm=S1NnwQZ=XaoDg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok3yB9aT9zetHsgujTajfaXvJxQ_ROxD7GitPYUF0c0rNg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO7c6sg4dRpKWBWPdxWm5o-3gDYi6Mj8MGocKnBAEzSR8W_ytg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok0Aj3tWBhKtk1FA7ZrmY9x=7TgEuA015+oR-QiKj1yU-A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABO3BC1AaYa=1KeKLWL497wCPWzuED61ksY_SvcojZeLsDA8Rw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok3Nvq0GANNvwR7YURDS2X_sMs3S8pNgze_RDrqHproH7Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABO3BC2EVAnbYcUn7_bc93tQYopcK-=Mssb7twKDikXpeviq0A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok0wPEkxCaCqfxbU345RuUKxiVAkq5oFEAtMDtWZeZNR5w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAM1Sok3KcNzck=6ssycLW65NU+Y+EwcnRPhSXrHHzs16SqqXbw@mail.gmail.com>

Nb also;

Oshani made https some years ago.

https://youtu.be/gdcdj91oCkE
http://news.mit.edu/2014/whos-using-your-data-httpa-0613
https://www.zdnet.com/article/transforming-the-web-into-a-httpa-database/
https://tw.rpi.edu//web/event/TWeD/2014/Spring/HTTPA
https://github.com/oshanis/httpa

Note also: https://twitter.com/csatrpi/status/1019222432685740032?s=19

The general theory therein, is to seek an expectation of accountability of
data use...

I am not sure how much of the usecase work relating to  HTTPA, made it into
the credentials scope of works...

I am also unsure what, if any, accountability systems are built into the
existing Australian Government Credentialing Platforms, ie; work product of
DTA, et.al. such as the digital health record system.

Hope that helps.

Tim.

Nb: I will move further correspondence on this matter due to the knowledge
banking SiG list.  If you are interested in this topic and are not already
subscribed to this list, please add yourself to it via the following link:
http://lists.internet.org.au/mailman/listinfo/kbi-webcivics


19 Jul. 2018, 12:37 pm Timothy Holborn, <timothy.holborn at gmail.com> wrote:

> Self Sovereign has a specified meaning, in the identity technology space
> worldwide as discussed.
>
> It's like talking about WWW and saying it's ok if your using the term to
> describe something that's designed for gopher.
>
> Re; the validity of choice,
>
> I keep thinking about an ostrich with their head in the sand.  I've also
> thought about how to put an Aussie spin on it.  Perhaps a campaign, it's ok
> to be an emu.
>
> The imagery is all about an emu with its head in the sand.  The campaign
> is about saying, there's all the information out there, being used in
> relation to your life.
>
> But if you don't want to know about it, thats ok.
>
> Blind trust, is an acceptable position.  Just be sure you know what
> decisions you're making and the implications of them, or not.
>
> It's ok to opt-out of that too..  knowledge, is an opt-in concept...
>
> Et.al.
>
> Tim
>
>
>
> On Thu., 19 Jul. 2018, 12:17 pm Todd Hubers, <todd.hubers at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Tim,
>>
>> When I say "self-sovereign" I would suggest that actually has two parts:
>>
>>    - Identity - which is what you must be thinking now.
>>    - Data - which is what I was mostly thinking about. The ability for
>>    one to own the data, and have it encrypted locally and stored in a cloud
>>    data bucket.
>>
>> This might be incompatible with the agreed definition of
>> "self-sovereign", but it just shows what I was thinking in my last email.
>>
>> I hope my important points are not lost in the minutiae, so I'll recap:
>>
>> *1. Can a citizen withdraw?*
>> *2. Is there a better design?*
>> 3. *More?*
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 at 11:42, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The term "self-sovereign" Comes from Christopher Allan, who has more
>>> recently become intrinsically involved with the credentials work I helped
>>> establish, with a few others a few years ago.
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.w3.org/community/credentials/2014/08/06/call-for-participation-in-credentials-community-group/
>>>
>>> His writings are worthy of having a good look at:
>>> http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2016/04/the-path-to-self-soverereign-identity.html.
>>> As are the rather extensive amount of writings available on the relevant
>>> GitHub pages.
>>>
>>> They originally worked on a concept called "respect network" which had a
>>> centralised username method for login. This was first worked on via oasis,
>>> prior to the takeover of the w3 credentials work, around the time the main
>>> person driving the work got SBIR funding with the US department of Homeland
>>> Security.
>>>
>>> I am not a subscriber to "self sovereign" methods, they are aware of our
>>> differences of opinion in this area.  They are not currently "solid
>>> compatible" or part of that stack, they have a broader different means
>>> which is not an inforg (no point telling people everything, where the claim
>>> may be made that those doing so, aren't meaningfully contributing ;))
>>>
>>> The nature of human identity is different to the identifiers and related
>>> works, somewhat formatively illustrated very well by our own Roger Clarke
>>> whose materials I find serve as a great "reality check" resources, with
>>> good provonance heritage to boot!
>>>
>>> http://www.rogerclarke.com/ID/
>>>
>>> With respect to existing catalogues of data, I think people are simply
>>> not aware.  Whilst a movement of people seeking to live without
>>> telecommunications / computers / database records about them (whilst
>>> seeking to retaining personhood) might be a great experiment for TV, it's
>>> not very practical.
>>>
>>> More soon.
>>>
>>> Tim.
>>>
>>> On Thu., 19 Jul. 2018, 11:15 am Todd Hubers, <todd.hubers at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Tim,
>>>>
>>>> As usual, you have plenty of insightful things to say. The improvement
>>>> of healthcare is truly a worthy goal, but not if that means dragnetting
>>>> data against citizens. But with so much information and ideas to cover: I
>>>> think progress would be achieved with goals and a strategy.
>>>>
>>>> Strategically, there is a limited amount of impact I believe we could
>>>> have in this particular group. I would also suggest that "Privacy" alone
>>>> isn't enough of a reason for the majority of the population, so that line
>>>> of conversation will benefit the privacy-concerned, but won't appeal much
>>>> broader than that.
>>>>
>>>> If you can summarise distinct problems in dot-point forms that would be
>>>> a great asset. Here are some of my own to kick-start:
>>>>
>>>> 1. *Can a citizen "withdraw"?* - There is a lot of talk about opt-out
>>>> and a deadline. One would think that a person's situation and beliefs are
>>>> not static. If withdrawal is not a planned mechanism, that's very
>>>> problematic. Actions would be: highlighting this to relevant groups to
>>>> lobby for such a mechanism to be created.
>>>>
>>>> 2. *Is there a better design?* - I would think that a self-sovereign
>>>> (SOLID?) framework would be a more direct 1:1 digital conversion. It would
>>>> be one where you have total control over the data, and choose who can
>>>> "view". Currently, people manually carry records (and quite a lot are sent
>>>> digitally Org to Org directly). Actions would be: signalling the open
>>>> source development of a self-sovereign platform, and have people opt-out,
>>>> not because they are concerned about privacy, but because they want to
>>>> influence the Government to evolve to the better solution.
>>>>
>>>> Any more high-level points?
>>>>
>>>> (I was involved way back with NeHTA, PHR, and other related systems.
>>>> There is much controversy beyond an "opt-out" model. But I do hope that
>>>> something will succeed given that over $1bn was spent on this.)
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Todd
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 at 12:58, Timothy Holborn via members <
>>>> members at lists.internet.org.au> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I would call it data dignity, noting in my opinion, the best person to
>>>>> fix that is the internationally extraordinary Hon. Michael Kirby, but we'll
>>>>> need to do some internal work prior to making best use of his time.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed., 18 Jul. 2018, 12:40 pm Ian Mann, <ianmann897 at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I fully appreciate your concerns about data privacy and control. I
>>>>>> recall in Germany in before WW2 all Jews had to register, and that
>>>>>> registry was used later to exterminate them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I am sure the registries were full of all sorts of claims made by the
>>>>> government at the time...
>>>>>
>>>>> The temporal process, through which "verifiable claims" are evaluated
>>>>> is hygienic, but also a series of features that may be considered "out of
>>>>> scope".
>>>>>
>>>>> It is not the job or public servants to fix that. It's the job of the
>>>>> people to do so, in any working democracy with a functional system of
>>>>> government.
>>>>>
>>>>> One might wonder how functional ours is, if reasonable considered
>>>>> today.  Do public servants understand the legal rules in which their work
>>>>> as agent relates?  Does it not matter, as most data is governed by
>>>>> international contract law + support for foreign affairs / law enforcement
>>>>> workers ..
>>>>>
>>>>> Do they believe reducing the available funding for civil society
>>>>> groups will improve the results formed in their eco-chambers?
>>>>>
>>>>> The worst thing, in my opinion, that they did to jews in WW2 was not
>>>>> death; it was the requirements put upon them on the basis they sought to
>>>>> continue to live and what that did you their humanity, what was required of
>>>>> them to decide, agreeing upon a set of human rights was a good idea.
>>>>>
>>>>> Even still, even today, we're defending those decisions...   Go
>>>>> figure.  It's a police prosecutors job to defend the actions of police, it
>>>>> is not their job to uphold the law.  That's why access to lawyers is
>>>>> prohibitively expensive, as to diminish the means for a judge, a court to
>>>>> hear about unfairness...
>>>>>
>>>>> Same series of beliefs are manifesting in our health system and it'll
>>>>> be more expensive than the cost born by way of the failures of our legal
>>>>> systems.
>>>>>
>>>>> Imho & cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>> Tim.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 at 12:36, Timothy Holborn <
>>>>>> timothy.holborn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > It is my opinion that the manner in which someone, or group of
>>>>>> people, store your data...
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > They'll be able to review your decisions, temporally, as they've
>>>>>> been made in past with increasingly improved resolution.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > My view is that you, or those nominated in your last will and
>>>>>> testament, should be the people who control how this 'inforg' works.  You
>>>>>> should not be limited as to what you can store in it, but rather, how and
>>>>>> what others see; and whether their able to rely upon it, to make decisions
>>>>>> that affect you and others.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I think this is an important decision to make.  I think currently,
>>>>>> there is very little technology services (if any)to make it.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Facebook is default.  Government seems to be making attempts to
>>>>>> compete, rather than redesign.  It's a marketplace problem, We need one.
>>>>>> We need to define the rules of engagement, what "fair dealings" means, "in
>>>>>> good faith", for the information age...
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Tim.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On Wed., 18 Jul. 2018, 12:28 pm Ian Mann, <ianmann897 at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Yes Tim a lot of beneficial things have arrived as your
>>>>>> introductory
>>>>>> >> paragraph says.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> I am sure some not so beneficial things are there too, but on
>>>>>> balance
>>>>>> >> I would never wish to return to the past days even if it were
>>>>>> >> possible.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> I watched a documentary called Ghost land a while ago where they
>>>>>> took
>>>>>> >> Kalahari Bushmen to Germany. The first part of the documentary
>>>>>> shows
>>>>>> >> the Bushman current life.
>>>>>> >> Then hey go to Germany and vist their first city ever.Once our own
>>>>>> >> ancestors lived that way I thought.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCfcxAbbShY
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Ian Mann
>>>>>> Mobile 04 7859 7859
>>>>>> International +61 4 7859 7859
>>>>>> Home International +61 2 4873 5444
>>>>>> 10 John Street, GOULBURN NSW 2580
>>>>>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=10+John+Street,+GOULBURN+NSW+2580&entry=gmail&source=g>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>>>>> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>,
>>>>> and is
>>>>> believed to be clean. _______________________________________________
>>>>> members mailing list
>>>>> members at lists.internet.org.au
>>>>> http://lists.internet.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/members
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> --
>>>> Todd Hubers
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> --
>> Todd Hubers
>>
>

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180719/3dda3248/attachment-0001.html>

From todd.hubers at gmail.com  Thu Jul 19 11:14:52 2018
From: todd.hubers at gmail.com (Todd Hubers)
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 11:14:52 +1000
Subject: [Kbi-webcivics] [IA - members] MyHealth Record
In-Reply-To: <CAM1Sok0Aj3tWBhKtk1FA7ZrmY9x=7TgEuA015+oR-QiKj1yU-A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAM1Sok1_bmQJY14_kQRuLatG4jdUBEmRvndA0t7uZFKc8jjKxw@mail.gmail.com>
 <p06240842d773690bae9e@192.168.2.186>
 <CAO7c6shUxeBuokjdU17z5T0oNpYPU7Cu2Y1tPEfygTLZWkuMVA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok3jVYne2jjj5_cB-v55C=HeY8vN5fcWNAfUzGVFSGyxdg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO7c6sjzOA8-89Hny_9TWGCauG-zFiBRjaKpPeSzxufFvEiCSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1531838502.10995.48.camel@biplane.com.au>
 <CAO7c6sgQwMH0NOh8a7VFm_73yad4V92QhpSCekgaXGiyj94WgA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok2CqXV2uPpWZHLcaNoTneWWaTx4XF9D8tnGfO4Dg=gDCQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO7c6sha1PKKMtND6E22ETy76xrVWK7YmMnm=S1NnwQZ=XaoDg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok3yB9aT9zetHsgujTajfaXvJxQ_ROxD7GitPYUF0c0rNg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO7c6sg4dRpKWBWPdxWm5o-3gDYi6Mj8MGocKnBAEzSR8W_ytg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok0Aj3tWBhKtk1FA7ZrmY9x=7TgEuA015+oR-QiKj1yU-A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CABO3BC1AaYa=1KeKLWL497wCPWzuED61ksY_SvcojZeLsDA8Rw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Tim,

As usual, you have plenty of insightful things to say. The improvement of
healthcare is truly a worthy goal, but not if that means dragnetting data
against citizens. But with so much information and ideas to cover: I think
progress would be achieved with goals and a strategy.

Strategically, there is a limited amount of impact I believe we could have
in this particular group. I would also suggest that "Privacy" alone isn't
enough of a reason for the majority of the population, so that line of
conversation will benefit the privacy-concerned, but won't appeal much
broader than that.

If you can summarise distinct problems in dot-point forms that would be a
great asset. Here are some of my own to kick-start:

1. *Can a citizen "withdraw"?* - There is a lot of talk about opt-out and a
deadline. One would think that a person's situation and beliefs are not
static. If withdrawal is not a planned mechanism, that's very problematic.
Actions would be: highlighting this to relevant groups to lobby for such a
mechanism to be created.

2. *Is there a better design?* - I would think that a self-sovereign
(SOLID?) framework would be a more direct 1:1 digital conversion. It would
be one where you have total control over the data, and choose who can
"view". Currently, people manually carry records (and quite a lot are sent
digitally Org to Org directly). Actions would be: signalling the open
source development of a self-sovereign platform, and have people opt-out,
not because they are concerned about privacy, but because they want to
influence the Government to evolve to the better solution.

Any more high-level points?

(I was involved way back with NeHTA, PHR, and other related systems. There
is much controversy beyond an "opt-out" model. But I do hope that something
will succeed given that over $1bn was spent on this.)

Cheers,

Todd

On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 at 12:58, Timothy Holborn via members <
members at lists.internet.org.au> wrote:

> I would call it data dignity, noting in my opinion, the best person to fix
> that is the internationally extraordinary Hon. Michael Kirby, but we'll
> need to do some internal work prior to making best use of his time.
>
> On Wed., 18 Jul. 2018, 12:40 pm Ian Mann, <ianmann897 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I fully appreciate your concerns about data privacy and control. I
>> recall in Germany in before WW2 all Jews had to register, and that
>> registry was used later to exterminate them.
>>
>
> I am sure the registries were full of all sorts of claims made by the
> government at the time...
>
> The temporal process, through which "verifiable claims" are evaluated is
> hygienic, but also a series of features that may be considered "out of
> scope".
>
> It is not the job or public servants to fix that. It's the job of the
> people to do so, in any working democracy with a functional system of
> government.
>
> One might wonder how functional ours is, if reasonable considered today.
> Do public servants understand the legal rules in which their work as agent
> relates?  Does it not matter, as most data is governed by international
> contract law + support for foreign affairs / law enforcement workers ..
>
> Do they believe reducing the available funding for civil society groups
> will improve the results formed in their eco-chambers?
>
> The worst thing, in my opinion, that they did to jews in WW2 was not
> death; it was the requirements put upon them on the basis they sought to
> continue to live and what that did you their humanity, what was required of
> them to decide, agreeing upon a set of human rights was a good idea.
>
> Even still, even today, we're defending those decisions...   Go figure.
> It's a police prosecutors job to defend the actions of police, it is not
> their job to uphold the law.  That's why access to lawyers is prohibitively
> expensive, as to diminish the means for a judge, a court to hear about
> unfairness...
>
> Same series of beliefs are manifesting in our health system and it'll be
> more expensive than the cost born by way of the failures of our legal
> systems.
>
> Imho & cheers,
>
> Tim.
>
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 at 12:36, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > It is my opinion that the manner in which someone, or group of people,
>> store your data...
>> >
>> > They'll be able to review your decisions, temporally, as they've been
>> made in past with increasingly improved resolution.
>> >
>> > My view is that you, or those nominated in your last will and
>> testament, should be the people who control how this 'inforg' works.  You
>> should not be limited as to what you can store in it, but rather, how and
>> what others see; and whether their able to rely upon it, to make decisions
>> that affect you and others.
>> >
>> > I think this is an important decision to make.  I think currently,
>> there is very little technology services (if any)to make it.
>> >
>> > Facebook is default.  Government seems to be making attempts to
>> compete, rather than redesign.  It's a marketplace problem, We need one.
>> We need to define the rules of engagement, what "fair dealings" means, "in
>> good faith", for the information age...
>> >
>> > Tim.
>> >
>> > On Wed., 18 Jul. 2018, 12:28 pm Ian Mann, <ianmann897 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Yes Tim a lot of beneficial things have arrived as your introductory
>> >> paragraph says.
>> >>
>> >> I am sure some not so beneficial things are there too, but on balance
>> >> I would never wish to return to the past days even if it were
>> >> possible.
>> >>
>> >> I watched a documentary called Ghost land a while ago where they took
>> >> Kalahari Bushmen to Germany. The first part of the documentary shows
>> >> the Bushman current life.
>> >> Then hey go to Germany and vist their first city ever.Once our own
>> >> ancestors lived that way I thought.
>> >>
>> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCfcxAbbShY
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ian Mann
>> Mobile 04 7859 7859
>> International +61 4 7859 7859
>> Home International +61 2 4873 5444
>> 10 John Street, GOULBURN NSW 2580
>>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is
> believed to be clean. _______________________________________________
> members mailing list
> members at lists.internet.org.au
> http://lists.internet.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/members
>


-- 
--
Todd Hubers

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180719/237917d2/attachment.html>

From timothy.holborn at gmail.com  Fri Jul 20 00:07:43 2018
From: timothy.holborn at gmail.com (Timothy Holborn)
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2018 00:07:43 +1000
Subject: [Kbi-webcivics] {Disarmed} Watch "Sir Tim Berners-Lee 2016 ACM A.M.
 Turing Lecture, May 29, 2018" on YouTube
Message-ID: <CAM1Sok3Bga5Coh7Vjq0qRU6BF2EXg8N1t-40=C3=xf_wJw941w@mail.gmail.com>

https://youtu.be/BaMa4u4Fio4

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180720/d2f0eb88/attachment.html>

From timothy.holborn at gmail.com  Sat Jul 21 23:21:25 2018
From: timothy.holborn at gmail.com (Timothy Holborn)
Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2018 23:21:25 +1000
Subject: [Kbi-webcivics] Why 'Ontology' Will Be A Big Word In Your Company's
	Future
Message-ID: <CAM1Sok3P1-+VU75JYtKX6ybBEXh6hWvQAJJOE1=qTdr-87eGTw@mail.gmail.com>

https://www.forbes.com/sites/cognitiveworld/2018/07/20/why-ontology-will-be-a-big-word-in-your-companys-future/

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180721/58497b8a/attachment.html>

From timothy.holborn at gmail.com  Mon Jul 23 23:46:23 2018
From: timothy.holborn at gmail.com (Timothy Holborn)
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 23:46:23 +1000
Subject: [Kbi-webcivics] TimBL Turing Lecture
Message-ID: <CAM1Sok1msdRWu5+rMHOhQ8+Hc1saj1Jp3kP5NZgX3fU5xE4Spg@mail.gmail.com>

Here's TimBL's Turing Lecture[1].

If DNS were replaced, how might one go about it.... It does seem, in the
content networking world, there are many things that could be improved and
i haven't been able to get out of my head TimBL's very fixed mindset in
dedicating a constituent of this important lecture to the topic.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaMa4u4Fio4

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180723/844d11ce/attachment.html>

From timothy.holborn at gmail.com  Wed Jul 25 11:48:39 2018
From: timothy.holborn at gmail.com (Timothy Holborn)
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 11:48:39 +1000
Subject: [Kbi-webcivics] [IA - members] {Disarmed} Re: MyHealth Record
In-Reply-To: <CAM1Sok3KcNzck=6ssycLW65NU+Y+EwcnRPhSXrHHzs16SqqXbw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAM1Sok1_bmQJY14_kQRuLatG4jdUBEmRvndA0t7uZFKc8jjKxw@mail.gmail.com>
 <p06240842d773690bae9e@192.168.2.186>
 <CAO7c6shUxeBuokjdU17z5T0oNpYPU7Cu2Y1tPEfygTLZWkuMVA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok3jVYne2jjj5_cB-v55C=HeY8vN5fcWNAfUzGVFSGyxdg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO7c6sjzOA8-89Hny_9TWGCauG-zFiBRjaKpPeSzxufFvEiCSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1531838502.10995.48.camel@biplane.com.au>
 <CAO7c6sgQwMH0NOh8a7VFm_73yad4V92QhpSCekgaXGiyj94WgA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok2CqXV2uPpWZHLcaNoTneWWaTx4XF9D8tnGfO4Dg=gDCQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO7c6sha1PKKMtND6E22ETy76xrVWK7YmMnm=S1NnwQZ=XaoDg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok3yB9aT9zetHsgujTajfaXvJxQ_ROxD7GitPYUF0c0rNg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO7c6sg4dRpKWBWPdxWm5o-3gDYi6Mj8MGocKnBAEzSR8W_ytg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok0Aj3tWBhKtk1FA7ZrmY9x=7TgEuA015+oR-QiKj1yU-A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABO3BC1AaYa=1KeKLWL497wCPWzuED61ksY_SvcojZeLsDA8Rw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok3Nvq0GANNvwR7YURDS2X_sMs3S8pNgze_RDrqHproH7Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABO3BC2EVAnbYcUn7_bc93tQYopcK-=Mssb7twKDikXpeviq0A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok0wPEkxCaCqfxbU345RuUKxiVAkq5oFEAtMDtWZeZNR5w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM1Sok3KcNzck=6ssycLW65NU+Y+EwcnRPhSXrHHzs16SqqXbw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAM1Sok1hK-1oXnQD5fbQw7dkogNy1mADj5JKp8Qu8_SahwQiTw@mail.gmail.com>

http://dig.csail.mit.edu/2010/Papers/IAB-privacy/httpa.pdf

On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 at 13:20 Timothy Holborn via members <
members at lists.internet.org.au> wrote:

> Nb also;
>
> Oshani made https some years ago.
>
> *MailScanner has detected definite fraud in the website at "youtu.be". Do
> not trust this website:* https://youtu.be/gdcdj91oCkE
> <https://youtu.be/gdcdj91oCkE>
> http://news.mit.edu/2014/whos-using-your-data-httpa-0613
> https://www.zdnet.com/article/transforming-the-web-into-a-httpa-database/
> https://tw.rpi.edu//web/event/TWeD/2014/Spring/HTTPA
> https://github.com/oshanis/httpa
>
> Note also: https://twitter.com/csatrpi/status/1019222432685740032?s=19
>
> The general theory therein, is to seek an expectation of accountability of
> data use...
>
> I am not sure how much of the usecase work relating to  HTTPA, made it
> into the credentials scope of works...
>
> I am also unsure what, if any, accountability systems are built into the
> existing Australian Government Credentialing Platforms, ie; work product of
> DTA, et.al. such as the digital health record system.
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> Tim.
>
> Nb: I will move further correspondence on this matter due to the knowledge
> banking SiG list.  If you are interested in this topic and are not already
> subscribed to this list, please add yourself to it via the following link:
> http://lists.internet.org.au/mailman/listinfo/kbi-webcivics
>
>
> 19 Jul. 2018, 12:37 pm Timothy Holborn, <timothy.holborn at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Self Sovereign has a specified meaning, in the identity technology space
>> worldwide as discussed.
>>
>> It's like talking about WWW and saying it's ok if your using the term to
>> describe something that's designed for gopher.
>>
>> Re; the validity of choice,
>>
>> I keep thinking about an ostrich with their head in the sand.  I've also
>> thought about how to put an Aussie spin on it.  Perhaps a campaign, it's ok
>> to be an emu.
>>
>> The imagery is all about an emu with its head in the sand.  The campaign
>> is about saying, there's all the information out there, being used in
>> relation to your life.
>>
>> But if you don't want to know about it, thats ok.
>>
>> Blind trust, is an acceptable position.  Just be sure you know what
>> decisions you're making and the implications of them, or not.
>>
>> It's ok to opt-out of that too..  knowledge, is an opt-in concept...
>>
>> Et.al.
>>
>> Tim
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu., 19 Jul. 2018, 12:17 pm Todd Hubers, <todd.hubers at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Tim,
>>>
>>> When I say "self-sovereign" I would suggest that actually has two parts:
>>>
>>>    - Identity - which is what you must be thinking now.
>>>    - Data - which is what I was mostly thinking about. The ability for
>>>    one to own the data, and have it encrypted locally and stored in a cloud
>>>    data bucket.
>>>
>>> This might be incompatible with the agreed definition of
>>> "self-sovereign", but it just shows what I was thinking in my last email.
>>>
>>> I hope my important points are not lost in the minutiae, so I'll recap:
>>>
>>> *1. Can a citizen withdraw?*
>>> *2. Is there a better design?*
>>> 3. *More?*
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 at 11:42, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The term "self-sovereign" Comes from Christopher Allan, who has more
>>>> recently become intrinsically involved with the credentials work I helped
>>>> establish, with a few others a few years ago.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://www.w3.org/community/credentials/2014/08/06/call-for-participation-in-credentials-community-group/
>>>>
>>>> His writings are worthy of having a good look at:
>>>> http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2016/04/the-path-to-self-soverereign-identity.html.
>>>> As are the rather extensive amount of writings available on the relevant
>>>> GitHub pages.
>>>>
>>>> They originally worked on a concept called "respect network" which had
>>>> a centralised username method for login. This was first worked on via
>>>> oasis, prior to the takeover of the w3 credentials work, around the time
>>>> the main person driving the work got SBIR funding with the US department of
>>>> Homeland Security.
>>>>
>>>> I am not a subscriber to "self sovereign" methods, they are aware of
>>>> our differences of opinion in this area.  They are not currently "solid
>>>> compatible" or part of that stack, they have a broader different means
>>>> which is not an inforg (no point telling people everything, where the claim
>>>> may be made that those doing so, aren't meaningfully contributing ;))
>>>>
>>>> The nature of human identity is different to the identifiers and
>>>> related works, somewhat formatively illustrated very well by our own Roger
>>>> Clarke whose materials I find serve as a great "reality check" resources,
>>>> with good provonance heritage to boot!
>>>>
>>>> http://www.rogerclarke.com/ID/
>>>>
>>>> With respect to existing catalogues of data, I think people are simply
>>>> not aware.  Whilst a movement of people seeking to live without
>>>> telecommunications / computers / database records about them (whilst
>>>> seeking to retaining personhood) might be a great experiment for TV, it's
>>>> not very practical.
>>>>
>>>> More soon.
>>>>
>>>> Tim.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu., 19 Jul. 2018, 11:15 am Todd Hubers, <todd.hubers at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Tim,
>>>>>
>>>>> As usual, you have plenty of insightful things to say. The improvement
>>>>> of healthcare is truly a worthy goal, but not if that means dragnetting
>>>>> data against citizens. But with so much information and ideas to cover: I
>>>>> think progress would be achieved with goals and a strategy.
>>>>>
>>>>> Strategically, there is a limited amount of impact I believe we could
>>>>> have in this particular group. I would also suggest that "Privacy" alone
>>>>> isn't enough of a reason for the majority of the population, so that line
>>>>> of conversation will benefit the privacy-concerned, but won't appeal much
>>>>> broader than that.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you can summarise distinct problems in dot-point forms that would
>>>>> be a great asset. Here are some of my own to kick-start:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. *Can a citizen "withdraw"?* - There is a lot of talk about opt-out
>>>>> and a deadline. One would think that a person's situation and beliefs are
>>>>> not static. If withdrawal is not a planned mechanism, that's very
>>>>> problematic. Actions would be: highlighting this to relevant groups to
>>>>> lobby for such a mechanism to be created.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. *Is there a better design?* - I would think that a self-sovereign
>>>>> (SOLID?) framework would be a more direct 1:1 digital conversion. It would
>>>>> be one where you have total control over the data, and choose who can
>>>>> "view". Currently, people manually carry records (and quite a lot are sent
>>>>> digitally Org to Org directly). Actions would be: signalling the open
>>>>> source development of a self-sovereign platform, and have people opt-out,
>>>>> not because they are concerned about privacy, but because they want to
>>>>> influence the Government to evolve to the better solution.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any more high-level points?
>>>>>
>>>>> (I was involved way back with NeHTA, PHR, and other related systems.
>>>>> There is much controversy beyond an "opt-out" model. But I do hope that
>>>>> something will succeed given that over $1bn was spent on this.)
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>> Todd
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 at 12:58, Timothy Holborn via members <
>>>>> members at lists.internet.org.au> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I would call it data dignity, noting in my opinion, the best person
>>>>>> to fix that is the internationally extraordinary Hon. Michael Kirby, but
>>>>>> we'll need to do some internal work prior to making best use of his time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed., 18 Jul. 2018, 12:40 pm Ian Mann, <ianmann897 at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I fully appreciate your concerns about data privacy and control. I
>>>>>>> recall in Germany in before WW2 all Jews had to register, and that
>>>>>>> registry was used later to exterminate them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am sure the registries were full of all sorts of claims made by the
>>>>>> government at the time...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The temporal process, through which "verifiable claims" are evaluated
>>>>>> is hygienic, but also a series of features that may be considered "out of
>>>>>> scope".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is not the job or public servants to fix that. It's the job of the
>>>>>> people to do so, in any working democracy with a functional system of
>>>>>> government.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One might wonder how functional ours is, if reasonable considered
>>>>>> today.  Do public servants understand the legal rules in which their work
>>>>>> as agent relates?  Does it not matter, as most data is governed by
>>>>>> international contract law + support for foreign affairs / law enforcement
>>>>>> workers ..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do they believe reducing the available funding for civil society
>>>>>> groups will improve the results formed in their eco-chambers?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The worst thing, in my opinion, that they did to jews in WW2 was not
>>>>>> death; it was the requirements put upon them on the basis they sought to
>>>>>> continue to live and what that did you their humanity, what was required of
>>>>>> them to decide, agreeing upon a set of human rights was a good idea.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Even still, even today, we're defending those decisions...   Go
>>>>>> figure.  It's a police prosecutors job to defend the actions of police, it
>>>>>> is not their job to uphold the law.  That's why access to lawyers is
>>>>>> prohibitively expensive, as to diminish the means for a judge, a court to
>>>>>> hear about unfairness...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Same series of beliefs are manifesting in our health system and it'll
>>>>>> be more expensive than the cost born by way of the failures of our legal
>>>>>> systems.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Imho & cheers,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tim.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 at 12:36, Timothy Holborn <
>>>>>>> timothy.holborn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > It is my opinion that the manner in which someone, or group of
>>>>>>> people, store your data...
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > They'll be able to review your decisions, temporally, as they've
>>>>>>> been made in past with increasingly improved resolution.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > My view is that you, or those nominated in your last will and
>>>>>>> testament, should be the people who control how this 'inforg' works.  You
>>>>>>> should not be limited as to what you can store in it, but rather, how and
>>>>>>> what others see; and whether their able to rely upon it, to make decisions
>>>>>>> that affect you and others.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > I think this is an important decision to make.  I think currently,
>>>>>>> there is very little technology services (if any)to make it.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Facebook is default.  Government seems to be making attempts to
>>>>>>> compete, rather than redesign.  It's a marketplace problem, We need one.
>>>>>>> We need to define the rules of engagement, what "fair dealings" means, "in
>>>>>>> good faith", for the information age...
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Tim.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > On Wed., 18 Jul. 2018, 12:28 pm Ian Mann, <ianmann897 at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Yes Tim a lot of beneficial things have arrived as your
>>>>>>> introductory
>>>>>>> >> paragraph says.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> I am sure some not so beneficial things are there too, but on
>>>>>>> balance
>>>>>>> >> I would never wish to return to the past days even if it were
>>>>>>> >> possible.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> I watched a documentary called Ghost land a while ago where they
>>>>>>> took
>>>>>>> >> Kalahari Bushmen to Germany. The first part of the documentary
>>>>>>> shows
>>>>>>> >> the Bushman current life.
>>>>>>> >> Then hey go to Germany and vist their first city ever.Once our own
>>>>>>> >> ancestors lived that way I thought.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCfcxAbbShY
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Ian Mann
>>>>>>> Mobile 04 7859 7859
>>>>>>> International +61 4 7859 7859
>>>>>>> Home International +61 2 4873 5444 <(02)%204873%205444>
>>>>>>> 10 John Street, GOULBURN NSW 2580
>>>>>>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=10+John+Street,+GOULBURN+NSW+2580&entry=gmail&source=g>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>>>>>> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>,
>>>>>> and is
>>>>>> believed to be clean. _______________________________________________
>>>>>> members mailing list
>>>>>> members at lists.internet.org.au
>>>>>> http://lists.internet.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/members
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> --
>>>>> Todd Hubers
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> --
>>> Todd Hubers
>>>
>>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is
> believed to be clean. _______________________________________________
> members mailing list
> members at lists.internet.org.au
> http://lists.internet.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/members
>

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180725/44df9387/attachment-0001.html>

From timothy.holborn at gmail.com  Wed Jul 25 13:28:33 2018
From: timothy.holborn at gmail.com (Timothy Holborn)
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 13:28:33 +1000
Subject: [Kbi-webcivics] #healthrecord - Health System Demo?
Message-ID: <CAM1Sok0q84=qezAirq+OQxqOsN_oDZcPPq-v7cOBrLZF5adriA@mail.gmail.com>

Is there a health-records system demo?

I've found a video - but not a usable log-in system, to show how the thing
works...

Tim.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180725/3f61d303/attachment.html>

From timothy.holborn at gmail.com  Wed Jul 25 17:57:47 2018
From: timothy.holborn at gmail.com (Timothy Holborn)
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 17:57:47 +1000
Subject: [Kbi-webcivics] Draft Thoughts - Healthcare - Records system
Message-ID: <CAM1Sok0rsFzQkNhEdo34dhJehNSmGgKavxqNKQw729+03fD+_g@mail.gmail.com>

All draft and IMHO field of considerations:

I've been looking into the health-records system and i'm finding some of
these people in the health-sector, problematic.

The health authority's number is: 02 82982600 and 02 62895578 - i called
asking whether there was a demo, apparently they believed this was
unnecessary, one operator advised me that she never tested anything before
she purchased it.  (I doubt she can be bound to her representation, indeed
it would reasonably be an act of cruelty to do so - but one, that the
operator does not consider a concern for her income generating moments in
giving me BS responses, undermining investigation 'in good faith' for a set
of issues, that are suggested to be - in the interests of the people.)

A few thoughts:
https://twitter.com/SailingDigital/status/1022012532033302528  (note:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objective_structured_clinical_examination )

Broader thoughts being drafted:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zyM6wCNwusxvXPQVTYBOScCKoYQ5FsbJ176IxuAoM4Q/edit?usp=sharing
but
that's really quite tricky stuff overall...

Information wars are different to the once undertaken by other medium.  It
looks like the protection of the 'call centre environment' is providing a
unhealthy work environment of what may be considered 'disturbed thoughts',
I am entirely sure, they have NFI what it is they're toying with, nor does
it seem they provide sufficient care and diligence to consider the
interests of a class of engagement modality they call simply - 'consumers'.

I think its fair to say, the big money is on delivering death to democracy
for a few short-term dollars; in so doing, endorse the status of 'consumer'
to be put in place of wording in agreements, such as 'human'.  I am
therefore making an amended version of the document formerly known as the
UDHR to reflect our governments position generally:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Y7QIR_pzjMzvEjWycxkBK_tqRcYkPQQvVjeBkQD3cZ0/edit?usp=sharing
and
to entertain me a little, in what is otherwise a day filled with activity
that renders me in a position, to have a lot to think about generally...

(It is my hope, this would provide a little positive light on what has been
otherwise, a deeply concerning series of interactions for a day whilst also
considering, perhaps its important to find a simple way to reflect what it
is, they're just slowly chipping away at, for another dollar, along the
way. )

In my evaluation, I believe it is reasonable to be concerned about this
health records system and its governance structure.  If anything, the issue
seems fundamentally cultural; whilst extremely complex in nature.  I have
not been able to find someone who is proficient with technology, in a
position of leadership within the medical field; who understands the
medical field sufficiently as to be reasonably deemed capable of making
intentional decisions.

As is the purpose of this SIG - that we require a framework through which
agency of 'information fiduciaries' be rationalised, and i'm quite firm on
the idea of a knowledge banking industry to do so.  People like to throw
around, what are factually - very damaging statements about others without
consideration; as though, the few dollars more they get, makes it ok. that
they're behaviours, don't really matter...   But my question to all, in
this field that has such a significant impact on my 'world view' - what if
the operation of a medical diagnostics business acted on that same
principles you are comfortable employing for economic benefit; what if
those principles, were applied to how your autopsy got done...

What is the relationship between the moral grammar of others, as can only
be reflected back at them in a way that is made consolable to, by god.

How is it, that you ask people - to wake up, when in so many professional
fields - they really just don't care, and how do we describe in lay-terms,
why we need to be worried about these sorts of information management
system problems; without progressing adversarial communications that will
cost participants, by way of a particular group of mental health conditions
that otherwise denote 'irrelevance', at least, from a compensation related
- point of view...

Tim.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180725/5df9a117/attachment.html>

From timothy.holborn at gmail.com  Thu Jul 26 17:17:50 2018
From: timothy.holborn at gmail.com (Timothy Holborn)
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 17:17:50 +1000
Subject: [Kbi-webcivics] health data for civil disputes?
Message-ID: <CAM1Sok2gkvSCLY-bNd6DESEZbCDVCTOREAY+XHBsSo7X_LCn9w@mail.gmail.com>

I recall changes to law somewhere in relation to the use of data for civil
disputes (vs precluding the use of data for such purposes).  i believe the
issue was something about divorce proceedings or some such over
simplification.

As health data stores evidence, and that these systems are also able to be
used to catalogue data provided by the patient - shouldn't that mean the
system can be used to sue the government where health records show that
there has been malfeasance / negligence, or other organised behaviour as to
cause injury?

equally; where, for instance, rape has occurred, but police have failed to
investigate.  Is it the case that police could in-turn be sued for
negligence?

is that a constituent of the 'proper purpose' provided by government?  the
ability to sue government for wrong-doings causing injury, by way of a
records system provided by them that improves the means of 'consumers' to
do so?

tim.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180726/3c102aa5/attachment.html>

From timothy.holborn at gmail.com  Fri Jul 27 02:02:30 2018
From: timothy.holborn at gmail.com (Timothy Holborn)
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2018 02:02:30 +1000
Subject: [Kbi-webcivics] Hr framework
Message-ID: <CAM1Sok0Wo=eUZ4XOdOdg0So6bRox0-iCAC6PEbv_J4Bf_ye2ig@mail.gmail.com>

https://www.cio.com.au/article/644299/human-rights-commission-we-re-both-beneficiaries-tech-ones-facing-guillotine/

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180727/c02662b4/attachment.html>

From timothy.holborn at gmail.com  Mon Jul 30 17:46:35 2018
From: timothy.holborn at gmail.com (Timothy Holborn)
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2018 17:46:35 +1000
Subject: [Kbi-webcivics] Conference
Message-ID: <CAM1Sok0VOBs-TF3xR9-22CnPSL6m9UF2p5ow6X8-A9Nz6GjKGg@mail.gmail.com>

Decentralise conference happening in the US, well worth following.

https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6429592835518922752

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internet.org.au/pipermail/kbi-webcivics/attachments/20180730/1ce1ea2e/attachment.html>