Just let me understand you perfectly… are you saying that the Web does = the Internet? Let’s clear that one up first. Because, you go on to talk of “The Net” and whether or not any disenfranchisement is occurring.

If you are grouping the Internet, and the Web together simply as “The Net”, then it will be difficult to discuss the differences between (for instance) the traditional client-server approach vs newer more distributed and decentralized processes.

You’ve worked at Sun, you have worked with Grid-Computing, you know the different systems… Or is it all just a minestrone to you, in which (I read your bio) cracking people’s passwords, and then disseminating that knowledge on USENET is somehow cool, and something to be proud of?

First: I’m not Adriana. I am a 39 year old geek who has been on the internet since 1987-ish and have debugged TCP stacks for fun on occasion, so I am well aware that The Web != The Internet.

You ask:

>Why try to negotiate answers and solutions in a cluttered, chaotic mostly lawless environment [...] where the consumer has long since been disenfranchised.

…and I reject the proposition, let alone the question; the Net does not disenfranchise people; perhaps a generation of baby boomers are worried what their tearaway kids are doing, poking cellphone buttons rather than smoking pot and enjoying free-love, but as for the net being a cluttered, chaotic, mostly lawless environment? I would opine that humans are well adapted to live in such conditions and manage relationships and communications in them.

As for “playing by the rules” – I should ask, “what rules?” – you just suggested the web is lawless, and now you are saying it’s not?

It can’t be both.

Sigh. I smell a troll and hereby consign you to the bit bucket. PLONK

I thought I might summarise back.

There two main aspects:

1) ME – my identity and being able to manage and share it securely myself.

2) MINE – Management/control of assets published by ME (usage (in its broadest form), attribution, rights etc etc)

The difficulty with MINE is that it comes in all sorts of shapes and sizes through different software and it could be consumed in lots of different ways. (BTW Dublin Core could be handy here as an adjunct).

VRM would facilitate the sharing of ME and MINE and this is what differentiates this from copyright/rights management etc. VRM would allow me to proactively choose, control and track who consumes ME and MINE real time using Web 2.0 technology

Is this right?

No need to go back to primitive implements, rather lets go in the other direction. i.e Why try to negotiate answers and solutions in a cluttered, chaotic mostly lawless environment that more resembles a scene from Blade Runner, where the consumer has long since been disenfranchised.

Most people may have swallowed the Web’s plutocratic rules of engagement hook-line-and-sinker. But I beg to suggest that playing by its rules is not the way to go.

From the tone of what you write:

““A Web-Centric Approach to VRM Implementation”. That’s like, trying to organize a ‘committee-approach-solution’ to the problems created by the world’s biggest committee, or putting Bill Gates in charge of software innovation, or trying to solve Police Corruption from within the Police Department.”

…I can’t shake the feeling that you haven’t really read the paper- although I am obviously biased by dint of being one of the authors.

Perhaps you can explain what precisely is problematic about using the models provided by the extremely popular tools of the day – blogging, feeds, etc – to enhance one’s ability to manage data pertinent to one’s self, and to share that with whomever you care?

You speak luddishly of the medium – the web – being the “mess”; perhaps you would prefer to found a new Year Zero and have us beat our hard drives into ploughshares?

If not, then precisely what do you mean?

In the ‘what’ section of your Blog you talk about preferring to work with a PR Company: “…that doesn’t mind examining what they do from first principles”. The next paragraph is entitled “a tangled web we weave”… ~ The clues to why your draft white paper on “Feeds-Based VRM” is so tangled is that, at its premise, it is, as it acknowledges, “A Web-Centric Approach to VRM Implementation”. That’s like, trying to organize a ‘committee-approach-solution’ to the problems created by the world’s biggest committee, or putting Bill Gates in charge of software innovation, or trying to solve Police Corruption from within the Police Department.

The medium is not the message… the medium is the mess. To solve this puzzle you have to be Alice and go through the looking glass. ‘The Web’ is the playing field sure, you can’t avoid that, but “The Web” is in fact the problem.

Point of order: The Web, is not the internet! The Internet is 40+ years old. The web is less that 20. The Web is an overlay on the internet, and like a religion, people subscribe to the myth, believe, and don’t see it clearly.

Enough discussion in the public domain. If you would like to discuss it from “first principles” I’d be happy to do that.