Editing Talk:Identifying people

OK, excellent, your conditions are good conditions to start, similar to those of [[w:journalism]].

Yes, someday a fork will occur to go farther and engage in outright war.  But by being as far over at least as the investigative press ([http://disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=free_press now under attack]) will hold that day off longer.

Sources like [http://truthout.org truthout], [http://hermes-press.com hermes press], [http://indymedia.org indymedia] and those trusted by [[w:Wikipedia]] might be a start.  If you can't get your claim to stick in wikipedia maybe it should not be allowed to stick?

But I think you miss the point about [[m:person_DTD]].  First is mostly for dead people who now have nothing to hide, those who would be covered in any encyclopedia and their activities spread everywhere.  Second, it does notmean that all data is gathered on everyone.  Somewhere on the scale between [[w:Muhammad]] and anonymous trolls known only as a probability field of IP numbers, there you are:  higher if [[w:Total Information Awareness]] zeroes in on you, and lower if you work hard at [[w:security through obscurity]].  But somewhere on that scale you are, and if *you* cannot gather all information about yourself *someone else will* and then they hve it and you do not.  Do you have all quotes everywhere from yourself?  No but if you are dangerous enough to someone, they will get that.  Better for you to have it first.  Third, even a live person using [[m:personl_DTD]] to organize data about themselves for their own use would have some limits and ways to hide things, so focusing on such an extensive standard, as we would allow for a dead person with no body to protect and maybe no family either (who might lose rights to things if the way they were acquired was known!), will tend to yield the better privacy tools first.  But not to focus on it, hide it, stick head in sand, means only the bad guys like [[Big Brother]] get those tools first.  See?
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 OK, excellent, your conditions are good conditions to start, similar to those of [[w:journalism]].
-:Glad we have consensus.
 Yes, someday a fork will occur to go farther and engage in outright war.  But by being as far over at least as the investigative press ([http://disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=free_press now under attack]) will hold that day off longer.
-:The fear of Fork is a positive force; it makes me work harder.
 Sources like [http://truthout.org truthout], [http://hermes-press.com hermes press], [http://indymedia.org indymedia] and those trusted by [[w:Wikipedia]] might be a start.  If you can't get your claim to stick in wikipedia maybe it should not be allowed to stick?
-But I think you miss the point about [[m:person_DTD]].  First is mostly for dead people who now have nothing to hide, those who would be covered in any encyclopedia and their activities spread everywhere.  Second, it does notmean that all data is gathered on everyone.  Somewhere on the scale between [[w:Muhammad]] and anonymous trolls known only as a probability field of IP numbers, there you are:  higher if [[w:Total Information Awareness]] zeroes in on you, and lower if you work hard at [[w:security through obscurity]].  But somewhere on that scale you are, and if *you* cannot gather all information about yourself *someone else will* and then they have it and you do not.  Do you have all quotes everywhere from yourself?  No but if you are dangerous enough to someone, they will get that.  Better for you to have it first.  Third, even a live person using [[m:personl_DTD]] to organize data about themselves for their own use would have some limits and ways to hide things, so focusing on such an extensive standard, as we would allow for a dead person with no body to protect and maybe no family either (who might lose rights to things if the way they were acquired was known!), will tend to yield the better privacy tools first.  But not to focus on it, hide it, stick head in sand, means only the bad guys like [[Big Brother]] get those tools first.  See?
+But I think you miss the point about [[m:person_DTD]].  First is mostly for dead people who now have nothing to hide, those who would be covered in any encyclopedia and their activities spread everywhere.  Second, it does notmean that all data is gathered on everyone.  Somewhere on the scale between [[w:Muhammad]] and anonymous trolls known only as a probability field of IP numbers, there you are:  higher if [[w:Total Information Awareness]] zeroes in on you, and lower if you work hard at [[w:security through obscurity]].  But somewhere on that scale you are, and if *you* cannot gather all information about yourself *someone else will* and then they hve it and you do not.  Do you have all quotes everywhere from yourself?  No but if you are dangerous enough to someone, they will get that.  Better for you to have it first.  Third, even a live person using [[m:personl_DTD]] to organize data about themselves for their own use would have some limits and ways to hide things, so focusing on such an extensive standard, as we would allow for a dead person with no body to protect and maybe no family either (who might lose rights to things if the way they were acquired was known!), will tend to yield the better privacy tools first.  But not to focus on it, hide it, stick head in sand, means only the bad guys like [[Big Brother]] get those tools first.  See?
-:Hmmm. There is this theory that says that the net is going to go in a direction where "The watched are watching the watchers.", which would be kinda nice, but I still think that the digital elite will always have the edge.
-What is the application of person_DTD in cium in your opinion? Automatic [[w:nepotism]] through [[w:FOAF]]?
-The Wipedians are not going to be down with this. As to wikipedia, we should focus on [[m:spacetime_DTD]]. I know similar things have been proposed in the past but nothing has happened to implement them. It'd be really useful for lot's of people. Think how spacetime markup would speed up the recording and studying of known history.