Editing Talk:Licensed deliverables

Dividing the project into three parts:

*[[XML/DTD]] and [[XML/Schema]]
*[[ASN.1]] minimal bitstream protocol which make the same data distinctions;  
::ASN.1, some ITU/ISO formal notation from the eighties! Gimme a break. I mean that the ISO/OSI 7-layer network protocol stack works just great on paper and everything, but somehow everybody seems to just use TCP/IP, eventhough it doesn't have a mammoth of an standards organisation saying that it works.

:::ASN.1 is a notation, happens to be handy to achieve [[Minimum Message Length]].  Has no particular bias towards the OSI stack.  That's silly.

*[[Executable]]s which implement this protocol and data model / [[schema]] / [[foundation ontology]];  [[Label data]] which can and must be consistently gathered and is what is subject to [[audit]] most often - there will be a need to withdraw support from labels that are just propaganda and say nothing about actual impact on real bodies.  
::I could say that I don't care if some [[label]] is just propaganda and I don't want to judge what is just brainwashing and what is not. I want to get a system running that allows people and organisations that have [[expertise]] and historical, [[built trust]] in things like [[audit]], [[anti-brainwashing techniques]], [[fair]] [[economy]] and [[safe]] [[economy]] to have their say.

::You need then to know 1. who they are and who trusts them ([[social capital]]).  and 2. how they verify what they know ([[audit]], [[instructional capital]]), and 3. whose rules apply where.

:I ultimatelly mean that [[centrally controlled economy]] has already been tested and I recall that it didn't do so well, so I'd rather not see people trying to turn [[Consumerium]] into the [[Pravda]] (or [[centrally controlled information economy]]) of the [[market economy]]. 

::They will try to do that.  But you best control that by giving them things they *can* control, and making it clear where "your idea of [[fairness]]" vs. "their idea" applies.

We only need XML for now as all executables and labels data gathering will take place via very many means, one per faction say.  These may create their own [[consortium]] with their own [[consortium license]], e.g. [[Greens]] will not let weapons companies use theirs.

:This I must think about. Offhandedly you're not making any sense, but on the other hand this tingles as an interesting idea. Proprietary markup as an advantage... outrageous.

::Groups will all want to run their own if they don't have this control.  They have to feel like they "own" it

That problem will solve itself if you get the license and XML schema good enough to create a self-improving protocol.  There are many good coders, but they do not contribute to projects where others of different values are allowed to just do damage to their code or twist it to be useful to their enemies.  All code is political.  Look at WAR FTP if you want to see a good values-driven bit of protocol writing with a [[licnese]] to match.


--------

Very important:  What is the minimum deliverable?  Consumerium "hello world"?

Here is a troll's suggestion:

"Don't buy this.

XML schema establishes what 'buy' means, so all buying decisions are affected by the same [[Consumerium protocol]].  If 'this' is undisputed, i.e. there is some barcode that is recognized as attached to 'something like this', then there is some known and limited set of [[label data]] which some [[executable]] uses to say "Don't buy this" or just say nothing about that buying decision.  The label data is known to be compatible with both the XML schema and the executable, and the executable is known to say nothing if the issues with the buying decision are not those the consumer cares about.  This is like a [[ban]] or a [[boycott]].

A more sophisticated version would set a price to make up for whatever [[evil]] was done in creating and disposing of this product, and maybe accept a [[donation]] to make up for whatever damage if the buying happens, or suggest an alternative that does not do this damage.  It is like a [[tax]], only it expresses [[consumer]] not [[country]]'s ideas of [[sin]], and is again accounted for, and maybe also collected by, an executable the consumer trusts.