Bureaucrats, developer, Administrators
9,842
edits
User talk:DanKeshet/scratchpad: Difference between revisions
moved
No edit summary |
(moved) |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Many orgs already gather data. See [[essential projects]] and [[interesting projects]]. But they don't put it in a format that can be filtered for one-purchase at a time for various people's criteria. That's the objective here. At least so far. | Many orgs already gather data. See [[essential projects]] and [[interesting projects]]. But they don't put it in a format that can be filtered for one-purchase at a time for various people's criteria. That's the objective here. At least so far. | ||
And, yes, you're right, the [[Signal Wiki]] will be simple. It will not look like this [[Development Wiki]]. It probably won't use the same software, for instance. Ideally it would use what [[Metaweb]] creates. | |||
If you think the end user vision is wrongheaded, well, write up some [[worst cases]] about it failing. Otherwise there's nothing specific to discuss. | On the UI issue: | ||
There's no reason not to distribute data on what's in the store in book form, even customized book form. You could for instance slide a [[frequent buyer card]] into a slot, and get a printed book with [[price premium]] information customized to you, or generic information like a score. It might even get printed at the [[retail shelf]] someday if some nation decides to require it - the first step to [[Consumerium Country]]. There's no bias as to how the signal is delivered. That's the main reason the language IS so abstract right now, actually. | |||
:These options are now covered properly at [[Consumerium buying signal]]. | |||
If you think the existing default end user vision is wrongheaded, well, write up some [[worst cases]] about it failing. Otherwise there's nothing specific to discuss. Write up some [[best cases]] with a book or guide at the shelf. The whole reason to solicit these [[use case]]s is to figure this kind of stuff out. | |||
But there are several points of [[Consumerium Service access]], and they would have to key on some product identifier, and the [[barcode]] is the standard one. We also know that it gets scanned at the [[checkout counter]], so it might just be a matter of adding up a [[score]], like a game. There might be benefits or a reward scheme for buying moral products. But sometimes just to know your score is valuable. There's merit to treating it like a game, where you are EXPECTED to memorize or just shift habits so as to buy more ethically. | |||
But all of these things would still require someone to [[barcode scan]] to be sure what the product was. | |||
:This gets done anyways in the [[checkout counter]], by the store staff, thus getting the [[GTIN]] codes transferred en masse to your mobile terminal [[Checkout Consumerium]] will allow for you to download your [[list of things you bought]] to your home computer and view the [[Consumerium buying signal]] from there a posteriori and '''use this to change your shopping habits the next time you go to the store''' | |||
:If you can get a [[list of things you bought]] in digital form as envisioned in [[Checkout Consumerium]] you can pick that book/leaflet/magazine up at home or even better download the [[GTIN]] codes to your home computer and start browsing away what you have. --[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 10:35, 12 Mar 2004 (EET) | |||
And it's a fantasy to believe that companies whose behaviour is exposed by the [[Consumerium Services]] as undesirable would not try to interfere legally. We would have to be damn sure of our data. This isn't a [[Wikipedia]] type wankfest of amateurs. This data is supposed to be reliable enough to bet on. The whole [[ConsuML]] proposal is about drawing on data from many sources to dump into [[Consumerium:intermediate page]]s, and hopefully not creating new data that would have to be verified by volunteers here. | |||