Profiling in the News: Was: RE: Taxonomies, URN's etc..

[Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>]

Title: Profiling in the News: Was: RE: Taxonomies, URN's etc.

Hi all, the part between the rows of asterisks was written last night, but couldn't be sent until now, so I changed the Subject Line.

I want to call your attention to InternetWeek's lead research topic today: Privacy vs. Personalization since this group is already included, through Ranjeeth and I, in the cc: lists for the xml.gov group that is studying the issue.

http://www.internetweek.com

 It should also be noted in passing that the Justice Dept. just requested the lower court to expedite the Microsoft case, looking for a penalty ruling sooner rather than later so that the case can be heard in the Supreme Court sooner rather than later. What this means for MS bundling all manner of stuff with its OS and calling it INNOVATION instead of MONOPOLY, I don't know. Hailstorm, .NET et al is the underlying issue, and that includes Passport, and included in Passport is a real good chance that MS will extend its monopolistic policies to human profiles used in its web services. Since they have not provided any information on what their IPR and copyright policy is going to be with regard to this information, I don't know, nor does anyone else that I have read yet.

This is not meant to alarm anyone, just to keep you informed and abreast of this news.

********************

Uh? I wasn't prescribing a course of action, especially not immediate, just making a prognostication based on observation in a thread that is not even among those we currently are considering for any sort of action. That's why I said probable, and it is probable. It may not be inevitable. I hope not. I was citing your example as one for physical description in the context of identification. Especially from a customer use view. However, it is also from the driving force of the customer use view that I think Human Identifiers will be among the first applications that will be built with HumanML, and that's what I should have said, instead of just saying HumanML will  probably tackle this area, implying that we would make this effort rather than application builders.

So, to clarify, I think that Human Identifiers, and probably in a broader sense than physical descriptor parameters,by which I mean medical parameters, if not also social parameters, will be among the first applications HumanML will be likely be used for enhancing.

Um, I don't know exactly how to broach this without stepping on your toes, or anyones, but how we want to build this language, or think it ought to be done, and try as hard as we will to make it happen in a sane and reasonable fashion, it will happen as it happens. I hope it happens as you prescribe here, but I would caution against prescription, and advise advice. You are our mentor, and are entitled, as is anyone, to your own style and I recognize it as such, but newcomers might not.

As for the repository function, I think that will also happen, though certainly not in the initial stages, like the next two years or so, but whether it happens with purpose aforethought or willy nilly in the aftermath of the next shakeout, after the next boomlet, remains to be seen.

Talking about it makes sense. Entering into the debate over it which is taking place right now, also makes sense. Doing it? Nah.

As for EMOTE, I didn't have the time or energy to clarify much about that yesterday evening, nor do I now, but I will try to do more of that tomorrow. BTW, I think it will probably turn out to be middleware that we use, but don't build in to our language because I don't think we need to. I need to study it some more and find out how their parameter syntax works, but I think we can choose to assign Shape and Effort Sets, which involve their entire range of parameters, to represent key positions corresponding to our gesture/states, when we get there. WHEN we get there, using a process such as you have described in other emails today,  not now.

Keywords: Probability, Timing.

***********************

I will correspond with Jan Albeck today to request a better understanding of their EMOTE parameters syntax. I have a Word document that I can forward if I get permission, if anyone wants to look at it in a raw state.

Ciao,

Rex

At 11:10 AM -0500 8/28/01, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:

> Just do a basic system of physical
> descriptors
> and stop.  That's one module.  It can be
> extended later.  I am ready to be convinced otherwise but
> only by coded examples.  Do not constrain the
> use, do not become the repository, do not otherwise
> open the scope to initiatives which we have neither
> the resources nor commitments to manage.
>
> What I coded was an example used between a
> fingerprint system and an arrest database.  It is
> real, it is working, and it represents a customer
> use view of data.  It was provided only to show
> that identification is a process, not a data type
> that is independent of a system.  What we need now
> are examples just as the EMOTE data provides a
> working example of a set of parameters for communicating
> with a character animation. That enables us to
> look at our prototype schema fragments and determine
> where extensions might be made.   A solid data
> description 
> will be far more reusable than a complex class
> description wanting implementation.
>
> We are already tied to OASIS.  Leave that exactly as
> it is and do not open more liaisons unless the
> community approaches this one to work under the
> OASIS authority.  Otherwise, we are starting a
> never-ending project that will not deliver.
>
> Len
> http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard
>
> Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
> Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com]
>
> HumanML will probably first
> tackle the area of Human Identifiers, including physical
> parameters--for personal medical information--and certification,
> whether as a certifier itself, heaven forbid, or as the arbiter of
> such through the auspices of the only totally non-profit,
> non-proprietary, uncentralized, and also, non-governmental and
> therefore unbiased, in legal terminology, repository of
> information
> authorized by individuals themselves.
>
> To understand that think of Profiling. Whether creating a profile
> for
> a Human Object that is the representation of a software agent or
> an
> actual person, HumanML will have a breadth and depth that allows
> for
> more areas of information than other database-centric systems
> created
> primarily for authentication of identity purposes such as Len
> described yesterday. As such HumanML will likely play a role. What
> that role will be is far from clear, but that is certainly an area
> that will deserve some dedicated work.
>
> One question which came up was longevity, and I suspect that we
> need
> to establish ties to as many academic and governmental computer
> installations as possible in order to ensure that our DISTRIBUTED
> repository structure will have a life of its own as long as the
> Internet does at least. Tying ourselves to OASIS or any specific
> industry consortium or group or association, is fraught with the
> typical dangers of business in general and the politics of
> consortia
> in particular. They are actually fairly stable, but while OASIS is
> a
> bit of an exception, they tend to be braking mechanisms, serving
> to
> prolong the shelf life of extant business product.

-- 

Rex Brooks
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison, Berkeley, CA, 94702 USA, Earth
W3Address: http://www.starbourne.com
Email: rexb@starbourne.com

Tel: 510-849-2309
Fax: By Request