Tuesday, April 07, 2015

Enterprise 2000 revisited

Simon Wardley has reminded me that Mapping is the only way to the future.


So I decided to apply his technique to an old Vision that I once helped write.


Extend Human Capability and

Promote Global Collaboration by

Providing Continuous Natural Access to

People and Knowledge


Ah it's clear now that this must have come from Simon's Strategem Algorithm


What does it look like with Simon'sMapping applied?


Extend Entity Capability and

Promote Global Collabora-Things by

Providing Transparent & Trustworthy Natural Access to

Entities and Smart Knowledge

Hmmm perhaps I've missed the point?

But then I did write this last Wednesday!!


OK, so that is a hateful join of two things, in this case words! But that will be what we get, when we let Things join together willy nilly. Most of the Thing joins done out of sight, and not under our direct control will be neither fortuitous nor laudable.

I recall trying to contact the folks behind the current Thing joining standard, DLNA. I had hoped to find a group of individuals who were planning to build "Agency" into their standard, at least I was until I understood them to be an association of Thing Manufacturers. When I understood the FLA, it stands for Digital Living Network Alliance, it became clearer, their goal is to let things connect to share data, mostly media related data. Put plainly DLNA servers publish all media files they hold to any and all compliant DLNA clients.

My conversation with them, was short and not so sweet, it resulted in them not understanding why I might not want any DLNA compliant thing to be able find and connect to any DLNA compliant server on my network. It ended with me being told "if you don't want them (the DLNA servers) to be connected to, then switch them off!" They clearly didn't understand my point or motivation. I wanted to add human agency to the DLNA standard, and they didn't see the need.

There are other Media related sharing standards, like Apple's proprietary AirPlay. Apple made the sharing activity human centric, the server in this case a smart phone or IPad will only share to a client under the direct control of a human. Putting the AirPlay Server under the control of the user, rather than allowing the user to use an AirPlay Client to browse all servers, is IMHO the right thing to do, Human Agency was put at the right point in the process of sharing.

As a test I placed a "Inappropriate Media File "on one of my disks that acts as an DLNA server, and tried to make it unavailable to my television, so that my Grandchildren could not stumble upon said file. The fellows from DLNA was right. If I didn't want the file to be available to my Grandkids, I needed to turn off the DLNA service on the disk. Be aware that when DLNA servers are enabled, "any" DLNA enabled client on a network can browse the files so published.

When it was just about sharing Media, perhaps Agency wasn't a high priority, as users could be relied on to not publish inappropriate material on their private networks. In truth, apart from the fact that they can't be relied upon, this also ignores the porosity of most home networks, that is few Betworks are private.

If I were a musician or filmmaker I would be concerned that my material was being published on DLNA servers, connected behind porous network routers. For I can imagine an illicit media service that reaches into the deperimeterised home networks to map, and provide access to the worlds DLNA published media.

As Things become more capable, and they start controlling each other, building Human Agency into the protocols that allow the Things to collaborate will surely be a necessity? Not just from the view points of Intellectual Property, and Privacy, but also from the view points of Fiduciary and Personal Safety.

Alternatively we can build Things that can think and act Autonomously, applying human values to their decisions, and Asimovs Four Laws of Robotics will apply!

Is Small and Simple really the best way to avoid complexity?

Alternate Title: Should we Exploit, Manage or Avoid Emergent Behaviour in the Internet of Things

Complicated is not the same a Complex, as those who study Complexity theory know well. Some of these theorists, posit that Complicated Systems can be designed, with behaviour that can be both predicted and controlled, while Complex Systems cannot. Complex Systems are normally found when a large number of smaller components or entities with similar goals are found in a specific domain. Their individual behaviour cannot be easily predicted but the emergent behaviours can often be divined once they have started to emerge. However it is not clear that they can be divined from a given set of starting points and/or constraints.

Computer Modelling of Complex Systems are increasingly used to develop theories as profound as the existence of dark matter, or the Location of Black holes. By running the increasingly detailed models enough times the required starting conditions are being established.

One of the outcomes of the increasingly detailed instrumentation of humanity is the fact that our every move and intention are being observed and collected by Things that are being given goals.

These Things are being connected in increasingly complex matrices or fabrics. We are creating the conditions of a Complex System in the Internet of Things. Complexity Theory predicts that there will be emergent behaviours.

Have any such emergent behaviours already surfaced?

Who is accountable for detecting, observing or regulating such behaviours?

What are the starting conditions for Autonomy to emerge as a new behaviour from this Network of Things?

Would we be allowed to become aware of the conditions that would allow the creation of this emergent behaviour? For after all the Computer Models would be under the control of the Things!

Why am I being reminded of Mice? Oh yes, they were the authors of the code to find "The question!", given the answer to Life the Universe and Everything was 42!. In this case Arthur Dent, the supposed sole survivor of the planet Earth, was the Thing that developed autonomous behaviour. As I recall he wasn't very happy to discover he was simply part of a System to divine a question.


Tuesday, March 31, 2015

When should a machine remove Agency from a Human?

The answer is not simple, but certainly when the human in question is breaking the Zeroth AND First Laws of Robotics.

       0. A robot may not harm humanity, or, by inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.
  1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
  2. A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
  3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.[1]

Surely I can't be the only person to ask:
"Why did the plane let him fly all those passengers into a mountain?"


I suspect Andreas Lubitz will be used as an exemplar for years to come as we see machines being given more and more authority to over-ride the risky instructions of mere mortals. This is one of those times in history when new principles are developed.

The new Principle can be written quite Simply as "Humans can't be Trusted!"

The same week as Andreas took his life and the life of 149 others, Ford launched a car that can "prevent you from speeding"

I posit that Things will be enacting more and more of our rules for us.
So can I suggest we start getting really good at writing Rules.

For if the Rule is bad the Thing will still enact it!

Saturday, February 28, 2015

Why the swing from Privacy to Agency?

I suspect have been asked this question via the many quizzical looks I have noticed on the occasions I espoused Agency over Privacy, but I sadly I read "confusion" rather than "question".

So recently I have been considering why I was not so "into" Agency in the past, and why I am now.

I had toyed with Primacy over Privacy in the early days of the Jericho Forum, indeed the word Primacy appears in the Identity Commandments.

It has recently struck me that the reason is very similar to the deep feelings of discomfort I experienced in my early forays into Second Life. The digital and physical world are starting to converge and in that convergence we have some new things to learn, and perhaps more importantly some new things to gain control of.

So to revisit my second life experiences, my first foray was more about understanding the interface and how to build things and dress myself in this new virtual world. I was happily immersed in these challenges (I still am not sure why I chose an animal skin cat suit) when I accidentally bumped into another virtual being. It was a visceral shock, I did not like the fact that I had absolutely no identity or trust cues. In fact I hated it so much I stayed clear for a fair while, and on the odd occasions I did venture back in, I worked hard to find deserted locations to play, in order to be "in control". If I couldn't be "Private" I sensed myself going into "Tube" mode. The way I am, and act, when travelling on the underground; in close proximity to a large number of strangers, I basically work hard to ignore them, pretending they are not real!

The time I did go into second life to interact with another virtual entity, was when I was being chaperoned by "Byn". She was a virtual world expert in my eyes, and most importantly I knew and trusted her. The experience was far more akin to real life and I felt like I was there, but most importantly I felt in control. Thus I sense that my issue was not really my desire for Privacy but rather my desire to be "in control". In short, I have an innate desire for agency! So perhaps my first swing from Digital Privacy to Digital or Cyber Agency was triggered by Second Life.

With the accelerating emergence of the Internet of Things the Digital and Physical worlds are colliding again.  Instead of the Physical world being instantiated Virtually in the Digital World, as in Second Life, this time the Digital World is being Physically instantiated in the Physical World.

We are learning how to make digital things physical in a new way. We have done this mechanically and indeed electrically for a long time. After all a thermostat and a heater are two components, or a thing, that translates a desired digital outcome, or a digital intent, into physical reality: "I want the temperature in the room to be 20 degrees Centigrade."

The fact that we are networking the sensor and the heater and giving them an API does not seem too important until we realise that now anyone on the planet, with the right skills, can chose to set the temperature of our room to whatever temperature they chose. The dangerous thing about this latest Digital / Physical interconnect is that there are no means to identify the lack of trust cues.

We have no simple means of knowing if we are in control of a thing and when we lose it.  How many of you spotted the new Frequent Locations service embedded by Apple deep in the bowels of iOS on your iPhone.

As an aside: Tim Cook please also shift from Privacy to Agency,your focus on Privacy  I accept that you "are" working hard to protect our Privacy from Nasty State Agencies. May I remind you that you have also been working hard to reduce our Agency or the degree of control we have over our Cyber Space. While I accept that Apple is not the only organisation hell bent on turning people from fungible resources into revenue generators. Locking us into your walled garden while carefully and subtly reducing our degrees of freedom, is not what I want from an organisation that wants to gain and maintain my trust.

The first organisation that truly empowers me, with an agent service that acts on MY behalf, will get my vote and perhaps most importantly access to my wallet. Indeed the first organisation that helps me to monetise my information whilst keeping me in control of that same information will be a hero in my eyes.

So, why the swing from Privacy to Agency? : I want to be able to be the agent of my own destiny in this ever more connected world of Things.

Agency gives me control and allows me to select and achieve many more things than the Privacy/Transparency choice.

Light, Heat, Nutrition, Health, Making, Wealth, Learning, Entertainment, Supporting Others, Charity, Security to name but a few.

Tuesday, February 24, 2015

Death: The Ultimate Cyber Agency Challenge

To recap, Cyber Agency is the control an individual has over their cyber space. Most of us do a very poor job of managing our Cyber Space. This is caused primarily because today our cyber space is made up of myriads of slices of enterprise Cyber Space, In the battle to win bigger shares of control over us, our Cyber Space providers are trying to attract us to use more and more of their "free services".

As an example, where is all the music to which you have license? In the past you might have said "music you own", that was however when we purchased physical objects containing the music. (In my own case, I find the answer to be unknown to me, I remember 3 service providers and have control of two but have an inkling that I have forgotten a couple, there was that incident in the last century where a disk crashed on my PC. I never really did recover from that, emotionally or archivaly. When I take into account the devices that contain my music, and then There was also that Russian Music service that provided cheap music...

I estimate that I have more than 25 Cyber Music Slices.

I won't bang on about all the myriads of Identities I have been forced to create on Vendor websites, I know I have forgotten more than I maintain control over, some of these are still costing me, as I regularly discover. The British Legion each year nicks another wodge of cash from my bank account. During the Iraqi war in a moment of giving I signed up to give them a donation. I must have ticked the wrong box, as the war is a distant memory, and I am still giving. However, as it is just after Poppy Day, I am reminded of the fact that I didn't buy one again, so end up not trying to figure out how to cancel the never ending donation. I did once and failed after 30 minutes of trying... and ended up frustrated and still poorer, but at least it's going to a good cause, right? But as the myriads of Identities in the main do not have too much of any import, I will focus on financially impactful identities. I lose my credit cards often enough that the credit card numbers I give to websites become quickly defunct. Perhaps this is a strategy I should actively engage in?! Yes, I think I will lose my Internet Credit Card each year, if I haven't already!

Attaining, let alone maintaining control over our Digital Assets is a task we keep promising ourselves that we will do. But the task is becoming ever more difficult as our Cyber Space is being sliced into ever thinner wedges. Too often we do not even notice our Cyber Space being split into ever more and thinner slices.We do this to ourselves when we by new and more devices, often from different suppliers. We also do this to ourselves when we attempt to file something and create a special folder for it, forgetting that we already have 3 other special folders for precisely the file type and content that this one was. A rough tally of my folders across multiple storage slices quickly exceeds 1,000... Aaargh!

Digital photos is the next domain starting to be dominated and sliced by our "free service" providers. Here I am even more confused, as Apple, just one of my providers, and with my connivance, has now managed somehow to create 11 different places where I can find our photos stored! How did that happen?! I am not even counting the 6 different iPhoto Archives I have created over the years. Last week I wanted a photo that I knew I had taken, I knew the camera and rough date, it is still not found:-( When I take into account the myriad of non Apple devices that take and store my photos the number of Photo Cyber Slices quickly approaches 50, I suspect it exceeds that number, but I have not the patience to even count them, let alone try to attain control over them. Oh yes I should also remember the myriad of storage cards of various types dotted round the house and in various devices. Many of these I can no longer even read! I still have an early Apple QuickTake? camera that creates a file type that not even Apple iPhoto deigns to acknowledge. I am sure it still has photos in it.... Oh! wait did I count the DJI drone? So yes, way more then 50 Cyber Photo slices. I just realised that of course I meant all images, moving and still! I wonder if those cine films are still readable!? I know the BetaMax tape I kept as a keep sake has long since become unreadable. I hope the Peacefull Valley Dude ranch VHS video is still readable.

Perhaps the most divisive of the Cyber Space slicers, is the growing band of free storage space providers. DropBox, Google Drive, iCloud (or whatever Apple is calling it this week) are just few of the myriad free cyber storage space providers. (Naturally I have one of every one that I can lay my hands on. After all it is free, and like my brother I encourage others to take up space in my new found storage provider as that gives me even more free space.) I am truly at a loss to define a number for my different Cyber Storage Slices, let's say 20? Seems conservative...

I can only imagine how many new Cyber Space slices will exist in my Cyber Space when the Internet of Things properly kicks in, as all things will naturally come with their own cloud data store. What self respecting thing would ever come into existence without a place in the cloud to store all it's sensor data. The number of these slices rapidly approaches a large number, today I have 15 temperature sensors in our household, that I know of, I assumed two in each car, I suspect there are many more.

So my rough prediction of cyber slices that will be in existence when I die will be well north of 5,000. I predict that at that time I will only have agency over less than 10% of them, and be "in control" of a handful.

Inside each of those slices might be between a dozen or 10,000 files.

I can only hope that my Digital Agent will attain wondrous curation skills before I die, as I know in my heart of hearts that I won't do it. I can only apologies in advance for the sad state of affairs that my family will find themselves attempting to handle.

So the next Cyber Space service industry that will need come into existence, if the Agents do not step up to the mark, is Cyber Space Curation of the Dead. Navigating the myriad of different Organisational procedures to wrestle back cyber agency of the dear departed will not be a trivial task! Just finding the slices is going to be hard enough! Whether there is anything value in all those slices is an entirely different matter! Future Data Archeologists may disagree, but perhaps the most prevalent response will be to erase the lot! To Adam and Christopher I have hidden the number of my Swiss bank account in one of those slices! ;-) (Not really!)

Now all I need is a suitable Cyber Slices of the Dead Graphic...

Sunday, January 11, 2015

Wait! my dreams are being mapped into Reality!

In this case, Mapping comes in the form of Clues, rather than @swardleys eminent Mapping approach.

If you haven't read the ClueTrain then do...

But perhaps more importantly read the NewClues: http://cluetrain.com/newclues/

At the end of the preface Doc Searles and David Weinberger state:

We, the People of the Internet, need to remember the glory of its revelation so that we reclaim it now in the name of what it truly is.

They solved my klutzy and limiting "We, the People of the World...", with the use of the key word Internet, an even more expansive version might start... "We, the Entities of the Internet..."

My ONLY quibble is their use of the word "is", for in their own minds they know that we can't know what "it" is, we can only extract Clues that point what it "truly can be!" Though perhaps they think they covered that with their use of "in the name of"

As they are the pre-eminent Clue extractors, I implore you again: "Read the New Clues."

I warn you, to truly grok them, the Clues that is, you will need to read them more than once and preferably in groups...

...Clue Clubs anyone?



Sunday, January 04, 2015

Digital Feudalism!

I have been discussing on the importance of "Digital Agency" and the need for a "Digital Magna Carta", but the phrase I was looking for just jumped out at me from this article.

The phrase is Digital Feudalism, we seem to be happily sleep walking into a new form of feudal society where the digital behemoths, and a few very agile and forward thinking startups, are happily hoovering up every ounce of digital agency they can. Sadly, they are not just hoovering up the digital bytes that allow us to maintain control of our own environments, they are also capturing as much data as they possibly can, in order to enable them to, know our every whim and desire, and predict our future desires before we ourselves know them. It is this rather spooky activity that has caused those who regulate our societies to focus on Privacy as the key aspect to legislate, rather than the broader and more important aspect of maintaining control of our digital selves, and our environment. This aspect I have labelled Digital Agency. Sociologists and Philosophers are very comfortable that the word agency pertains to the degree of control an entity is able to exert on their environment. In normal usage we are comfortable with the use of the word when it relates to passing our agency to a third party or agent. In fact so comfortable that we are transferring our control ever more completely to the new power brokers, the Digital Feudalists, or Uber Class.

The term "Uber for X", where X is the new industry being targeted by the Digital Feudalists, is starting to create fear in the traditional organisations, used to providing goods and services in the current economic model. Will they be next to be taken out? We should expect them to try and turn us into their digital serfs as rapidly as they know how.

What then, is Digital Feudalism and what are the underlying bets? Digital Feudalism is the act of making Serfs out of both the provider and the consumer. There are two types of serfs in this new model. Firstly the physical serf, the indentured front line provider of the service in question, they are basically providing the labour capital at the lowest possible cost to provide the physical aspects of the digitised service in question (NB Where possible the new Feudal Lords aim to eliminate the need to use human labour in the provision of their services.) The second serf type, is the entity we used to call Customer, they are the indentured digital consumers of the relevant service. In both cases these serfs are bound by an indented** contract to their digital feudal Lord, whether Uber, Google , or O2, (one of the earliest of the new Digital Feudalists in their initial BT Cellnet guise.)

**The indents in the two physical copies of a contract were used to identify the documents as the same contract. Hence the word indentured. Trust and Identity are at the root of so many of our legal and social systems.

Regulators existed in the communications space, who understood the importance of the freedom of choice and ability to move from provider to provider, thus number mobility and the ability to change providers were swiftly regulated. However, the control over the data created by mobile communication devices has not yet been put back into the hands of the rightful owners of that data, as Telefonica the owners of O2 have demonstrated with the creation of Telefónica Dynamic Insights. For that matter nor has the control over the mobile communications devices themselves been put into the hands of the owners of those devices. This is related topic, which describes the importance of our having agency over our Things.

On then to the underlying bets, the key bet of the Digital Feudalists is that there will always be enough digital serfs with the economic capacity to purchase their services, another bet is that there will always be enough physical serfs willing to provide the few remaining required physical activities at below market rates.

An underlying bet is that the human resources making up both types of serfs will be happy to treated as fungible assets. Willing to be treated like cattle or perhaps worse the beets fed to the cattle.

Finally, they are betting on gaining access to our collective digital assets at no charge, at least not from the rightful owners of those digital assets.

It is not clear that our regulators are up to the task of ensuring that Digital Agency rests in the hands of the related entities, whether individuals or organisations. At present they seem to be focussing on prescribing opaque windows in the bathrooms of houses built on the edge of a Volcano. We are in the process of losing control of our individual environments, let alone the data we create in them, and perhaps worse the means of creating wealth from our skills and digital assets. Hence the importance of creating a Digital Magna Carta, that defines and prescribes the key Digital Rights that any entity should hold dear. Such a document would be a useful signpost to enable us, and those that govern us to navigate the next decade, as humanity struggles to address the major social upheavals involved in changing from one economic model to another.

One question that occurs to me is that when all the population of the planet are digital serfs, and that the last vestiges of labour have been expunged by automation from the production process, what then? The film Zardoz springs to mind!

A disquieting thought from the article I referred to at the start of this blog, that you may or may not have read, is that the growth in inequality is higher in San Francisco than it is in Mumbai.

On the up side, the most positive thought was also found in the article:

"Whatever the outcome, the younger generations show a tendency toward being empowered citizens valuing co-creation and sharing rather than becoming consumers."

So what should we be doing about Digital Feudalism, this question is as relevant to business owners, and those that govern us, as it is to ourselves as individuals. Or will we just sit back and let the Millenials deal with it?

Methinks that it is not a good idea for us, the ever aging part of the population, to leave them, the Millenials, with the impression that we thought it was a good idea for them to be treated as fungible assets. They may just jump to the conclusion that the concept should naturally apply even more strongly to the old and decrepit part of the human labour pool!?

Perhaps we need more than a Digital Magna Carta...

"We the People, of the planet Earth, on order to form a more perfect global community...

Now I know I'm dreaming!! ;-)


Thursday, December 18, 2014

A Thing I lost control of....

The announcement of the UK prices for the BEBOP, triggered in me a desire to acquire one, despite :
1) The UK price was higher than both Europe and US prices
2) My prior drone from them had flown off into the wide blue yonder, refusing to respond to any commands, never to be seen again.

This was the contents of the email I just sent them.

So despite my awful experience with my previous drone from you (Parrot Case n° 076016), I plucked up the courage to try you again.

I tried to order a Bebop using the "buy now” button you kindly emailed me…. yeah right!

So after much clicking I then figured out i could get it cheaper from the US including the Import Duty
So I clicked buy from Amazon US, when I thought I wonder what the Customer Reviews are like?

And lo! A spate of "it flew straight up and out of sight" instances…

Funny! that’s exactly what happened to my previous Parrot! ...and despite spending hours trying to persuade you to replace it I got nowhere,

I was quite surprised how I quickly I had forgotten the pain.

Needless to say the negative reviews brought the pain back with a rush….

Happily I was just in time to cancel my order, needless to say I was much relieved.

So to close, my DJI Phantom 2 Video should arrive in time for Christmas and is also going to cost me less. 


That was a mighty close shave!
A still frustrated Ex Parrot Owner, to mis-quote a famous parrot sketch

Mr. Praline: 'Ello, I wish to register a complaint…. I wish to complain about this parrot
….e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, flew off into the sky and joined the bleedin' choir invisible!! THIS IS AN EX-PARROT!!
Owner: "We have a Bebop!?”


Owner: N-no, I guess not. (gets ashamed, looks at his feet)

Have a reasonably quiet Christmas, but please deal with the myriad of Lost or Damaged Bebop complaints better than you did my Parrot complaint. I will keep scanning for the class action, and instantly join it!

Adrian and Ex Parrot owner.

Remember folks it is important to be able to maintain control over your Things.
Anyone designing a Thing that either leaves them in control of it, or no-one in control of it should feel the full weight of the law on their shoulders. Sadly as with all things legal, the law has yet to catch up with the full implications of Cyber Agency, or lack there-of!

Have a Great Christmas

And be careful about choosing your things....

I was lucky that Parrot had chosen to over-price their thing, as this caused me to see the US Amazon reviews on the Bebop!

Post Blog Note

I just received this email bounce back!

Thank you for contacting Parrot UK technical support.

In order to streamline our support process and improve the level of service we offer to our customers we are currently making changes to the way enquiries are handled, as such this email address is no longer active. Please follow the link below to complete our new online support form and we will be in contact shortly.

Our opening hours are Monday – Thursday 9am – 5.30pm and Friday 9am – 4.30pm.

Sorry for any inconvenience, your enquiry is important to us and we look forward to hearing from you.

=====  !!!!!!!  =====   !!!!!
I suppose it's little wonder they have stopped folks emailing them!

Aside: I wonder when the news media is going to pick up on the idea of rogue drones with software flaws "<"Think: Mind of it's own!">" flying off out of control and creating mayhem....