Article 40 of the Magna Carta (1215) embodies in one sentence the concept of Agency.
I was listening to a radio news article on the troubles besetting Egypt, when “agency" reared its head again…. For me having "agency" involves not having my rights, sold, delayed or denied.
#40 To no one will we sell, to no one deny or delay right or justice.
The binary agency/control option is quite apparently the issue, with the Egyptian voters being given a fools choice.
Option 1) No i.e. you want the Prior Constitution which established the Muslim Brotherhood as the only option leading to a Police State
Option 2) Yes to the New Military Constitution which establishes the Military as the only option leading to a Police State
Getting the "Balance of Agency" right is never easy, I can’t see any easy way out, while neither side wants to truly create a pluralist society. I would commend those developing a new Egyptian Constitution to take the best parts of the Magna Carta.
The same goes for the Internet...
Option 1) Enterprise Centric …. leads to exploitation of consumers data, and thus the consumers
Option 2) Network Centric …. leads to exploitation of consumers data, and thus the consumers
Option 3) Service Centric …. leads to exploitation of consumers data, and thus the consumers
Option 4) Device Centric …. leads to exploitation of consumers data, and thus the consumers
While Option 2) Network Centric Is currently dominant
(I hold the News Corporations to be part of the Network Centric Option, along with Broadcasters and Network Providers, in my mind Network is not just the wires.)
(I hold the News Corporations to be part of the Network Centric Option, along with Broadcasters and Network Providers, in my mind Network is not just the wires.)
We are currently in a battle, perhaps as yet unrecognised, between the Service and Device Options for dominance. Clearly the Network Players will continue to fight to maintain their valuable, to them, dominance. Sadly it appears that all the potential winners want to sell, delay, or deny our data rights.
Put more starkly: Who will rule us, through our data, Google or Samsung?
(Apple is still straddling the fence between the two options but by targeting only the wealthier, they will likely be also rans.)
Amazon might be the white knight, if they help build an agency enabling ecosystem that gets the balance right. At present they are seemingly fighting for dominance in option 3, but they are not averse to fence sitting, with devices sold at a loss, if it helps them achieve dominance.
I don’t really like any of the above numbered options; where are the options that allow for the balance of control between providers and consumers. I am not looking for a compromise(d) option, I am asking is there a "Fourth Way"?
Do we need an Internet Magna Carta that focuses not on an individuals right to Privacy, but more on the right of entities and Society to control how their data are used. A charter that does not allow the selling, delay or denial of our data rights.
The intriguing thought I have is that the e-trust ecosystem designed to deliver on the needs defined in an as yet unwritten Internet Magna Carta, might be used to solve the wider societal difficulties that we face; as factions, formed from religion, tribe or dogma continue to rip our plant apart. Only this week we had a world leader get embroiled in an affair of the heart which interfered with the affairs of his state. We also had an individual chose to eat the raw limb of an opponent he had slaughtered as retribution for the loss of his own family members, we are living in a crazy world.
Clearly criminals would not be allowed to hide evidence of their crimes, nor Leaders hide their true values, but isn't it reasonable for us to want entities to have balanced agency?
Clearly criminals would not be allowed to hide evidence of their crimes, nor Leaders hide their true values, but isn't it reasonable for us to want entities to have balanced agency?
Let’s build an e-trust eco-system that helps hold our leaders accountable, and achieve an agency balance that; supports rights of many different factions, encourages the growth of enterprises with the right values, ensures the continuation of a trustworthy global communications network, helps reward the development of valuable services, and creates a demand for devices that are valued. We might call this Internet (or Social Media) enabled phenomena Social Capitalism! Either way “Agency" in the new system should be balanced in favour of no ONE entity or organisation.
Intel has written a paper on the upcoming Data Society in which they wrote "Today, we do not control most of our personal information. People in the future may "want to have more transparency and control over the use of their data." and perhaps more importantly: "We don’t know enough about our own data, and its value."
Intel has written a paper on the upcoming Data Society in which they wrote "Today, we do not control most of our personal information. People in the future may "want to have more transparency and control over the use of their data." and perhaps more importantly: "We don’t know enough about our own data, and its value."
I hope that this new option will be “Value(s) Centric"
With an e-trust ecosystem in place perhaps we could build a Pluralist Outside-In Society?
I believe that this would be as valuable for the enterprises currently being marginalised in the batlle for dominance as will be to the consumers who are being increasingly exploited.
Whether Extremist Christians or Extremist Muslims would be happy to live in such a society is another matter.
With an e-trust ecosystem in place perhaps we could build a Pluralist Outside-In Society?
I believe that this would be as valuable for the enterprises currently being marginalised in the batlle for dominance as will be to the consumers who are being increasingly exploited.
Whether Extremist Christians or Extremist Muslims would be happy to live in such a society is another matter.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks in advance for sharing your thoughts...