Privacy, Identity and personal data are the new politics, religion andsex of after dinner fall outs

Ask a group of friends to define any of the following words:- private, privacy, trust, sharing, personal data, data, rights or context and whilst you may start the evening as friends; you may well end the evening questioning ideologies.  Privacy, Identity and personal data have become the new politics, religion and sex conversation topics that we should not discuss. But why? My personal view is that, just like politics, religion and sex, we all start from different points (knowledge and mood today), with varying expectations (outcomes) and personal experiences (crosses to bare).  This opinion piece is about the different starting points and not expectations or personal experience; as we get to read about expectations from daily FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) articles that form fabulous NEWS headlines, and personal experiences as well, they’re personal. This opinion is not trying to convert or sway anyone from their trusted viewpoint; the purpose is to present a framework that

Rob Reid: The $8 billion iPod - why sometimes numbers just don't help the case

Once you have watched the video, read the 100+ comments on TED Personally, I took the simple message get the numbers and facts related to your message correct or it will undermine the principal

A structural model for Identity based on certification, recognition, reputation and anonymity.

I have been thinking for a while about a model that describes the interdependencies between public, private, identity, reputation and privacy (laws).  This is mostly driven by the need to try and find an approach to define different types of “identity” based on characteristics that have some degree of stability and repeatability. The first “public” version of this model is represented in hand drawing below, and I would love feedback, input and criticism.   The vertical axis represents the perceptions of how people can be perceived by everyone else; this provides a range from a private citizen (general public) to a public figure (politician). The horizontal axis represents the how we conduct ourselves from being a private self (protected) to being public (15 seconds of fame) The quadrants are defined by the extremes of the axis definitions as follows: Obscurity - a private citizen who wants to remain private. An example at an extreme is a hermit, but this category tries to incorporate

ScreenAgers, brand trust and reputation management

If I stated, “the weather’s changeable” you’d probably accept it without challenge, as every day the weather changes. If I asked you to find two snow flakes exactly the same, you would probably agree that’s an impossible challenge. However, if I told you that ScreenAgers know more about digital, media and social and than you (or me) I expect you would, in the politest way possible, move on and find something wholly more agreeable to your views. We have to learn to overcome our inbuilt and significant preference for news that plays to our fears ( TED talk ) and views that confer with our own views and opinions ( Obliquity ); we have to think outside of our comfort zone. ScreenAgers don’t have our old models to hang onto; it is worth seeing where they are going, so we can tag along. Yes, there are new rules for engaging in a digital world that build on the social ones handed down from previous generations ( 33 new digital rules ); but generally the digital age in which we live is creatin

Sometimes humour can explain subtle differences between private worlds

These are two clips from Seinfeld : about George’s worlds that he keeps separate – colliding, because of someone else’s actions.  The episode is the one in which George’s two worlds collide. It’s the one where “Relationship George” and “Independent George” battle it out for supremacy. The conflict of the episode is that George knows what will happen when his two worlds collide: “Relationship George will kill Independent George”. In George’s mind, there is a clear separation between his love life and his life among friends.  The analogy is to the current struggle we’re having between our “digital life” and our “real life”. Personally, the dichotomy of a “digital life” being somehow different from “real life” is already false…..other than it is probably easier to lie and cheat in the real world. [youtube]

Do we want to give users CONTROL over their data or do we want to give users CONTROLS over their data? Views?

source : This is a interesting set of posts from OpenDigital on Identity.  It leaves open still for me an important question.... Do we want to give users CONTROL over their data or do we want to give users CONTROLS over their data.....I struggle to see how icons will ever help as the onus comes to the user and sharing becomes complex and difficult, and whilst you may well do the right thing there is no control over your neighbour who may not do the right thing with your data.

Teens' Cruel World Of Social Networking