...
[Andrew
said]
Perhaps, in a broader
context, an even more important aspect is the notion of eXtreme Monitoring
Language!
The article from TBL et al in Scientific American started with
an example where medical data which, in Europe at least, would be seen as
confidential information was passed around with what at least some would view as
gay abandon.
If machine processing of semantics is implemented we, as
individuals, are highly likely to lose control of the privacy of our personal
information if we cannot know or influence directly which parts of personal
information (and its meaning) is accessible to "Big Brother".
[Danny
says]
The bad news is that
this is the state of affairs we see now - our personal information is to a large
extent out of our control. There's a slight difference in the approach
to such information in the cultures on either side of the Atlantic (and
Pacific), on how far we trust private and/or public organisations with the data,
but with the current "war on terror", whatever restraint there was has gone as
far as governments are concerned. The existing web is crawling with spam
merchants, all too ready to lift and abuse personal
information.
Some of the current
approaches to managing sensitive personal information on the net (e.g. MS
Passport & Palladium) are
also worrying, in that they are also driven by purely commercial
interests. You mention the medical data issue - the kind of outsourcing of
data processing that goes on in the uk National Health
Service, where (often questionable) financial and political concerns
are primary isn't exactly confidence-building either.
The good news is
that consideration of things such as security policies are effectively written
into the "semweb constitution", or to be more precise woven into
the principles of the W3C's Semantic Web initiative, and the premises
on which their working groups are operating. I'm not entirely optimistic,
but I certainly feel the Semantic Web, through improving communication
structures and empowering the end user in general at least offers the
opportunity for greater personal control of confidential information. It's got
to be one of the most aesthetically displeasing words, but perhaps
'democratization' would sum this up.
[Andrew
said]
Another aspect of the Sem-Web which deserves more
attention is the likely distortion of focus on to meanings which are culturally
narrow and which are more readily definable. The history of science is littered
with "realities" which have been determined more by what we can measure than
what is necessarily important.
[Danny
says]
Indeed.
Though again localization is in the "semweb constitution",
this is relatively unexplored territory as far as the web is
concerned, and I personally think this could well be a problem for civilization
(grandiose, I?) or at least a huge can of worms when it comes to
implementation.
[Andrew said]
I think there is a real
possiblity that the Sem-Web will focus more on what we can *define* rather than
what is important. Many of the most important aspects of life are intriguingly
intangible and are likely to be resistant to a culturally narrow
standardization. Therefore there is a prospect of a distortion of meaning (and
therefore potentially of thinking) perhaps unparalleled in the history of
Mankind.
[Danny
says]
Heh, well yes, I couldn't agree
more. Though here I would once again point to the current situation, where
incredible cultural distortion is already happening : prior to a couple of
weeks ago, when did we last see Bali represented on television as anything
other than a playground for Westerners? The current web already offers quite a
bit more access to information than mass media spoon-feeding, and again I'm
cautiously optimistic that the Semantic Web will improve matters here
too.
[Andrew
said]
There are issues involved which we might do well to
consider which require us to lift our eyes (or nose) from the silicon
grindstone. :)
Alas, it's back to the carborundum
;-)
Cheers,
Danny.
