<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
<opml version="2.0">
<head>
<title>13.opml</title>
<dateCreated>Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:56 GMT</dateCreated>
<dateModified>Thu, 13 Dec 2007 20:46:59 GMT</dateModified>
<ownerName>Tom Morris</ownerName>
</head>
<body><outline text="There's lots of things to get pissed off about in life. Dishonest politicians, crappy uncritical journalism, bullshit, equivocation, lies, death, the Spice Girls. Well, calm down. &lt;a href=&quot;http://paulboutin.weblogger.com/2007/12/13#a1741&quot;&gt;Paul Boutin&lt;/a&gt; has a cute doggy picture. And Flickr has a great tag cluster &lt;a href=&quot;http://flickr.com/photos/tags/cute/clusters/dog-puppy-animal/&quot;&gt;of amazing cute dogs&lt;/a&gt;. And &lt;a href=&quot;http://flickr.com/photos/tags/cute/clusters/cat-kitten-kitty/&quot;&gt;cats too&lt;/a&gt;, but I'm definitely a dog person. Okay, normal cynicism resumes about... &lt;em&gt;now!&lt;/em&gt;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 20:46:59 GMT"/><outline text="Good to see that &lt;a href=&quot;http://eirepreneur.blogs.com/eirepreneur/2007/12/paddys-valley-i.html&quot;&gt;Paddy's Valley&lt;/a&gt; is doing well. Congrats James and all the Irish entrepreneurs!" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 18:30:53 GMT"/><outline text="&lt;a href=&quot;http://twitter.com/aral/statuses/485955402&quot;&gt;Aral&lt;/a&gt; was making fun of me for wearing a suit the other day. Now &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/2007/12/13/my-new-suit/&quot;&gt;David Weinberger&lt;/a&gt; is doing the suit thing too. &lt;em&gt;Eeek!&lt;/em&gt; It's spreading!" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 18:22:45 GMT"/><outline text="Who knew? &lt;a href=&quot;http://l.yimg.com/www.flickr.com/images/stats/construction4.gif&quot;&gt;Flickr&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://l.yimg.com/www.flickr.com/images/stats/construction3.gif&quot;&gt;has&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://l.yimg.com/www.flickr.com/images/stats/construction2.gif&quot;&gt;animated&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://l.yimg.com/www.flickr.com/images/stats/construction1.gif&quot;&gt;GIFs&lt;/a&gt;. You can see the source of this hotness by signing up for the &lt;a href=&quot;http://flickr.com/photos/me/stats/&quot;&gt;new Flickr stats&lt;/a&gt; service." created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 18:13:22 GMT"/><outline text="Ever wonder why we need straight-forward and agile technologies like &lt;a href=&quot;http://rubyonrails.com&quot;&gt;Rails&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://djangoproject.com&quot;&gt;Django&lt;/a&gt; and REST? &lt;a href=&quot;http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/The-Beast.aspx&quot;&gt;Today's Daily WTF&lt;/a&gt; will show you. I have a sort of unofficial rule of thumb when doing Java development: when I see a class which contains the word &quot;Factory&quot; in the title, I know that pain may closely follow." created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 18:10:55 GMT"/><outline text="&lt;a href=&quot;http://simonmcmanus.com/2007/12/12/bullshit-20/&quot;&gt;Simon McManus&lt;/a&gt; on Web 2.0: &lt;q&gt;I'm currently at the second day of the LeWeb3 Conference. For a long time I have disliked the term &quot;web 2.0&quot; for a number of reasons. It has no clear definition, different people take it to mean completely different things... I would love to see an end to terminology 2.0 but realistically I can only ask that if people insist on using these terms they follow it by an explanation of what they actually mean.&lt;/q&gt;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:58:37 GMT"/><outline text="If you thought using the word &quot;open&quot; was just a masquerade to promote one's platform, you'd be right. Just so you know, it's happening in &lt;a href=&quot;http://mobhappy.com/blog1/2007/12/11/is-all-this-talk-of-open-just-lip-service/&quot;&gt;the cellular market in the US&lt;/a&gt;. Networks are talking about how they are open, when in fact they are simply &lt;em&gt;providing GSM service!&lt;/em&gt; Err, guys, this is what we've been doing in Europe for quite a long time. I've got more to say about faux openness, but not today." created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:26:07 GMT"/>
<outline text="LA Times on Dreyfus and the dreaded podcast" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:56 GMT"><outline text="Today I was in &lt;acronym title=&quot;Internet Relay Chat&quot;&gt;IRC&lt;/acronym&gt; with &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/&quot;&gt;David Weinberger&lt;/a&gt; and we were discussing various things - what the concept of leadership means on the Internet, whether or not leadership is in fact an American cultural point that's not as applicable outside of the US - and then the discussion turned to Hubert L. Dreyfus, the Heidegger scholar at the University of California at Berkeley. I then Googled and found that &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.hyperorg.com/backissues/joho-jul24-02.html#dreyfus&quot;&gt;David&lt;/a&gt; had written about Dreyfus' &lt;em&gt;On The Internet&lt;/em&gt;. I read Dreyfus a few years ago and shook my head in disagreement. Even if you take his Kierkegaardian presupposition of the authentic self seriously, I don't actually think that the Web is any &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt; of a departure from the authentic self than any other medium, and it does have the ability to make us more accountable to one another and make us more honest and even slightly more human in the process.&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:56 GMT"/><outline text="&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:56 GMT"/><outline text="All well and good. What do I found today, then? &lt;a href=&quot;http://nigelwarburton.typepad.com/virtualphilosopher/2007/01/hubert_dreyfuss.html&quot;&gt;Nigel Warburton&lt;/a&gt; linked through to an article &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-podclass24nov24,0,7889823,full.story?coll=la-home-center?sr=hotnews&quot;&gt;by Michelle Quinn in the &lt;acronym title=&quot;Los Angeles&quot;&gt;LA&lt;/acronym&gt; Times&lt;/a&gt; about podcasting and philosophy, with reference to Dreyfus.&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:56 GMT"/><outline text="&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:56 GMT"/><outline text="The &lt;em&gt;LA Times&lt;/em&gt; article has a few nice quotes:&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:56 GMT"/><outline text="&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:56 GMT"/><outline text="&lt;q&gt;&quot;We listen to relieve ourselves of mainstream television,&quot; Joe said.&lt;/q&gt;&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:56 GMT"/><outline text="&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:56 GMT"/><outline text="&lt;q&gt;He attended the University of Alaska in the 1960s and remembered only one thing from his philosophy class: the name Kant (which belonged to the 18th century German thinker Immanuel Kant). He worked as a wood and stone turner until the dust started bothering him. In 2002, he became a truck driver... &#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:56 GMT"/><outline text="This spring, he found the lectures on iTunes. &quot;I felt like I discovered the Fountain of Youth,&quot; he said.&lt;/q&gt;&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:56 GMT"/><outline text="&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:56 GMT"/><outline text="Warburton also mentions that &lt;a href=&quot;http://whooshup.blogspot.com/&quot;&gt;a Dreyfus fan blog&lt;/a&gt; has been setup. Nice. I'd count myself as a Dreyfus fan, even though I disagree with him about the Internet. I listened to his Existentialism and Literature lectures while I was studying Kierkegaard and found the alternate approach he brought extremely helpful. The University of California have published &lt;a href=&quot;http://webcast.berkeley.edu/course_details.php?seriesid=1906978475&quot;&gt;a new lecture series&lt;/a&gt; by Dreyfus on Heidegger and &lt;em&gt;Being and Time&lt;/em&gt;. You bet I'm subscribed.&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:56 GMT"/><outline text="&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:56 GMT"/><outline text="Now as for, as Warburton puts it, &quot;[Dreyfus' argument] that face-to-face tuition is essential, particularly for Philosophy&quot;, I completely agree with it. Face-to-face tuition is a vital part of education, and something that - if available - should be taken advantage of - and that podcasting, blogging and all the other Internet media forms should be supplementary to a face-to-face education. This is why I think academia is important, and we need to think very seriously about how we are going to deal with academia in the future. The current model &lt;em&gt;is broken!&lt;/em&gt;&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:56 GMT"/><outline text="&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:56 GMT"/><outline text="It's broken due to bad decisions made primarily by politicians - namely the unification of academic and practical education. For me, practical education - learning some well-defined skill possibly with a craft or trade following - needs to be separated from ongoing, open-ended and exploratory education - like philosophy, literature, art or certain forms of science. It makes no sense to teach these side-by-side, and it makes no sense to see the latter as a gateway to employment. Instead, it is a process oriented towards making better people.&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:56 GMT"/><outline text="&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:56 GMT"/><outline text="And that is what I think podcast lectures are doing. At the very least, they are transmitting knowledge. If they do this, they've succeeded. And if they go even a small way towards improving people's lives - then they are mission accomplished.&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:56 GMT"/><outline text="&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:56 GMT"/><outline text="From the article: &lt;q&gt;For their part, universities are experimenting to see what works. Mogulof said UC Berkeley had no plans to charge for the podcasts but acknowledged that the benefits were unclear.&lt;/q&gt;&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:56 GMT"/><outline text="&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:56 GMT"/><outline text="And there's the nub of it. Universities should see podcasting their lectures as part of their public service remit - just as the BBC does for it's podcasts (and should for it's television, instead of wasting time and money arseing around with this iPlayer rubbish). While broadcast television and radio have sacrified themselves to a group-think producer class who think only in terms of ratings, the Reithian instinct has found a strong home online. Sometime in the future, administrators will try and fuck that up too by trying to come up with an objective measure like the Research Assessment Exercise to see exactly what 'value' there is in it all. Oh, wait, I don't speak too soon..." created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:56 GMT"/></outline><outline text="hCard, Trust and FOAF signing" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:41:07 GMT"><outline text="My humble contribution to building open social networks - namely, 'extendable hCards' that give you more information based on whether I know you - &lt;a href=&quot;http://microformats.org/wiki/openid-brainstorming&quot;&gt;are covered on the microformats.org wiki&lt;/a&gt;. It's something that we are playing with in the Semantic Web community. Yesterday, &lt;a href=&quot;http://inamidst.com/sbp/&quot;&gt;Sean B. Palmer&lt;/a&gt; and myself had a &lt;a href=&quot;http://chatlogs.planetrdf.com/swig/2007-12-12.html#T14-20-46&quot;&gt;discussion on #swig&lt;/a&gt; about the Trust layer on the Layer Cake. This is something that I currently satisfy using &lt;a href=&quot;http://xmlns.com/wot/0.1/&quot;&gt;Web Of Trust&lt;/a&gt;, which is based on &lt;acronym title=&quot;GNU Privacy Guard&quot;&gt;GPG&lt;/acronym&gt;.&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:41:07 GMT"/><outline text="&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:41:07 GMT"/><outline text="This is not ideal. Much as I love &lt;acronym&gt;GPG&lt;/acronym&gt;, it's so not ready for wide public adoption. And, as sbp points out, it has it's problems. I'm not sure where we should go next on Trust. I don't think OpenID is the complete solution to Trust problem. OpenID only solves part of it. I don't think any server-based solution can work. I just don't trust anyone else to hold my encryption keys. I trust my OpenID provider to let me into social networks and blogs and so on, but I don't trust them enough to replace cryptographically-secure identity signing.&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:41:07 GMT"/><outline text="&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:41:07 GMT"/><outline text="So, let's open out the discussion here. There is not going to be one Trust solution. OpenID, OAuth, GPG, ssh-keys - all attack different pieces of the problem. We need to figure out what we are actually trying to do with Trust. We are trying to assert identity - &lt;em&gt;prove&lt;/em&gt; that the person who is attached to a terminal is the same person time and time again. And we need a strong solution to that. We are also trying to make sure of document validity - ie. that this chunk of RDF or XML or HTML comes from who it says it does. This used to be pretty easy - check which server it's coming from. But in a world with aggregation, widgets, platforms and so on, we cannot be so sure.&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:41:07 GMT"/><outline text="&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:41:07 GMT"/><outline text="Then there's the sort of trust we use for white-listing - do I trust that a person's assertions about others are true? This kind of trust is pretty easy to solve, and we are doing it already with FOAF+OpenID-based solutions.&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:41:07 GMT"/><outline text="&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:41:07 GMT"/><outline text="If we are going to solve the Trust problem, we are going to need to slice it up into simple, well-defined chunks and solve them in a way that is applicable to all the different approaches - web sites, web services (REST, not WS-* insanity), microformats and light-weight data approaches, upper-case SemWeb, APIs... the list goes on.&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:41:07 GMT"/><outline text="&#13;" created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:41:07 GMT"/><outline text="I'm not the expert here. I'm just a guy who knows enough programming to be dangerous and has a philosophy degree. Let's start the conversation about the Trust layer." created="Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:41:07 GMT"/></outline></body>
</opml>
