Comments on: The Internet, now with more noise http://www.milesburke.com.au/blog/2006/11/02/the-internet-now-with-more-noise/ Thoughts on small business, the web industry and more, from Miles Burke, Author, Speaker, Entrepreneur & Geek. Tue, 06 Jan 2009 23:38:00 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Nathanael http://www.milesburke.com.au/blog/2006/11/02/the-internet-now-with-more-noise/#comment-25399 Nathanael Sun, 05 Nov 2006 02:49:08 +0000 http://miles.burke.id.au/blog/?p=108#comment-25399 Well we already have the XFN thing happening; why can't we just hook into that? And you can specify how far out you want relationships to be classified as "trusted" - so perhaps 4 levels: friends of friends of friends of friends of Miles can post or send emails. Once we get good XFN-like networks happening then these relationships will be exhaustively configured - so you can just say "Web developers" are "trusted" and that could include 2 million people; so you specify the branch you want to categorise and then everyone linked to that is included in that classification ?? Well we already have the XFN thing happening; why can’t we just hook into that? And you can specify how far out you want relationships to be classified as “trusted” - so perhaps 4 levels: friends of friends of friends of friends of Miles can post or send emails. Once we get good XFN-like networks happening then these relationships will be exhaustively configured - so you can just say “Web developers” are “trusted” and that could include 2 million people; so you specify the branch you want to categorise and then everyone linked to that is included in that classification ??

]]> By: Royce Townsend http://www.milesburke.com.au/blog/2006/11/02/the-internet-now-with-more-noise/#comment-24574 Royce Townsend Fri, 03 Nov 2006 07:55:48 +0000 http://miles.burke.id.au/blog/?p=108#comment-24574 I was thinking about what Nathanael said, and it's a great idea. Everyone is registered (just once) with a trusted 'place where you register'... sounds great. But who do you trust? (Maybe the government... but what about other governments?) Does it cost money to register. If it costs money can you convince everyone to do it. (And use the same protocol??). Before I read Nathanael's comments I was thinking of a trust network. I trust Miles, Miles trusts someone else etc. But that probably just too hard. Sigh I was thinking about what Nathanael said, and it’s a great idea. Everyone is registered (just once) with a trusted ‘place where you register’… sounds great.

But who do you trust? (Maybe the government… but what about other governments?) Does it cost money to register. If it costs money can you convince everyone to do it. (And use the same protocol??).

Before I read Nathanael’s comments I was thinking of a trust network. I trust Miles, Miles trusts someone else etc. But that probably just too hard.

Sigh

]]> By: Nathanael http://www.milesburke.com.au/blog/2006/11/02/the-internet-now-with-more-noise/#comment-23967 Nathanael Thu, 02 Nov 2006 06:14:20 +0000 http://miles.burke.id.au/blog/?p=108#comment-23967 Miles - I'd really like to see some research in the area I briefly mentioned in my WD06 wrap-up post (http://www.purecaffeine.com/2006/09/web-directions-is-over) which hopefully I might expand on if I get time to look into the feasibility a bit more; Basically the idea is that in Email 2.0 there won't be such a thing as anonymous emails or email addresses using nicknames or whatever. In fact, there won't be email addresses - you can send an email to a person or a legally registered entity such as a company - but not to an email address. There'll be physical authentication protocols in place and the addressing will take place in the background. So instead of writing to blahblah@blahblah.com, you will write to Miles Burke, with whatever extra bits are needed to narrow it down to the correct person. And that email will need to come from a person, ie Nathanael Boehm, not an email address. If this were possible, then it would eliminate comment spam and email spam, except where you invite users to comment anonymously through a web form. Otherwise your comments and email will be tied directly to your identity. Miles - I’d really like to see some research in the area I briefly mentioned in my WD06 wrap-up post (http://www.purecaffeine.com/2006/09/web-directions-is-over) which hopefully I might expand on if I get time to look into the feasibility a bit more;

Basically the idea is that in Email 2.0 there won’t be such a thing as anonymous emails or email addresses using nicknames or whatever. In fact, there won’t be email addresses - you can send an email to a person or a legally registered entity such as a company - but not to an email address. There’ll be physical authentication protocols in place and the addressing will take place in the background.

So instead of writing to blahblah@blahblah.com, you will write to Miles Burke, with whatever extra bits are needed to narrow it down to the correct person. And that email will need to come from a person, ie Nathanael Boehm, not an email address.

If this were possible, then it would eliminate comment spam and email spam, except where you invite users to comment anonymously through a web form. Otherwise your comments and email will be tied directly to your identity.

]]> By: Tuna http://www.milesburke.com.au/blog/2006/11/02/the-internet-now-with-more-noise/#comment-23953 Tuna Thu, 02 Nov 2006 05:18:10 +0000 http://miles.burke.id.au/blog/?p=108#comment-23953 Miles your just too popular.. But what do we replace email, page searching or blog comments etc with.. whats the solution. Point to Point message / information certified validation? Miles your just too popular.. But what do we replace email, page searching or blog comments etc with.. whats the solution. Point to Point message / information certified validation?

]]>