I didn't think it was tangential... perhaps I'm pushing my agenda, not yours. :-)
My agenda is that we use systems over time, yet designs tend to picture systems that are static in time, and therefore miss a key dimension.
You are correct to fold SOME of what I said into "ownership of information about grouping and aggregation".
Part of what I was also thinking about, is the ability to dis-aggregate data by changing permissions or identities. If some organization, such as Google, finds a way to aggregate two of your online identities, can you undo or manage that unwilling aggregation? Can I, for example, revoke your access or visibility into my unit of identity that is managed elsewhere?
Ownership of data is a complex problem, but reasonably better understood than ownership of identity. We can revoke access to data, but not to an identity.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2012-02-01 08:23 pm (UTC)My agenda is that we use systems over time, yet designs tend to picture systems that are static in time, and therefore miss a key dimension.
You are correct to fold SOME of what I said into "ownership of information about grouping and aggregation".
Part of what I was also thinking about, is the ability to dis-aggregate data by changing permissions or identities. If some organization, such as Google, finds a way to aggregate two of your online identities, can you undo or manage that unwilling aggregation? Can I, for example, revoke your access or visibility into my unit of identity that is managed elsewhere?
Ownership of data is a complex problem, but reasonably better understood than ownership of identity. We can revoke access to data, but not to an identity.