But it gets worse …

… because, with those maps will be all kinds of information about you, your family and how you all move in and around your house. As Nathan Yau writes …

But does the general public care? I don’t think they do. It seems like they don’t.

This is from September 2015 …

iRobot Brings Visual Mapping and Navigation to the Roomba 980

NO – the public don’t care. They actually have no idea it is happening at all – and so Roomba and its ilk will continue down their path and continue to get away with it until they are stopped … I am not holding my breath.

Gizmodo’s take.

Maybe that doesn’t unnerve you, but it probably should. This is all part of the larger quest for a few major companies to hoover up every bit of data about you that they can. Now, they want to know all about your living space. Going through the iRobot terms of service, you can see just how much data is already being collected on a daily basis just by clicking like on a Facebook page or visiting a corporate website. And that data will likely be just as insecure tomorrow as it is today.

Spotted this in my feeds today …

You can find the original here – along with the associated article by ‘Chief Martech’ Scott Brinker. Anyone spot the problem?

Before reading on - Scott's excellent piece about Amazon's acquisiton of Wholefoods is not what this article is about. Though I will probably extend that on another occasion. No, rather it is the thinking behind the model that he uses to support his case.

Answer … every level in the stack has software associated with the role except ‘we the people’ – or ‘consumer’ as the chart would have it.
As usual, I am in general accord with Scott’s writing and thinking. Continue reading

            Yes. It's A Word. It's not a word I like. But I track it. It's what you do. And one of the places I track it is on a site called <a href="http://www.chiefmartec.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">ChiefMartec</a>.

Scott Brinkler introduced an interesting concept today, which is discussed in detail on his blog. Namely that Marketers shouldn’t beat up on themselves as much about ‘keeping up with tech’, because the fact is they 1) will never be able to keep up with technological change anyway and 2) they should consider how they are doing against their competitors. Do that and life will look a lot better.

You can read the whole article here.

He illustrates his idea here. Continue reading

            <a href="http://www.wunderlich.ca/biography/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">John Wunderlich</a> wrote this and it appeared in my VRM INBOX today.
Sometimes I read stuff like this and am reminded of an episode of “Big Bang Theory” in which Sheldon, the archetypal nerd with no social skills, determines that he can make friends by following a flow chart. Marketing is not a one-to-one tool, it is a brand management and presentation tool.

Dang. I saw that Big Bang episode just the other day and it didn’t click. John nailed it. The customer journey rubbish you see on web sites and in presentations is exactly the same issue! Try it. Really try it. Continue reading

            Doc Searls - spiritual leader of the VRM movement pointed to us today at the <a href="http://blogs.harvard.edu/vrm/about/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">what is VRM about</a> page. It works for me - word-smithing aside. This quote caught my eye.<!--more-->

The Industrial Revolution gave companies scale: single ways of dealing with with many people at once. Mass manufacturing, mass distribution, mass marketing and mass media are all examples of corporate scale at work.

The Internet Revolution gives people scale, though not all at once. After all, the Internet we have today (the one that supports all forms of data traffic, including the commercial kind) was only born on April 30, 1995, when the NSFNet (one of the backbone networks within the Internet, and the last to forbid commercial traffic) was decommissioned. The future since then has not been evenly distributed.

I have long held that we are on the cusp of the end of the era of the industrialization of everything. Just one example.

Said it then – saying it again …

Just as we are discovering that industrializing our food chain was maybe not the best idea or that applying manufacturing processes to our children’s education – was ill conceived ….

            Earlier this week, <a href="http://bizcatalyst360.com/i-am-my-own-system-of-record/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Bizcatalyst posted my article 'I Am My Own System Of Record'</a> to their site. I then shared it with various people that I know that are interested in the topic (including Doc Searl's VRM list). For posterity - some of the responses that came back into the mail list follow ...<!--more-->

Doc Searls

I’d like to bring two threads together, with what Adrian (Gropper) wrote here:

My authorization server will manage any number of persistent relationships at one central console so I don’t have to fly from silo to silo but that does not take care of the discovery aspect of marketing by a “new” vendor.

A “new” vendor will need to discover my authorization server somehow while preserving my anonymity until the point where my policies (as managed and exposed by my authorization server) decide to either automatically release identifying attributes or notify me somehow and impinge on my attention. Who will play the role of dating site in the broader economy by enabling my authorization server to hide some attributes even as it promotes the discovery of others?

It seems to me that we are missing a clear vision of the public space for discovery of my authorization server. Does it look like Google or like Apple or like blockchain?

Seems to me there’s not much daylight (if any) between being one’s own system of record and operating one’s own authorization server. Do I have that right?

John Wunderlich

The amount of air between the two depends on whether or not the Authorization Server and/or the personal System of Record allow me to manage multiple identities. If one or the other is just controlling selective attributes of a root unitary identity then you will still need to manage multiple systems to manage multiple identities.

Example use case would be a human rights worker in an authoritarian regime, who needs to maintain an anonymous social networking presence for their human rights work but an innocuous social networking presence for presentation to the authorities. The two must never be linkable. People with socially stigmatized medical conditions, unpopular political views or who just want to maintain a social life separate from their corporate life will all have similar requirements.

Jim Pasquale

You can all beat into submission-or-at-least-try. We all only have one identity, it is based on all my data both private, public, and shared. We all have multiple personas we use at any one given time all day long. The amount and kind of identification data to each and every one of my personas are different and at the same time, the same depending on who or what one needs to identify them self’s to.

Identity and Identification are two separate entities depend on each other. While a person can be their own system of record managing multiple personas, the only true way to change my identity is by changing the data which it is complied of.

Based on the thinking above, an individual’s digital dashboard or even a PIMS, or what Jim here, calls a lifecycle mixing board and others like Adrian call an Authorization Server rightly so. Should and would be able to signal out a persons personas, I share much different and much more health data with… you can fill in the BLANK, than I would in comparison with a FMCG (Fast Moving Consumer Goods) who offers skin or hair care products one might be interested in.

What can I say other then I like to keep it simple.

Brian Behlendorf

It would be nice to believe that a dashboard to a personal authentication server would faithfully and perfectly keep separate those persona whose mixing would lead to problems, such as in John’s examples.  The history of such technologies, however, lends one to believe that’s not likely to happen.  Thus why people often have a separate cell phone, laptop or tablet for personal use and work – whether it’s cookies or simply our own blinkered brains, the already-leaky abstraction can become a life-threatening (or at least livelihood-threatening) problem all too quickly.  Thus, I’m on the side of those saying that even with a semantic of “one identity”, my “personas” may need to physically and virtually reside in completely different places.

Adrian Gropper

I agree with Brian. Trying to hide my Authorization Server behind Tor onion addresses makes my head hurt. For now, I prefer the simplicity of one AS per persona. I think we can keep identity off the table for now.

This still leaves open the question that Doc and I are asking about the nature of the “discovery” service that manages the transition from anonymity to the AS that represents my persona. Does that look like Google, Apple, blockchain, or something else?

            I stopped blocking trackers on the Forbes site, just to see what was going on there.<!--more-->


A lot it would seem. Every one of those items is sending stuff about what I am doing back to their mothership. And there are a lot of motherships. This is why the concept of VRM is so important.

            A great, if busy past week that saw me at UC Davis for two days, working with teams of very bright students as part of their <a href="http://gsm.ucdavis.edu/ag-innovation-entrepreneurship-academy" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Agricultural Innovation Entrepreneurship Academy</a> [ File that under <span style="color: #800000;"><strong>Passion</strong></span> and <span style="color: #800000;"><strong>People</strong></span> ], down at The Computer History Museum in Mountain View, attending VRM Day with <a href="http://twitter.com/dsearls" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Doc Searls</a> and the team that makes up <a href="https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/research/projectvrm" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">The VRM Project</a> [ Put this one under <span style="color: #800000;"><strong>People</strong></span> ], engaged with <a href="http://www.mymentor.net">My Mentor</a>, a new start up launching in the UK [ this one goes under <span style="color: #800000;"><strong>People</strong></span> and <span style="color: #800000;"><strong>Platforms</strong></span> ] and got invited (and I accepted) to be a <a href="http://bizcatalyst360.com/our-bizprophets/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">featured contributor on BizCatlyst 360</a> [ In case you are wondering ... <span style="color: #800000;"><strong>Passion</strong></span> ]

I have just requested a 3.0 version upgrade on my time module, so once that is installed I will endeavor to write individual posts about some of these topics over the next week.

Meanwhile these are the 5 things that caught my eyes and ears last week.

Continue reading

            A recent comment on a mail list  I belong to.

We already have distributed identity data. Our information is “everywhere”. It is not going to go away. Organizations are not going to change their existing systems.

And I thought – yup – it is an uphill battle. BUT then came the play from list contributor Don Marti.

There’s a lot of fraudulent and erroneous user data
out there, too. If an organization buys data without
consent of the user, it’s getting a certain percentage
of crap.

Part of making VRM work is to effectively increase
the percentage of crap in non-VRM systems, by helping
users protect themselves from non-VRM data collection.
Organizations don’t change willingly, but getting worse
and worse results from lower and lower quality data
will make them.

And I thought ‘double yup’. Excellent thoughts. I am contributing in my own way and also recently adopted Dave Winer’s way. Now we just need to get the other several hundred million (in the USA alone) people on board.

            <blockquote>The United States has lost the moral authority to create the environment in which the value in our personal data can be unlocked by technological innovation.</blockquote>

Interesting take. Essentially, the argument is that in a post Snowden world, the world at large no longer trusts the USA to lead the way in this ‘Brave New World’. But if not the USA, then who ? The article suggests that the UK is well positioned. Really ? I don’t think so. They really are just as bad.

[ Source : The Internet of Me – Medium ]