why I would pay the BBC license fee in the future
To day the BBC, I believe, maintains a high hurdle bar for linear programming and content creation. This is not enough to ensure that I will continue to pay the license fee. Notwithstanding this understanding of quality hurdle, the BBC is a national asset. It is independent of commercial pressures. It is trusted. So what else can it do?
The BBC faces issues on the changes from linear programming to VOD, appointment viewing to time shifting, podcasting and user generated content, editorial pressures and new technologies; but these are just business change as normal. As the consumers adapt and technologies improve, these business as normal decisions are difficult but faced by all payers in the media, telecoms, IT and technology industries.
Given that the BBC is a trusted party, would I pay a license fee to them to become my trusted safe deposit box for my digital identity?
My digital identity and preferences are currently stored at Google, Ebay, Microsoft Live, Amazon, Yahoo, my ISP, Myspaces, etc etc. All those services that I subscribe to. However, I want my preferences, my identity and my history that allows services providers to improve service delivery, to be stored in one place. A place that cannot be commercially exploited. However should I chose, I as a user can sell my data to commercial companies, and it would be open and free for my chosen services to use to improve experiences, that that data that they will use will be all of my data, rather than the subset.
However, if the BBC supported my digital identity with an avatar - would I be happy with the BBCs ownership of that avatar - a sort of digital in loco parentis?
The type of digital identity I am suggesting is not one that the home office would issue; it is not an ID card. This digital identity that the BBC would store for me, would be based on open standard and open API’s, but which ones?
Question, is there a gray market for myspace.com ?
Last night at mashup London, the audience heard from an expert panel. The content was of a high standard and so was the debate. [link to mashup] However, there was a specific focus (maybe due to the presenters) that personal publishing is for the 14 to 24 market, this could be that this group is vein, has too much time, views it as substitution to TV or a host of other irrational and non-logical reasons.
Is there a gray market for the same technologies? The over 60’s are cash and time rich. They have many more life issues to share and chat about, and often in need of good informed independent opinions. Maybe for medical care, which medicine should not be mixed, dealing with midlife crisis siblings, wills, death, homes, care, pensions, holidays, travel and eating out.
Does anyone think that this is an interesting market, is there a market for personal publishing and how would you enable this rather technically illiterate market to become bloggers?
I am a verified Tag - not a number
Players (corporate companies who own brands and networks) want control points for good economic reasons [barriers to entry], control of numbers has been an underpinning element in communications, search resolving [directory] has been another.
Whilst I understand comments about what are tags and resolving numbers, which look the same, I accept the criticism that I did not explain my intention well. I am not sure that I will do much better this time, but I am sure you will let me know, and I will still be somewhat vague, as this is thought in progress and your point of view is probably more valid than mine.
If (if) my identity (ID) is only a collection of verified information [assumption], I need two elements to justify identify ( who I say I am) - who I am based on some historical fact(s) and that these facts are conferred somehow. My historical facts are made up from my DOB, NI, education, jobs, interests, relations, finger print, preferences etc. These facts allow me to gain Identity and acquire verified identity (conferred) such as driving license, passport, entry cards etc. These verified identities in turn allow me to buy verified services such as banking. These verified services allow me to pay-for (buy) non-verified services such as communications, who give me a number, that becomes part of my identity. But a communication number cannot be used to identify who I am, therefore the loop is open. This suggests that I can use simple and then complex proof to gain an identity to gain access to services.
Now, Avatar's, handles, numbers and indeed my name; are like tags, totally agree - they are descriptors in space and time to resolve something that I cannot remember as it is too complex [dna, ip address, family history] . However, some of these services are one dimensional and allow a user to hide, to be hidden, to falsely identify who they are and be me [fraud]. Verified Identity, my passport, driving license (in most cases) should be a true representation of who I am at some point in time. Now, how about a verified Tag. Something that allows me to be identified and verified, but not because who I say I am, but others. A closed loop system. Since, the Internet allows me to set up an ID called tonyfish, without proof. I can then take someone’s verified ID can communicate to another channel. As this is open – it can be abused.
