Domesticating Pervasive Surveillance


Pervasive Surveillance is here and its not going away.  The technical vision is built upon the use of URIs and machine-readable documents, often referred to as RDF or Linked Data.  These technologies are used for sophisticated purposes today by the worlds most powerful organisations (and governments)

The tooling is built upon international standards have have robust international patent-pool protections, in consideration of intellectual property frameworks internationally and the legal means bring integrity into the game.

These tools are able to be swapped out for other parts should one part fail.

These steps delivering architectural resilience, is delivered through means that leverages an international community who have been dedicated to a consistently similar vision for a number of decades. Their very smart people.

The means to communicate in the real-world is immutable.  The means to furnish the right to communicate online should also be immutable; whilst it is certainly also the case, that law does relate always to acts that include communication.  If a person says they’re going to harm another person, those around them would intervene; this is similarly reasonably the case online, yet, the qualities of how this is done to the betterment of humanity, is complicated.

The technology ecosystem centres upon the needs of human actors.  It enables the linked-storage and use of files across internet, to ensure people are made able to personally make use of ‘smart agents’ (AI), dynamically overtime, which supports the act of communicating on behalf of the person. 

The consequence of the information systems design is to deliver a means to query data temporally (ie: accessibility to past queries, and the continual generation of new ‘present’ queries) as to provide a unique response based on a persons definitions of how the ‘AI Agent’ should respond to that specified query as a unique event.  The intended purpose of this is to deliver the means for a persons to make full-use of ICT, taking into consideration the intimacy formed with a persons ‘inforg’, as is used in relation to them, by them and for them.

The ‘inferencing rules’ are defined by the person rather than being defined by alternative methods, such as advertising revenue focused enterprise owned and operated AI.  The distinction made here; can be considered through the lens of Autocorrect; an AI agent, is reading the documents to gain a sense of what is being written by a human person (a form of surveillance); and the AI agent is owned by the software company whose interest is in improving its commercial re:use potential.  Where Autocorrect ‘mistakes’ are made; two things happen, firstly a correction is read by the AI agent to assist it in learning, as to improve its value to the owner / operator of it.  Secondly, more communication is required to fix a problem that occurred as a result of that mistake.  This in-turn generates more income for the service providers involved.  yet the consequence to the end-user, the human, may be that they’re personhood is tarnished / damaged in some way due to the mistake made by AI that is deemed to reasonably and acceptably occur.

Similarly; agents on behalf of companies can write false statements in computer systems about a human ‘data subject’.  where this is unknown and unable to be corrected; the re-use of that ‘data’ / ‘information’ can lead to harms to the ‘data subject’ without any repercussive effects on the document author.  These behaviours do indeed cause harm which can only be prevented by changing the method and systems design of information management; as does relate otherwise, to the operation of the ‘pervasive surveillance’ environment that is otherwise unavoidably impacting the lives of humans .

By changing the way data is managed and information is processed, as to form a constituent embodiments of knowledge; everything else changes.  It’s about putting wisdom, into the minds of humanity.

As data is collected, augmented, and made use of by others using online systems, this in-turn has an impact on the ‘data subject’. where the data quality is poor, the impacts on the data subject can be very serious.  Yet the data that is most important to us, is stored by others and we often do not even know what it is those systems have been updated to say about us nor how to easily correct errors.

Many years ago, works commenced on building our systems for banking, unions, medicare and more recently the ISP industry.  If we are to create a solution to this problem; consider the legislative environment required to ensure the data that is already produced and networked about you, (but stored by other companies), imagine if you could be provided services that enabled that information to be stored by you in your ‘knowledge banking accounts’.  Imagine if those systems were built in a way, that meant anyone could use them, irrespective of any disabilities or impairments. 

What would Stephen Hawking want?   Imagine if the high-resolution neural interface supporting the means for a person with severe disability to interact with the world, was able to be owned by them, and not anyone else.  That they were able to maintain some sense of privacy for their thoughts, as part of how we think about human rights, as we forge designs.

Think about the fact that all of the data produced constantly about you and your life is currently stored somewhere.  What if all of that could change and that an expectation be set that if it’s got something to do with your activities in the world, you need a copy of it.   you don’t need to know the details of what every person might say about you to other people in private; but, if data is going to affect your life – you need to be able to make use of it for self defence.

Imagine how you would benefit in your life, if the data about you was yours.

How could it affect your means, to socioeconomically participate.  Imagine how much you would need any such ICT system,  to be trustworthy; designed to support your health and wellbeing.  To operate an advanced security team.

Imagine how the sophistication of modern information technology could be used by you; if all the information produced about you, about what you do, who you interact with – all that data already being stored somewhere; was made available to you in a way, that allowed you to define how artificial intelligence works for you.  That you could ensure your doctor was able to make use of all of that information as part of your healthcare, looking for preventative solutions rather than reactive treatments.  Imagine if the work done by you was able to be connected to work done by others, and if you helped in any way, you could economically participate in the benefits of the outcomes brought about. 

Imagine how all that data, when stored securely, by (a) provider(s) who are legally better able to prove the information produced is not false; and that through the means to network information in documents a chorus of persons are able to construct shared statements of fact. Imagine how such a system could be used to protect your needs as required by you.

Making Pervasive Surveillance work for humanity

We live in a world today that is pervasively surveilled, and that’s not going away.  With all this technology, how has your ‘intelligence’ become advanced by artificial intelligence.  how does it help you make contextually smarter decisions and how does bad (false / wrong poor quality) information affect you?   How does all the things summarised as ‘fake news’, provide a more intelligent means for you to make more good decisions overtime, than was otherwise needed before any of the technology existed at all.  How is technology used to consume you, and how is it used to make the natural world a better place. 

How is technology made useful to you, to protect you, if you become a victim of crime, to stop that from ever happening, or to prove that it did…

To ensure the statements made about you are at least known to you, and that any errors are corrected, through the use of the information stored by you in your knowledge bank.  Then, if disputes arise, the completeness of information able to be processed by systems run by a court; can more accurately, fairly and cheaply communicate the issues in a court of law as to seek lawful remedy.

Imagine what might change if the systems that serve to deliver pervasive surveillance throughout society, that we rely upon in our societies,  changed the way it made use of permissions to make you the most important person, for the information that is otherwise stored about you. that your decisions about how that information is used, is considered by law and is built around your ability to make the vast majority of decisions for you.

To ensure the views built and depended upon about you; is produced on the basis of your direct involvement, to help ensure the most accurate information available to the world at any time about any matter concerning you, or that if the information is inaccurate, the reason for that problem is you.  

Imagine a world that decided to redesign and adaption of our information management systems, to maintains our shared moral fortitudes and the means to support ‘verifiable claims’; and the reference-able terms any honest claim, is built upon.

fixing the misuse of ‘security’

In our world as is operated without a ‘knowledge banking industry’, our views, and consequentially our world, is increasingly subjected to distortions; our news, is impacted by the complexities of what is simply called ‘fake news‘, even though, our world is increasingly saturated in data.

It is due to the structure of ICT systems; or more specifically, our information management systems, that is critical to our means, as individuals and as members of any group, that the design of the way ‘truth’ and trust; is supported by the communications infrastructure that now replaces the ‘print era’ tools used formally.  Whilst it is currently the case that consumers have virtually no means to solely and beneficially store data products produced about them, this does not need to be the case. 

Technically, it can be made to work, somewhat easily.

If through the proper guidance and consideration, a knowledge banking industry was established; how would it yield influence upon our world?

How did the advent of our banking system, influence our society? 

The advent of the seminal concept to our system of democracy, ‘rule of law’, how has the advent of ISPs influenced “rule of law” in our societies?

How could a knowledge banking industry, built upon international ‘free to use’ internet technology (including web) standards influence the world.  Using data, how could we build applications to power economic yield through more modern means, to re-evaluate assumptions made due to the manner through which ‘information management’ now already impacts the world.

It is expected that significant benefit can be realised, by ensuring the application of data is made to be an extension of self; and that through infrastructure that supports this underlying principle, the means to cooperatively manage groups (ie: persona ficta), group works and decision making, can be provided an immeasurable level of technologically driven, socioeconomic support.  In-effect, the person who should benefits most from the surveillance of themselves, should be that person, unless they’re breaking the law and harming others.  If this is not technically made to be the case by design, then the person is made to be a commodity, which breaks the needs of any ‘democracy’.

This underpinning concept; The vision, of how to improved economic infrastructure to supply, for the express benefit of natural persons, our means to live in societies ruled by law; that are made participatory with us; requires infrastructure that ensures we are entitled to make use of ‘information management’ infrastructure services as independent constituents.  This in-turn sets the stage for participation with broader group, distinguished by the cooperative, jurisdictional, application of law and lawfully provided apparatus.

This legal infrastructure is in-turn integral to any and all, stakeholder tenancy.  If we seek to be known as a stakeholder in our system of democracy, our information systems must be produced as to support it.  If we want to innovate, to make the world a better place, we need to be able to make use of knowledge, or research, of quality, qualified works done by others as to contribute by way of innovation and the truer nature of invention that has made us what we are today. We cannot do that, where our information systems provide economic support, for the distribution of ‘fake news’, false knowledge (which is still ‘information’); and whilst the means to enhance our words as individuals is not in any way similarly capable, to the means furnished through Internet Technologies, the least we could hope is that the use of ‘autocorrect’ does not mislead others as to our intended words; the best we can hope, is that our intended communications are not only able to be understood by few; but by many, should that be something we want to occur.

The aim of our 4th industrial evolution is to positively impact quality of life in our natural world.  We are assumed to be the principle beneficiaries and decision makers, as members of our human species.

It is through us, that the health and sustainability of our natural world can be thoughtfully, and one might consider positively – impacted.  That whilst it is the case we now have technology to augment the definition of lifeforms by DNA and otherwise; that our means to make moral choices, appropriate choices, that this capacity and burden, put upon the few, is built upon the means through which they are able to make use of our information systems. Whilst the term ‘Artificial Intelligence’ is muddy, when considering the broad nature of the tooling used in relation to the concept of ‘AI’, it is the case that most of these systems are designed to consume vast quantities of information from available sources online.  

But think, about how many things that relates to what it is to be human and ‘lived experience’ that one would never want to so comprehensively publish online, as to ensure the algorithmic training processes for AI; are able to take those sorts of things into account, for the beneficial use of the legal personalities who own and operate them for profit.

Irrespective of the importance and implications of what it means to the world, should we produce a human centric web, powered by a ‘knowledge banking industry’; It remains the case that we must consider, in economic terms, how it is these sorts of goals, might be pragmatically achieved and what, if we do not, the implications of those choices are irrespective of what decisions are made, and what is in-turn, set-aside.

 The way in which an international knowledge banking industry could improve society is not yet broadly understood from this economic standpoint. The vision of a ‘human centric web’ has been produced, and later communicated, as to be contingent upon a design philosophy that is built upon SOLID, seminal, principles.  Through these means the tooling has been produced through both the disconnected, and cooperatively collected; myriad of works produced by many, overtime, whose shared, principle related visionary considerations has now brought about an opportunity for the rest of humanity to decide what they want to do, if they want to define their own inforg and how the systems that manage it are made to be used by others both in life and historically thereafter.  This site, attempts to provide information about the tools to present, to any one who is interested, how it is, that a knowledge banking industry can be made.