2010/2/2
<sampo@symlabs.com>
> TAS3 appears to concentrate on a authorisation/authentication mechanism
> for
> access to and transfer of electronically stored personal information. In
> this regard, Clique Space differs in that it was primarily conceived by me
> to handle real-time and near real-time operation of devices.
authentication bit is just necessary evil. I think one of the
big features of TAS3 is ability to pass policies with PII such
that the policies actually are enforced. ANother big is the audit
framework.
I do not understand why real-time would be differentiating factor. TAS3
web service calls certainly can happen in real-time.
You've enlightened me a bit on IoS, and I'll expand on this enlightenment below.
Here, I'll address your contention that real-time might not be a differentiating factor. I've capitalised some of the terms here that represent Clique Space components as I have envisaged in the actual implementation. Clique Space, while being a trademark, is also capitalised because it is a component - or rather... oh you get what I mean.
Ultimately, all activity concerning the storage, retrieval, and transmission of information involves the real-time interaction of electronic hardware and software devices. All these devices (to whatever level is deemed appropriate) can be Connected to a Clique Space, and the Clique Space to which they are Connected can be notified in some appropriate way of what they store, retrieve or transmit. Each and every device would be Connected to a Clique Space using an Account which represents some individual, and each Account would be Affiliated to some organisational role through an Account Profile.
What Clique Space is notified of would usually only be an appropriate summary of what a device (a Client Device) actually did, because a device would still use whatever transport mechanism it regularly uses to collaborate. It is envisaged that the the Client Device requires some appropriate functional enhancement that allows it to Connect to a Clique Space through some appropriate Media Profile extension. The device's vendor perhaps would fashion the Media Profile as well as the Client Device's functional enhancements, and this Media Profile would be installed onto the Clique Space by the Clique Space's administrators.
IoS model foresees ability to be your own identity and personal data
storage provider, even to the point of running the PDS on your phone.
That being said, it should still be noted that for majority of people
a network side hosted PDS may be easier.
In that case, a PDS sounds mildly similar to a Clique Space's Agent Device.
The Clique Space is composed of a set of Agent Devices which together form one or more Agent Collaborations. Each Agent Collaboration manifests a Clique Space, and Clique Space administrators control the number and function of Agent Devices within the corresponding Agent Collaboration.
As with your description of a PDS, I imagine an Agent Device would usually be on a separate host, but indeed, the Client Device hardware might well be host to its own Agent Device either as embedded code, or as a separate process. Agent Devices are running instances of software that implement the Clique Space concept. Agent Devices are Client Devices in that their membership of an Agent Collaboration can be modelled in a Clique Space as a Clique in which they appear as a Participant. This ability of Clique Space to describe itself is another feature that I think is quite powerful.
How does the term Agent Device PDS sound to you?
So, Clique Space provides the opportunity to have individuals be known as controllers of every electronic hardware and software device in this world. I think this has bucket loads of potential, and gives accountability to the consequences of an individual's actions in a virtual exchange. There is no overlord in this scenario; individuals enter social contracts whenever they interact with other individuals to supply or procure services through their associated Client Devices. Every individual has the opportunity to take Clique Space device activity audit logs of their interaction with every other individual, and every individual uses their discretion when deciding when, and on what terms one is going to interact with another based on the same social contracts that form in a physical world.
The "public" Clique Space, will not play big brother, so I wish to dispel any notions here. Not only is this unethical and not only would this encounter resistance in the form of boycott, but I would believe the public Clique Space would be very large; collecting and persisting an audit log of this size would ultimately be a constant of technical intractability, topped off with a paradoxical cherry.
> So, a bit more on the technical side...
>
> There are a few things to consider with regard to a device and the network
> infrastructure it uses; Clique Space is neutral with regard to physical
> networks because devices may use different physical networks to "the
> internet". Hence, while multiple Clique Spaces might exist on one network
> (say, "the internet") one Clique Space may also span multiple networks.
Personally I view GPRS and 3G just as access technologies to internet.
What other networks than internet do you see?
I suppose "the internet" has broadened in scope since it was conceived. It used to be TCP/IP and this is what I meant. Nearly everything today can be considered to be on the internet, but I do not believe that diminishes the value of the Clique Space concept.
The IoS folks are also trying to reach out and get collaborators. Sounds
like potential match.
Cheers,
--Sampo