From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ej1-x62a.google.com (mail-ej1-x62a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5602E3B2A4 for ; Tue, 9 Jan 2024 13:24:06 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-ej1-x62a.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-a2a360dbc11so317985166b.2 for ; Tue, 09 Jan 2024 10:24:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1704824644; x=1705429444; darn=lists.bufferbloat.net; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=QNPVeYVaDbw7BvojXyUMdo0SwqnJABVF3+moICvMOdA=; b=W4C6FHR0ce70O3NOcwfk5eF1JQaMBmxVvaWJHL9U0aL63TbD3Xv26BA/ZBpmsaUk++ 9xjYM2WTNlXPuG7XDCCSf30esNYiFVwURIQiFtBEEDtKU7FoF9bD0M3RnRA5mZSoUHcF kgKMWllSKREYDF4gts9bLrfh6OVlCr9i9KWf7p49EVBlR7myREm5nvgPaMF0nP61mrBI NLyS6qn7lsoQoMZGB/IqyknaMrnKOxSSL+uQODPDiCVUwO0X1nD9uZZXPiBgbH4ukWz4 m5AYwjHSvTv2VFyxY/XhYQQ01jMCb09K5QcOZaQGEseOLGu8SpMV4uvLv2SrwfvKJlVs oSug== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1704824644; x=1705429444; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=QNPVeYVaDbw7BvojXyUMdo0SwqnJABVF3+moICvMOdA=; b=WVFndGJkLp0EcFJaQMK5mSs2PUWOUPoON7/ZD81ARTflCbIeMVSkYtmzaW8r9F4Upp OJsfnvoz+eT/PkzIE53vSyMotXpnAmM3FSNktv2EJDA8i6XD+P2FoiUT2l9aE4WuLCcX XzdTiaHs70A8A5qcFw7Al3R0E0yJGXKhpldipuZuOWwAYZzzismZsMFrWT5lY/CR0x6H BZVZvH9Clm+LLuHnTf4ZdOXGuLZoUO/mm63uv2oRgFChtAiqvYqe5xfhuHumBmQU0KaM QJQjI5+QSqGifyWRK1n+S/uUMi3BaTf20v2WkxpO7KBfVeikzZGkDn+mLNEhQFJO29tS m05w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yyad8qenB84VQ/mScvLDP50tyZD9qof3FdTejI17FeULqwjxUT1 eIiFFJCOf0eptTwpoElGzoMSlRbkUpCumMQRdzAIbbW4 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFGVrRvRzWkqjupCmDM52dUWT+sy/1glma1agQTLJ/FCowlo6FRK5LEMHByCyybbm5bcdqKjLNIaZ8JJsxO0U4= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:188:b0:a2b:a272:9812 with SMTP id 8-20020a170906018800b00a2ba2729812mr137581ejb.42.1704824644284; Tue, 09 Jan 2024 10:24:04 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: "David Bray, PhD" Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2024 11:23:51 -0700 Message-ID: To: David Lang Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Network_Neutrality_is_back=21_Let=C2=B4s_make_the_technical_asp?= =?UTF-8?Q?ects_heard_this_time=21?= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000053b578060e876be9" Subject: Re: [NNagain] The growing challenges of discerning authentic vs. inauthentic information and identity X-BeenThere: nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: =?utf-8?q?Network_Neutrality_is_back!_Let=C2=B4s_make_the_technical_aspects_heard_this_time!?= List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2024 18:24:06 -0000 --00000000000053b578060e876be9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable However there=E2=80=99s the asymmetry of power and voice - where folks can = use repetition and cognitive easing around lies and just repeat, repeat, repeat and drown out the voice of others who lack the same access to digital megaphones. Remember courts ask people to tell the truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth. What manipulators of the inauthentic do is usually something where 2 of the 3 =E2=80=9Ctruth asks=E2=80=9D are done and the 3 is stretch= ed. You might get the truth but not the whole truth - or the truth with disinformation/inauthenticness inserted too. On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 20:12 David Lang wrote: > that's where the reputation comes into play, if they are willing to burn = a > trusted reputation to lie, you can't stop them, but trusted reputations > take > time to build, so are not free. > > this will take time for people to learn, so it's not a short-term win > (short > term, I expect that there will be telltales that will show up through > analysis, > although it make take inspection of the camera that supposedly took the > picture > to find them all), but there is a need for trust, anonymity, and > independence > from a centralized authority (needed for anonymity) > > the novel Earthweb ( https://www.baen.com/earthweb-second-edition.html > https://www.amazon.com/Earthweb-Second-Mark-Stiegler-ebook/dp/B079BKBHJ2/ > ) > shows how such a reputation based system could work (for both legal and > illegal > activities) > > How do 'darkweb' type folks establish trust and avoid being burned? they > have to > have some sort of reputation based system (even if informal) > > David Lang > > On Mon, 8 Jan 2024, David Bray, PhD wrote: > > > Yes - however folks who do bad things rarely sign that they did bad > > things... so how do we tackle bad actors? > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 9:30=E2=80=AFPM David Lang wrote= : > > > >> On Mon, 8 Jan 2024, David Bray, PhD wrote: > >> > >>> Also signatures and the like only work for things where you actively > >>> attest. > >>> > >>> What if it's a supposed photo, video, or other claims that a person d= id > >> (or > >>> did not do) something. Sadly we know eyewitness testimony actually is > >>> replete with errors... which is why heretofore "roll the video tape" > >>> (you're at least a Gen X'er or older if you recall video tapes) has > been > >>> what courts relied upon: > >>> https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-the-eyes-have-it/ > >>> > >>> What do we do if that's now questioned? Watermarking of photos, audio= , > >> and > >>> videos can be overcome - and, sadly, may actually super-empower eithe= r > >>> surveillance states or authoritarian states to "control" media. So fr= ee > >> and > >>> pluralistic societies will be especially challenged here? > >> > >> signing the images and then the reputation of the person doing the > signing. > >> > >> now, this doesn't solve the court problem, but there I would say there > >> needs to > >> be multiple sources in any case. > >> > >> David Lang > >> > >>> > >>> On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 5:08=E2=80=AFPM David Lang via Nnagain < > >>> nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: > >>> > >>>> signatures work, but how do you know what signatures to trust? the > >> current > >>>> approach of 'trust signatures where they have paid one of a few > >> companies' > >>>> is > >>>> not going to work. There will need to be some sort of decentralized > >>>> reputation > >>>> system where you can pick who you trust > >>>> > >>>> Yes, some people will chose to trust people who feed them fakes. Tha= t > is > >>>> better > >>>> than giving any one entity the ability to declare anything as "true, > >> don't > >>>> you > >>>> dare question it" (as we have seen over the last few years) > >>>> > >>>> David Lang > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, 8 Jan 2024, Dave Taht via Nnagain wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2024 15:17:12 -0500 > >>>>> From: Dave Taht via Nnagain > >>>>> To: Network Neutrality is back! Let=C2=B4s make the technical aspec= ts > heard > >>>> this > >>>>> time! > >>>>> Cc: Dave Taht > >>>>> Subject: Re: [NNagain] The growing challenges of discerning authent= ic > >> vs. > >>>>> inauthentic information and identity > >>>>> > >>>>> Basically I am interested in the intersection between politics and > the > >>>>> internet in the context of this list, which is broader than the NN > >>>>> issue. So I appreciate monday conversation starters like these. > >>>>> > >>>>> In my case, I often have to revert to thinking about the present in > >>>>> terms of what used to be science fiction. "Interface" - upon > >>>>> cogitating about what the coming election will look like came to mi= nd > >>>>> - https://www.amazon.com/Interface-Stephen-Bury/dp/0553572407 > >>>>> > >>>>> When I first saw the deepfakes Pr0n phenomenon a few years ago, I h= ad > >>>>> my oh-ghu moment, as I realized once tools like that got into > >>>>> everyone's hands the truth and authenticity of any form of media > begin > >>>>> to vanish, and the recent rise of the LLMs *almost* put the finish = to > >>>>> it. Thankfully the LLMs (so far) have a terrible tendency to > >>>>> hallucinate which is often easily detectable, and overall, the > >>>>> technoliterati have managed to expel really bad ideas like > >>>>> crypto-grift, web3, and so on in the last few years. Web3 investmen= t > >>>>> is down 70% this year... > >>>>> > >>>>> I now wish very much that the concept of "whuffie" existed in the > real > >>>>> world, but the flight to mastodon, twitter's addition of community > >>>>> notes, most of newspapers moving to a for-pay model, and in general= , > >>>>> the innoculation of the populace at large to distrust everything th= ey > >>>>> learn on line is well underway which I find some comfort in. > >>>>> > >>>>> Promoting widespread skepticism and disbelief are powerful tools, b= ut > >>>>> trying to find guidelines to what is actually truthful harder. For > >>>>> example, I read wikipedia's talk page on everything controversial. > Too > >>>>> few do that. I recently sat through fox news with my mom, because h= er > >>>>> blood pressure was too low, and it served well to "improve" that, a= nd > >>>>> me, take a lisinopril. > >>>>> > >>>>> Life's just a ride, tho, you know? > >>>>> > >>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Down_and_Out_in_the_Magic_Kingdom > >>>>> > >>>>> On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 9:32=E2=80=AFAM David Bray, PhD via Nnagain > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Dear NNAgain=E2=80=99ers, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Today on a different listserv, I joined a discussion on what I sen= se > >>>> will be a pressing issue across multiple sectors in 2024. I recogniz= e > >> this > >>>> is not NN-related and so if it isn=E2=80=99t of interest, I apologiz= e in > >> advance. > >>>> However as most of us have technology background here, my sense is w= e > >>>> generally have a better sense of the looming issue than non-technica= l > >> folks > >>>> at the moment. Below I outline some of the contours of the evolving > >> problem > >>>> space, and invite each of you to share your thoughts as I sense the > >>>> diversity of perspectives here might help with brainstorming potenti= al > >>>> solutions necessary for civil societies to continue: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Premise: We are at the precipice of an extended era where > >>>> inauthenticity vs. authenticity will be difficult to discern, that > that > >>>> involves multiple forms of content including biometrics and more. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> In isolated pockets, governments are becoming aware of this - > however > >>>> it=E2=80=99s going to be really difficult for pluralistic societies = like the > >> U.S. > >>>> where any of the Estates that traditionally would have a role to pla= y > in > >>>> verifying the authentic vs. inauthentic nature of something have had > >> public > >>>> trust in them as arbiters eroding. And it doesn=E2=80=99t help that = both > >> politics > >>>> and advertisement rely on presenting things as 100% authentic when > >> they=E2=80=99re > >>>> often only somewhat so (or, to be more generous, mix facts with lots > of > >>>> beliefs). > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Not supporting autocracies, however they have a bit of a =E2=80=9C= home > field=E2=80=9D > >>>> advantage here because there is only one singular narrative - and > anyone > >>>> who questions it can be fired/isolated, imprisoned/disappeared, or > >>>> killed/executed. Tools of such regimes, to include filtering, > >> censorship, > >>>> and repression - will be used to ensure only one narrative (authenti= c > or > >>>> not, mostly likely the latter) is seen by a majority of their > >> population. > >>>> Pluralistic societies will have it much harder, and the last ten yea= rs > >> will > >>>> pale in comparison to the challenges of sensemaking in a world flood= ed > >> by > >>>> both media and mediums of questionable authenticity. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Back in 2019-2020, I did my darnest to connect Pablo and an > additional > >>>> People-Centered Internet expert with Salesforce that has a lot of CR= M > >> data > >>>> with the proposal that SF could provide a feature where, as part of > the > >>>> CRM, =E2=80=9Cout of band=E2=80=9D questions could be included to do= some sort of > >>>> additional level of trust that the entity on the other end was who > they > >>>> claimed to be. Unfortunately that pitch was overshadowed by larger > >> concerns > >>>> that SF=E2=80=99s software, give some of its features, could be misu= sed in > ways > >> not > >>>> intended by them (think about ways akin to Cambridge Analytica) and > they > >>>> were trying to figure out how they could incorporate features to > prevent > >>>> actors from misusing/abusing their software in ways not intended by > >> them as > >>>> a company. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 2024 is going to be hard. Manipulation of what people appear to se= e, > >>>> hear, sense - and thus know - is becoming sadly easier. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Meanwhile understanding of the importance of triangulation, > >>>> triangulation, triangulation from different perspective to discern > >>>> authenticity vs. inauthenticity remains time-consuming and hard. > >> Perhaps we > >>>> need to consider standing up private sector Dun & Bradstreet-like > >> entities > >>>> for identity and other important adjudicatory functions - however th= at > >>>> doesn=E2=80=99t immediately solve the issue of how to help the publi= c in a > would > >>>> experiencing a flood of questionable content, information, and > >> identities? > >>>> And who =E2=80=9Cwatches=E2=80=9D the adjudicators? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> David Bray, PhD Principal, LeadDoAdapt Ventures, Inc. > >>>>>> Loomis Innovation Council Co-Chair & Distinguished Fellow > >>>>>> Henry S. Stimson Center, Business Executives for National Security > >>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>> Nnagain mailing list > >>>>>> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net > >>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> 40 years of net history, a couple songs: > >>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DD9RGX6QFm5E > >>>>> Dave T=C3=A4ht CSO, LibreQos > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> Nnagain mailing list > >>>>> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net > >>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> Nnagain mailing list > >>>> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net > >>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain > >>>> > >>> > > --00000000000053b578060e876be9 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
However there=E2=80=99s the asymmetry of power and v= oice - where folks can use repetition and cognitive easing around lies and = just repeat, repeat, repeat and drown out the voice of others who lack the = same access to digital megaphones.=C2=A0

<= div dir=3D"auto">Remember courts ask people to tell the truth, whole truth,= and nothing but the truth. What manipulators of the inauthentic do is usua= lly something where 2 of the 3 =E2=80=9Ctruth asks=E2=80=9D are done and th= e 3 is stretched. You might get the truth but not the whole truth - or the = truth with disinformation/inauthenticness inserted too. =C2=A0
<= div>

On Mon, Ja= n 8, 2024 at 20:12 David Lang <david@lang.hm> wrote:
that's where the reputation c= omes into play, if they are willing to burn a
trusted reputation to lie, you can't stop them, but trusted reputations= take
time to build, so are not free.

this will take time for people to learn, so it's not a short-term win (= short
term, I expect that there will be telltales that will show up through analy= sis,
although it make take inspection of the camera that supposedly took the pic= ture
to find them all), but there is a need for trust, anonymity, and independen= ce
from a centralized authority (needed for anonymity)

the novel Earthweb ( https://www.baen.com/earthweb-= second-edition.html
https://www.amazon.com/Eart= hweb-Second-Mark-Stiegler-ebook/dp/B079BKBHJ2/ )
shows how such a reputation based system could work (for both legal and ill= egal
activities)

How do 'darkweb' type folks establish trust and avoid being burned?= they have to
have some sort of reputation based system (even if informal)

David Lang

On Mon, 8 Jan 2024, David Bray, PhD wrote:

> Yes - however folks who do bad things rarely sign that they did bad > things... so how do we tackle bad actors?
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 9:30=E2=80=AFPM David Lang <david@lang.hm> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 8 Jan 2024, David Bray, PhD wrote:
>>
>>> Also signatures and the like only work for things where you ac= tively
>>> attest.
>>>
>>> What if it's a supposed photo, video, or other claims that= a person did
>> (or
>>> did not do) something. Sadly we know eyewitness testimony actu= ally is
>>> replete with errors... which is why heretofore "roll the = video tape"
>>> (you're at least a Gen X'er or older if you recall vid= eo tapes) has been
>>> what courts relied upon:
>>> https://www.scientificam= erican.com/article/do-the-eyes-have-it/
>>>
>>> What do we do if that's now questioned? Watermarking of ph= otos, audio,
>> and
>>> videos can be overcome - and, sadly, may actually super-empowe= r either
>>> surveillance states or authoritarian states to "control&q= uot; media. So free
>> and
>>> pluralistic societies will be especially challenged here?
>>
>> signing the images and then the reputation of the person doing the= signing.
>>
>> now, this doesn't solve the court problem, but there I would s= ay there
>> needs to
>> be multiple sources in any case.
>>
>> David Lang
>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 5:08=E2=80=AFPM David Lang via Nnagain = <
>>> nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> signatures work, but how do you know what signatures to tr= ust? the
>> current
>>>> approach of 'trust signatures where they have paid one= of a few
>> companies'
>>>> is
>>>> not going to work. There will need to be some sort of dece= ntralized
>>>> reputation
>>>> system where you can pick who you trust
>>>>
>>>> Yes, some people will chose to trust people who feed them = fakes. That is
>>>> better
>>>> than giving any one entity the ability to declare anything= as "true,
>> don't
>>>> you
>>>> dare question it" (as we have seen over the last few = years)
>>>>
>>>> David Lang
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 8 Jan 2024, Dave Taht via Nnagain wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2024 15:17:12 -0500
>>>>> From: Dave Taht via Nnagain <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net<= /a>>
>>>>> To: Network Neutrality is back! Let=C2=B4s make the te= chnical aspects heard
>>>> this
>>>>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0time! <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net= >
>>>>> Cc: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [NNagain] The growing challenges of disce= rning authentic
>> vs.
>>>>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0inauthentic information and identit= y
>>>>>
>>>>> Basically I am interested in the intersection between = politics and the
>>>>> internet in the context of this list, which is broader= than the NN
>>>>> issue. So I appreciate monday conversation starters li= ke these.
>>>>>
>>>>> In my case, I often have to revert to thinking about t= he present in
>>>>> terms of what used to be science fiction. "Interf= ace" - upon
>>>>> cogitating about what the coming election will look li= ke came to mind
>>>>> -=C2=A0 https://www.= amazon.com/Interface-Stephen-Bury/dp/0553572407
>>>>>
>>>>> When I first saw the deepfakes Pr0n phenomenon a few y= ears ago, I had
>>>>> my oh-ghu moment, as I realized once tools like that g= ot into
>>>>> everyone's hands the truth and authenticity of any= form of media begin
>>>>> to vanish, and the recent rise of the LLMs *almost* pu= t the finish to
>>>>> it. Thankfully the LLMs (so far) have a terrible tende= ncy to
>>>>> hallucinate which is often easily detectable, and over= all, the
>>>>> technoliterati have managed to expel really bad ideas = like
>>>>> crypto-grift, web3, and so on in the last few years. W= eb3 investment
>>>>> is down 70% this year...
>>>>>
>>>>> I now wish very much that the concept of "whuffie= " existed in the real
>>>>> world, but the flight to mastodon, twitter's addit= ion of community
>>>>> notes, most of newspapers moving to a for-pay model, a= nd in general,
>>>>> the innoculation of the populace at large to distrust = everything they
>>>>> learn on line is well underway which I find some comfo= rt in.
>>>>>
>>>>> Promoting widespread skepticism and disbelief are powe= rful tools, but
>>>>> trying to find guidelines to what is actually truthful= harder. For
>>>>> example, I read wikipedia's talk page on everythin= g controversial. Too
>>>>> few do that. I recently sat through fox news with my m= om, because her
>>>>> blood pressure was too low, and it served well to &quo= t;improve" that, and
>>>>> me, take a lisinopril.
>>>>>
>>>>> Life's just a ride, tho, you know?
>>>>>
>>>>> https://en.wikip= edia.org/wiki/Down_and_Out_in_the_Magic_Kingdom
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 9:32=E2=80=AFAM David Bray, PhD= via Nnagain
>>>>> <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear NNAgain=E2=80=99ers,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Today on a different listserv, I joined a discussi= on on what I sense
>>>> will be a pressing issue across multiple sectors in 2024. = I recognize
>> this
>>>> is not NN-related and so if it isn=E2=80=99t of interest, = I apologize in
>> advance.
>>>> However as most of us have technology background here, my = sense is we
>>>> generally have a better sense of the looming issue than no= n-technical
>> folks
>>>> at the moment. Below I outline some of the contours of the= evolving
>> problem
>>>> space, and invite each of you to share your thoughts as I = sense the
>>>> diversity of perspectives here might help with brainstormi= ng potential
>>>> solutions necessary for civil societies to continue:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Premise: We are at the precipice of an extended er= a where
>>>> inauthenticity vs. authenticity will be difficult to disce= rn, that that
>>>> involves multiple forms of content including biometrics an= d more.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In isolated pockets, governments are becoming awar= e of this - however
>>>> it=E2=80=99s going to be really difficult for pluralistic = societies like the
>> U.S.
>>>> where any of the Estates that traditionally would have a r= ole to play in
>>>> verifying the authentic vs. inauthentic nature of somethin= g have had
>> public
>>>> trust in them as arbiters eroding. And it doesn=E2=80=99t = help that both
>> politics
>>>> and advertisement rely on presenting things as 100% authen= tic when
>> they=E2=80=99re
>>>> often only somewhat so (or, to be more generous, mix facts= with lots of
>>>> beliefs).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not supporting autocracies, however they have a bi= t of a =E2=80=9Chome field=E2=80=9D
>>>> advantage here because there is only one singular narrativ= e - and anyone
>>>> who questions it can be fired/isolated, imprisoned/disappe= ared, or
>>>> killed/executed. Tools of such regimes, to include filteri= ng,
>> censorship,
>>>> and repression - will be used to ensure only one narrative= (authentic or
>>>> not, mostly likely the latter) is seen by a majority of th= eir
>> population.
>>>> Pluralistic societies will have it much harder, and the la= st ten years
>> will
>>>> pale in comparison to the challenges of sensemaking in a w= orld flooded
>> by
>>>> both media and mediums of questionable authenticity.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Back in 2019-2020, I did my darnest to connect Pab= lo and an additional
>>>> People-Centered Internet expert with Salesforce that has a= lot of CRM
>> data
>>>> with the proposal that SF could provide a feature where, a= s part of the
>>>> CRM, =E2=80=9Cout of band=E2=80=9D questions could be incl= uded to do some sort of
>>>> additional level of trust that the entity on the other end= was who they
>>>> claimed to be. Unfortunately that pitch was overshadowed b= y larger
>> concerns
>>>> that SF=E2=80=99s software, give some of its features, cou= ld be misused in ways
>> not
>>>> intended by them (think about ways akin to Cambridge Analy= tica) and they
>>>> were trying to figure out how they could incorporate featu= res to prevent
>>>> actors from misusing/abusing their software in ways not in= tended by
>> them as
>>>> a company.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2024 is going to be hard. Manipulation of what peo= ple appear to see,
>>>> hear, sense - and thus know - is becoming sadly easier. >>>>>>
>>>>>> Meanwhile understanding of the importance of trian= gulation,
>>>> triangulation, triangulation from different perspective to= discern
>>>> authenticity vs. inauthenticity remains time-consuming and= hard.
>> Perhaps we
>>>> need to consider standing up private sector Dun & Brad= street-like
>> entities
>>>> for identity and other important adjudicatory functions - = however that
>>>> doesn=E2=80=99t immediately solve the issue of how to help= the public in a would
>>>> experiencing a flood of questionable content, information,= and
>> identities?
>>>> And who =E2=80=9Cwatches=E2=80=9D the adjudicators?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> David Bray, PhD Principal, LeadDoAdapt Ventures, I= nc.
>>>>>> Loomis Innovation Council Co-Chair & Distingui= shed Fellow
>>>>>> Henry S. Stimson Center, Business Executives for N= ational Security
>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Nnagain mailing list
>>>>>> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net= /listinfo/nnagain
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> 40 years of net history, a couple songs:
>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D= D9RGX6QFm5E
>>>>> Dave T=C3=A4ht CSO, LibreQos
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Nnagain mailing list
>>>>> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/lis= tinfo/nnagain
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Nnagain mailing list
>>>> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinf= o/nnagain
>>>>
>>>
>
--00000000000053b578060e876be9--