Re: SDO vs academic conference, was poster sessions

[jean-michel bernier de portzamparc <[e-mail]>]

2011/1/14 Olaf Kolkman <[e-mail]>

>
> On Jan 14, 2011, at 9:23 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
>
> > On 11/Jan/11 20:32, John C Klensin wrote:
> >> --On Tuesday, January 11, 2011 10:35 -0800 Randy Presuhn
> >> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>
> >>>> At issue though is that these individuals get paid
> >>>> (sponsored) by someone, either directly or indirectly by
> >>>> corporations and/or governments.
> >>>
> >>> Not necessarily.  Some of us have no employer and just do this
> >>> stuff for the fun of it.
> >>
> >> Indeed.  Although I'm increasingly taking exception to the "fun"
> >> part.
> >
> > If you remove fun, what else remains that can be used as a compass to
> > take a bearing in iffy circumstances?
>
> For some of us: A feeling of responsibility in shaping the future of the
> Internet that is beyond direct corporate interest and next year's line
> items.
>

+1
Portzamparc


Jean-Michel,

This what lead us to identify three areas of not yet cloned people's
responsibility:

- the operance for the short term operational issues that are mostly
addressed by agreements and contracts and are related to machines.
- the governance for mid-term relational issues that are mostly addressed by
international rules and national laws and are related to people.
- the adminance for the long-term architectural orientations that operance
and governance may trust, that make the Internet (hence in part the world)
constitution (as per L. Lessig) and that are related to humanity.

We feel that up to now operance managers/corporates and governance
politicians/governments have left the adminance to IAB and IRTF, applied by
the IETF, forgetting that they shape the possible futures of people,and
leaving an under influence "market" to "decide". The claim of the young
emerging IUse (Intelligent Internet and IETF Users) community is to be an
active part of the Internet adminance. Moreover this is an urgent issue as
the technology (cf. the IDNA2008 example) has reached the fringes of
possible semantic facilitation services, i.e. the possibility of social
meaning engineering.

If "fun" and "monney" are the only IETF motivations, there is some urgency
to work on new meanings production. The IUse value added meaning is to
permit everyone to technically empower him/herself, to do what he/she likes
in life better, for the good of networked others. Because we beleive that
such a distributed and intricated network of diverse meaning and purpose in
life is the only solution we (the people) will be left with "the day after
the google-stream stops".

Also, I fear this very interesting thread forgets two important aspects we
IUsers try to deal with:

- we also are engineers and developers who can engineer and document. But we
are not dedicated to the sole global internet, being first interested in our
internets (possibly through different technologies, and for our own
business). These internets do not have the budget to pay for an IETF time,
we cannot wait for years, and most of all why would this be under ISOC
Copyright? We need many things we can think off to be used elsewhere and
therefore to be public domain.

- in uncoupling the Internet functions from the Internet Use Interface
possibilities, IDNA2008 has open an entire new engineering area, outside/on
top of the IETF scope. We are interested in "fringe to fringe" smart
services (extended services) and to directly support semantic facilitation
you could dub as "brain to brain". For that we need the IETF underlaying
Internet we use to work well, and its engineers to seriously want to
understand what we need and why and to help us with it.

jfc