|
Thursday, April 3, 2003
O'Chalk 
| | Sitting at the Starbucks near the entrance to the Concourses F and G at O'Hare, soaking up the free wi-fi. I remembered this hot spot from the last time I was here, and it's nice to see it's still alive. I'm sure it's provided by Microsoft, because there's a Microsoft kiosk for showing off Tablet PCs, and the SSID is "tabletlaunch." The last time I was here the folks at the kiosk didn't know what I was talking about when I told them there was free wi-fi in the viscinity, but ... thanks to whomever. |
| | We sat in San Jose forever and missed our connnection here. Now we're on standby for the last flight out, at 9:55. Outside the rain is huge. Like a waterfall. Lightning flashes above the long cylindrical roof, and thunder rattles the glass. Kinda wonder if we're gonna get outa here tonight. |
| | The kid's burning up some stored energy at the little playspace set up here by one of the museums. Nice. |
| | [Later...] More delays. Now it looks like we probably won't get out of here until 9 or 10pm or later... |
Keyboard volleying with Ubergeek
Paper trail
| | Just got this from a reader: |
| | Note that the NYTimes has changed their online links policy - after a certain amount of time, article links now expire, pointing the user to an abstract and an opportunity to pay. |
| | Shocking for the "paper of record" - especially without any notice. |
| | Doesn't surprise me. I wasn't aware that the paper didn't already age everything after a week or so to somewhere behind the paywall. |
| | Are there outbound links from the paid archives, I wonder? Or is it all text? |
| | I've written about this before. Even though I was told, after that last linked piece, that the Times made millions by selling old content, I still think the lost opportunity to assert and maintian authority by having linkable content available on the Web far exceeds whatever money the paper makes by selling old fishwrap. |
Coasting
| | We're headed off for family stuff (cousin's wedding, mom's birthday). Today's a flying day. Expect light blogging. |
| | [Later...] I'll say this for Wayport: they answer support calls. I'm sitting here with an accumulating herd of Chicago-bound flyers, all delayed for "air traffic" reasons, with no word on how long the delay will be. Nor any word on what will happen with our connection there. So I've got a little bit (or a lot) of time to keep working on stuff. (Of course the kid has other ideas.) There's a nice strong wi-fi signal here, provided by Wayport. I've used them quite a few times before, but never got stuck in a loop where I've paid but still get redirected to a please-pay page. So I called 'em up, got a human being immediately, and he made sure my (DHCP-assigned) IP address would pass through. All in about a minute. |
Thinking points
| | We need to get our hands around the choke point that's preventing the right things from being counted. I suggest that the check point is who controls the data and thus the character of the data kept. We assume that data is always kept by the seller, but is that so? |
| | - Whenever a seller and a buyer intersect, the data is maintained by the seller, as we expect.
- Whenever an employer and an employee intersect, the data is maintained by the employer. (Who is the buyer of the services.)
|
| | In the first case, the data keeper is the seller, not the customer. In the second, though, the keeper of the data is the customer, purchasing the employee's work. So it's not about the roles of the players, It's about size and who is the designer of the transaction. Data is the asset of the designer of the business agreement, and a liability to the other party to the agreement, who's subservient to the keeper's records. |
| | I emphasize designer of the transaction because transactions are designed ad hoc, one-at-a-time, like component parts in machines before Eli Whitney invented standardized parts. Perhaps our economy has become too complicated to let transactions be designed for the sole benefit of whoever thinks it up first and has superior data resources. |
| | The subhead that follows is Proprietary Data is the Basis of Tyranny. |
| | Lot of stuff to chew on there. |
Mostly they have the best name
Get your war off
| | there are no easy answers. period. that's an easy answer. perhaps this mess of war and non-peace and oversaturation of consumer info thru the big time media and the warblog/antiwarblog bickering and the weariness resulting from being told nothing really about everything that happened/may have happened/will certainly happen in the real world or only in some partisans' deepest delusional desires will encourage us to stop expecting easy answers and just sit down and do the damned hard work that is actually required to accomplish progress. |
More proof we all just rent here
| | Did anybody save any of it? Just wondering. |
| | [Later...] True, the Internet Archive has some. I'm wondering about whoever owns the "content." Does it even still exist? |
No longer this, but now that, etc.
There are responses to this message:
Copyright 2009 The Doc Searls Weblog
|
