"We've got to stop pretending it's a paper-based world." This is a quote in the Des Moines Iowa Register from Scott McLeod, an associate professor of education leadership at Iowa State University.
These are words we should all remember. Everyday I am confronted by terms like reports, print this out, let people print things. We need to move on. It is not just about being green, it is about providing value.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Facebook fumble
It is really surprising that a forward thinking, young managed company like Facebook would fumble so badly with their new Terms of Service.
Facebook just doesn't get it. They are messing with peoples identity and we're not going to take it!
What makes Facebook think that just because they are working to monetize their franchise that they can unilaterally take over a persons identity?
As I see it, Facebook has several options. They can push forward with their grab at the individuals identity and IP and face the wrath of the community; they could simple say that the individual owns all of their identity information and IP and provide better mechanisms for them to manage it; they could allow members to choose one of the Creative Commons licenses for IP placed on Facebook. I do not believe that Facebook has any right of ownership to a members identity information (name, email address, phone numbers, friends, etc.) or IP.
Simply changing the language of the Facebook ToS won't change the grab. Facebook needs to think beyound this afternoon and go far out into the future. They can not steal people's identity and IP just to monetize their network. "The" network will find someplace else to go.
What I want to see is Facebook providing mechanisms through Friend Connect that places identity information owners firmly in charge of their digital identity. While were at it, Microsoft and Google should do the same.
Facebook just doesn't get it. They are messing with peoples identity and we're not going to take it!
What makes Facebook think that just because they are working to monetize their franchise that they can unilaterally take over a persons identity?
As I see it, Facebook has several options. They can push forward with their grab at the individuals identity and IP and face the wrath of the community; they could simple say that the individual owns all of their identity information and IP and provide better mechanisms for them to manage it; they could allow members to choose one of the Creative Commons licenses for IP placed on Facebook. I do not believe that Facebook has any right of ownership to a members identity information (name, email address, phone numbers, friends, etc.) or IP.
Simply changing the language of the Facebook ToS won't change the grab. Facebook needs to think beyound this afternoon and go far out into the future. They can not steal people's identity and IP just to monetize their network. "The" network will find someplace else to go.
What I want to see is Facebook providing mechanisms through Friend Connect that places identity information owners firmly in charge of their digital identity. While were at it, Microsoft and Google should do the same.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Autonomy gobbles up Interwoven
I remember when Autonomy was just a start-up struggling to get their message out. They've come a long way with a broad-based set of product offerings.
Here's a link to the press release.
Here's a link to the press release.
AIIM International Expo + Conference
AIIM International Exposition + Conference
March 30- April 2, 2009
Pennsylvania Convention Center
Philadelphia, PA
www.aiimexpo.com
March 30- April 2, 2009
Pennsylvania Convention Center
Philadelphia, PA
www.aiimexpo.com
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Monday, January 5, 2009
OpenID's future
I read with interest this morning Dave Kearn's last missive from Network World - Has OpenID lost its mojo. I share Dave's concern about OpenID, but I don't think its lost its mojo. There are plenty of site using OpenID and it is spreading. Yes, there are lots of people using Facebook, but in my network I have not encountered a single person or entity using it. I have high hopes that Hardt's move to MSFT will be a positive step for both Infocards and OpenID.
Here's wishing that 2009 will be the year that digital identity management really takes off and we can have platform interoperability and true data portability that allows the individual to be 100% in control of their digitial identity.
Here's wishing that 2009 will be the year that digital identity management really takes off and we can have platform interoperability and true data portability that allows the individual to be 100% in control of their digitial identity.
Friday, January 2, 2009
Retaining workers
Retaining mature workers key to holding off job shortages
As I was reading this article (linked above) it struck me that the issues and tactics outlined to retaining mature workers really are the same that are needed to retain less mature (mature = older, less mature = younger).
The five steps outlined are relevant to all workers, not just older workers. Employees desire to be connected, engaged, appreciated, and fairly compensated. In return they will provide appropriate value and expand the organizations capabilities and collective knowledge. The accomodations outlined for older workers are the same that will attract and retain younger workers - flexible schedules, training, etc.
Why do these supposed "experts" feel the need to create these artificial and incendiary classifications between generations? This approach is divisive and counter productive. We live in a connected world that is cross cultural and trans generational. This calls for connectedness not generational segregation.
As I was reading this article (linked above) it struck me that the issues and tactics outlined to retaining mature workers really are the same that are needed to retain less mature (mature = older, less mature = younger).
The five steps outlined are relevant to all workers, not just older workers. Employees desire to be connected, engaged, appreciated, and fairly compensated. In return they will provide appropriate value and expand the organizations capabilities and collective knowledge. The accomodations outlined for older workers are the same that will attract and retain younger workers - flexible schedules, training, etc.
Why do these supposed "experts" feel the need to create these artificial and incendiary classifications between generations? This approach is divisive and counter productive. We live in a connected world that is cross cultural and trans generational. This calls for connectedness not generational segregation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)