Continuing my thread on CCTV cameras (here and here), Bruce Schneier wrote a solid summation of the issues of pervasive cameras.
|
|||
|
Continuing my thread on CCTV cameras (here and here), Bruce Schneier wrote a solid summation of the issues of pervasive cameras. Kevin Kampman has added his opinion to latest RBAC thread. Kevin makes an interesting point:
This reminds me of Alan Cooper’s The Inmates are running the Asylum. Cooper makes the point that anything coupled with a computer becomes a computer. This includes but is not limited to: alarm clocks, cars, ATMs, and naval warships. (Come on admit it, you too have ripped a hotel alarm clock out of the wall because you couldn’t figure out how to shut it off; we’ve all done it.) Cooper’s overall point is that the Designer must be extremely careful in her design choices so as to not lose the intent and spirit of the original object before it got coupled with a computer. At the end of Tim Weil’s presentation on RBAC at Catalyst last month, Nishant asked a basic question: is the NSIT RBAC model sufficient and complete? Not receiving a satisfactory answer, he has taken his question to the blogosphere. Nishant’s question touches upon two of the hobgoblins of identity: context and intention. I talked about issues of context years ago in an unrefined form. This week I have been out here in Utah working at Burton Group’s headquarters trying to figure out what I will be researching in the coming quarters. I have not found my research topics yet, but in conversations with the team it is becoming clear to me that lurking behind a lot of the topics we’d like to dig into are the problems of describing context and recognizing intentionality. We’ll see what the coming months of research uncover. |
|||
|
Copyright © 2012 tuesdaynight - All Rights Reserved |
|||
what others say