Safety Considerations
The intended purpose of these works is to produce technology that supportively elevates our humanitarian capacity for advancement; particularly as it relates to the PeaceInfrastructureProject related considerations. As such, i've seperated this permissive commons technology documentation work from the Webizen documentation works, with the view of seeking to ensure that the approach; does not require the use of webizen specifically.
Yet,
There are an array of safety considerations that are being considered via the [[SocialFactors/CommercialModels/Webizen]] project and in-turn the Webizen that have the effect of attending to the issues identified and considered via that process. There is some concern about circumstances where PCT may be used without the webizen tooling, in a manner that may be harmful or form negative impacts in relation to the issues noted by the SocialFactors documents.
It should also be noted; that whilst i am cognizant of various issues that may lead to unintended and/or bad outcomes; many of these considerations relate to outcomes that may still be better than what otherwise occurs without PCT.
As part of the applied methodology; some consideration is being put towards establishing whether the focus should firstly be upon the applied use / application, with respect to webizen systems; and that, the ecosystems are clearly illustrated / stated / designed, with consideration about how they may be developed (through the webizen related ecosystem) to become more useful beyond the scope of webizen users alone.
Presently, the amount of resources to perform this work is miniscule by comparison to what is hoped to occur once the ecosystems are sufficiently defined as to render the means to support and be supported by; others gainfully (and morally) engaged in progressive works.
Yet, i cannot produce that ecosystem environment ( See Webizen DevDocs ) without implementing a permissive commons technology ecosystem, to support the informatics processes. In-Effect, i need to create an ecosystem in-order to support the development of an ecosystem, that should in-turn render support for people whose works may provide the future capacity to address the safety (and moral) considerations related to the broad-scale use of PCT.
Conversely, via means that are in-effect a form of SocialAttackVectors it is entirely likely that others will seek to 'pick the eyes out of it', to deploy similar systems, that do not share the same philophical / moral considerations; as judged by the implications of their practical actions / activities. In most circumstances, the complexities involved in these 'ecosystems' are of a kind that results in a form of security mechanism that i've termed 'social encryption', although - have not written about in detailed specifics / specifications. The underlying notion being, that it is very difficult to understand how these facets / constituencies all 'hang together' in a manner that i would consider to be 'correct'; as such, whilst others may well get more resources / funding / support - it is unlikely that the lifecycle of any alternatives that do not functionally support 'human rights' / ValuesCredentials will result in failure (no ROI, etc.).
As such; the most important consideration is more purely, about ensuring whatever it is I / 'we' do - is done on a BestEfforts basis. Anecdotally; I have been working on the general ideas over a period of time that started more than 20 years ago. Throughout that time, there have been many who've aggressively (for gainful purposes, generally) suggested that 'they're doing it all already', or similar. Yet, now, so many years later, so much is still not done / active. The ideology of persons, shapes what it is they're able to create; whilst the consequences of HumanCentricAI may not be understood by bad actors whose expertise is moreover associated with a professional capacity / expertise in gainfully carrying out SocialAttackVectors - the nature of these systems, is quite different; as such, its unlikely that they'll be able to comprehend it very well, or that they'd be equipped to design something that follows a similar set of principals that are fundamentally moral in nature.
What is more likely to happen, is that some of the ideas that are intended to support FreedomofThought may be considered by bad actors with the express purpose of seeking to engineer systems that have the opposite effect / design / (socio) economic structures; either immediately, or as a considered pathway for future commercial growth of anysuch solutions.
Irraspective of whether the lead agents are within the public or private sphere of society.
Consequence
In-order to support the embryonic stages for these technologies, it is considered that making use of a version of the webizen ecosystem; or by applying similar ecosystem considerations via web-civics, is likely to provide support services of importance; in-order to curate the development of these works so that they end-up being operationally available in a manner that supports the intended 'good' associated to the investments made to create / invent it.
If circumstances relating to these considerations change, i'll update the documentation to make a note of it.