<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Friendsourcing</title>
	<atom:link href="http://groups.csail.mit.edu/haystack/blog/2008/11/24/friendsourcing/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://groups.csail.mit.edu/haystack/blog/2008/11/24/friendsourcing/</link>
	<description>MIT CSAIL Research</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 22:48:44 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: TryBPO</title>
		<link>http://groups.csail.mit.edu/haystack/blog/2008/11/24/friendsourcing/comment-page-1/#comment-605</link>
		<dc:creator>TryBPO</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Jul 2009 05:52:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://groups.csail.mit.edu/haystack/blog/?p=146#comment-605</guid>
		<description>I think friendsourcing is quite useful, although you have to be careful which friends you outsource the information to.  I have some that are better than others at reminding me of the information I need to know.  The trick is to pass information to them that they will WANT to remember...and learning which friends are good for what.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think friendsourcing is quite useful, although you have to be careful which friends you outsource the information to.  I have some that are better than others at reminding me of the information I need to know.  The trick is to pass information to them that they will WANT to remember&#8230;and learning which friends are good for what.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Outsourcing Guru</title>
		<link>http://groups.csail.mit.edu/haystack/blog/2008/11/24/friendsourcing/comment-page-1/#comment-400</link>
		<dc:creator>Outsourcing Guru</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jan 2009 09:08:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://groups.csail.mit.edu/haystack/blog/?p=146#comment-400</guid>
		<description>This is actually the first time I heard the words &quot;friendsourcing&quot; and &quot;crowdsourcing&quot;.  Quite catchy ^_^.  Anyhow, I think friendsourcing may just be the next big thing. After all, &quot;trust&quot; is an important factor in just about any transaction.  And who else to trust better than your tried and tested friends right?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is actually the first time I heard the words &#8220;friendsourcing&#8221; and &#8220;crowdsourcing&#8221;.  Quite catchy ^_^.  Anyhow, I think friendsourcing may just be the next big thing. After all, &#8220;trust&#8221; is an important factor in just about any transaction.  And who else to trust better than your tried and tested friends right?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://groups.csail.mit.edu/haystack/blog/2008/11/24/friendsourcing/comment-page-1/#comment-92</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2008 15:30:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://groups.csail.mit.edu/haystack/blog/?p=146#comment-92</guid>
		<description>Katrina,  I appreciate your comment and insight.  I like the way you&#039;ve identified differentiating attributes of each &quot;sourcing&quot; arrangement.  What is interesting to consider is that the differentiation seems to revolve around levels of trust.  How do you think the &quot;sourcing&quot; scheme (and trust levels) is related to the importance of the information?  I would think that the less important the information, the more likely one would be to &quot;source&quot; the management of it to a lower level of trust.  It seems like you could have a graph showing the degree of importance of personal information along  the x axis and the required trust level on the y axis.  There are some people who throw around personally identifiable information without much thought and others who keep it very close hold.  In the grand scheme of personal information management, if there could be a single system for a person like your friend, it would have to incorporate multi-level security.  This grand system would also have a wireless syncing capability and be interoperable with the major personal information management systems.  It would have a personal ad-hoc network (PAN) management capability.  He would set up profiles for types of devices and types of authentication required on his PAN.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Katrina,  I appreciate your comment and insight.  I like the way you&#8217;ve identified differentiating attributes of each &#8220;sourcing&#8221; arrangement.  What is interesting to consider is that the differentiation seems to revolve around levels of trust.  How do you think the &#8220;sourcing&#8221; scheme (and trust levels) is related to the importance of the information?  I would think that the less important the information, the more likely one would be to &#8220;source&#8221; the management of it to a lower level of trust.  It seems like you could have a graph showing the degree of importance of personal information along  the x axis and the required trust level on the y axis.  There are some people who throw around personally identifiable information without much thought and others who keep it very close hold.  In the grand scheme of personal information management, if there could be a single system for a person like your friend, it would have to incorporate multi-level security.  This grand system would also have a wireless syncing capability and be interoperable with the major personal information management systems.  It would have a personal ad-hoc network (PAN) management capability.  He would set up profiles for types of devices and types of authentication required on his PAN.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
