[OpenID] The death (and life) of a protocol

[Dave Kearns]

Peter, Peter, Peter, you ignorant slut (to paraphrase Dan Akroyd) -

No one pays a penny to read my newsletters, but many thousands do read 
them (perhaps because they don't have to pay - who knows?)

It's an opinion piece exactly because that's what the newsletters 
promise to my readers - my opinion. And the event was last month, not 
last year (did you read the newsletter?)

Judging from the twitter stream and the comments on this newsletter, 
it's hard to take it as "the pulse of some community". More like 
swimming against the tide.

What, exactly, was it I was supposed to tell you a year ago?

-dave

On 7/31/2012 3:06 PM, Peter Williams wrote:
> I didnt like tone of the Kearns et al brigade, off selling 
> subscriptions to a newsletter full of opinion pieces. It reminds me of 
> a journalist who does nothing but take pulses of some community to 
> which he is invited, and writes about them in a leader piece. If that 
> community is swinging one way, the journalist opines how great it is. 
> If it swings the other, the same journalist says how awful it is. 
> There was nothing the journlist was adding (other than reporting is 
> attempting to swing some opinion). It reminds me of the 1996 era when 
> we used to give journalists (or their editors) stock options, to place 
> stories about how wonderful were digital ids.
>
> I can sell you an opinion for 5c, too. And thats all its worth. In 
> fact, mine are free (being worthless).
>
> So when someone descends into the "SAML is dead" line of journalism, 
> save your 5c and spend it elsewhere. Save up a dollar, and find a 
> better source of information that is not selling you the time on the 
> wall clock in front of everyone.
>
> Recently, in our world we were able to understand OAUTH 2.0 (and 
> thanks to Microsoft for getting the articulation of the business 
> rationale down pat, and Google-land for forcing security for web APIs 
> to be distinct from security for enterprise-3-tier APIs.). Its a shame 
> that certain journalists who were in a position to educate (a year+ 
> ago) didnt do so, merely writing pat story lines for impact. 
> Presumably, another conference invite is at stake, on the high-ego, 
> never ending conference circuit (of faux-opinion makers largely 
> talking to each other about what someone else is doing).
>
> There may be a market for second and third hand information, about 
> last years events. And, Ive no objection to someone making a profit. 
> But, openid might want to stay in the forground and on the leading 
> edge, and stay away from talking about last year's events.
>
> Now I should end nicely, with praise. Kearns can write, beautifully. I 
> just find he has nothing to say on the topics that matter, today.
>
> > From: sakimura at gmail.com
> > Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 10:24:45 -0700
> > To: board at lists.openid.net; openid-general at lists.openid.net
> > Subject: [OpenID] The death (and life) of a protocol
> >
> > An excellent article by Dave Kearns.
> >
> > 
> http://blogs.kuppingercole.com/kearns/2012/07/31/the-death-and-life-of-a-protocol/
> >
> > But the needs of the enterprise are also important, and the improved
> > versions of these protocols – OpenID Connect and Oauth 2.0 – are the
> > future.
> >
> > SAML was king, at least in the opening decade of the 21st century, but
> > the king is dead. Long live the king!
> >
> > Nat Sakimura
> > _______________________________________________
> > general mailing list
> > general at lists.openid.net
> > http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-general
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> general mailing list
> general at lists.openid.net
> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-general