about that post from 2003!
Integrated the market resistance theme, the trust matrix and the grand idea of a commercial architecture in one post. Use, storage and exchange of trusted information (I think) before the SED or the TNC concepts were formalised. Even managed to avoid Wave's quarter-by-quarter carrot and stick.
Someone please help me pop my conceit bubble. 
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=1309843
"zeev hed, I've probably written more on the subject of chickens and eggs than anyone else on the Wave board. So much so, that I have come to have a faint whiff of poultry.
You are correct to point out the difficulty of introducing technology of this kind. Wave has made many previous efforts: through deployment via a unique partner (see amongst others IBM several years ago, and Hitachi more recently), building a broad consensus (through integrators like EDS and IBM Global), focusing on specific sectors (the film, health and banking industries, for instance) and then at delivering a product through someone or another's mandate (see Wave's Cyber-COMM and FINREAD endeavors, and now TCG). This is why it has taken so long to bring Wave's services to market. The market is extremely resistant to the introduction of this kind of product for exactly the reasons you describe.
The TCG process, however, looks like it has much greater strength than any of its precursors. Bill Gates has said Microsoft's future is contingent on the success of their trustworthy computing initiative (don't ask for the quote - lost it long ago), Intel is committed, IBM and HP are deploying TPMs in the corporate space. IBM has 4 million chips in the marketplace already, and HP is also beginning to deploy. The industry is likely to follow their lead. So chip deployment - stage one - is happening.
Stage two resolves the question, can anything more be done with these chips other than just to harden the security of the PC a little bit. The answer to this question is Wave's specialty, and will also be Microsoft's. It seems IBM, at least, have discovered enough interest in the kinds of services Wave offers to co-demonstrate them for several months. And there will be a whole load of politics involved in the outcome of who ends up doing what here.
Yes, you are right to wonder whether all the necessary industries - eg the banking types and the entertainment types and the legal types and the mortgage types etc etc - will be ready at the right moment, so that a useful trust matrix is established for the benefit of consumers. Certainly, this may be the next difficulty in the chicken cycle, and the analyst who said (something like) "why would anyone buy something that Microsoft is doing in two years" may prove correct.
On the other hand, Wave has been working on its relationships in many of these areas for several years. And if the need is present currently, I don't see why a company would feel the need to wait for Godot, or Gates for that matter. Indeed, Microsoft faces its own hurdles in this area. An aggressive EU commissioner and a competing EU project (Information society), grave difficulties with patents belonging to a Sony-Philips private entity (formerly Intertrust), a somewhat difficult relationship with the public, a history of flawed security. So they have problems of their own.
I think there's an opportunity here myself. And it's a grand one. If you want it in a couple of sentences, I think it's all about the creation of distributed property in cyberspace, its storage and exchange. Not the rules that govern its use, but the method by which it is done. And Wave wants to be in there offering some services to this new and undoubtedly massive market.
We'll see what happens."
| 
