| | |
|
UdiKarklinskyFirstPaper 9 - 12 May 2015 - Main.EbenMoglen
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper" |
|---|
Complementing Notice with Periodical Disclosures | | | The big question is how could such disclosures become reality? Regulatory mandated disclosures could, in my opinion, be an effective solution also regarding “use of data.” However, it is important to note that personal data privacy protection is less regulated than general consumer protection, and therefore, to apply this idea here is somewhat more “ambitious”. Also, mandatory on-going disclosures, even if designed thoughtfully by the regulator, might not be as effective as hoped. Companies are likely to make disclosures as “dry” as possible, and it would be difficult to require them to effectively highlight the individual risks. With that regard, technical solutions, putting the “disclosure” in the hands of an independent third party, more adequately incentivized, might have some advantages over regulatory mandated solutions. Perhaps like tosdr.org provides accessibility at the notice stage, others could assist on an ongoing basis, providing automatic periodical reports that identify the information you provide to a certain website, and more importantly, reflect the risks involved in a comprehensible manner. For instance, such software could provide automated simple explanations about “worst-case scenarios” it deduces: “news website Y holds a list of all articles you read this year, including this one about ‘how to hide that you cheated on your wife.’ This information has probably been sold to Z and W and could end up…”). Although there are technical measures that allow users to understand, in some circumstances, what data did they provide, in my research I did not find software that allows on-going potential-risk-oriented “disclosures” which deal exactly with the informational limitations that are so prevalent among users. | |
>
> |
This is responsive to one aspect of my comments last time around.
This draft presents the problem that the obscurity of the last draft
obscured. Now, given an "application" of one article, we can
perceive clearly what nonsense the whole proposition was from the
beginning. This is progress
So—on the basis of some nonsense some people said once, which
we don't actually analyze but just sort of assume must be correct
and meaningful because they said it—we can imagine a
regulatory intervention that would require data-miners to show the
ore what was made from it. Never mind, as the draft itself notes,
that no factual similarity exists between the credit card
transaction log and the Facebook weblog. Never mind that in one
case the intervention requires the consumer to be notified about his
own spending, and in the other case the requirement would be for
disclosure and analysis of third-party activity. Never mind the
differences between the regulation of banking and the regulation of
speech. Never mind, in fact, anything that would distinguish
between the nonsense we are supposed to assume wasn't nonsense in
its original context solely—so far as the draft gives us
reason to believe it at all—because it was published once, and
its importance as an "application" in this context.
It is almost as though the goal were to avoid thinking. Two other
fellows thought about something once, and if I simply mechanically
"apply" their thinking to the current completely different situation
at least I won't have to do any thinking of my own.
Let's go from drafts that tell me some theory is in general useful,
and drafts that tell me that someone else used them once, to a
thought of your own which isn't recommended by its generation in any
particular school of dogma, or by being lifted from something that
someone else thought. State your idea simply at the beginning of
the draft. Show how that idea develops from the facts you have
learned about the world. Answer some of the obvious questions or
objections. Leave the reader with an implication she can explore on
her own given what you have thought so far for her.
| | |
| META TOPICMOVED | by="UdiKarklinsky" date="1425659661" from="CompPrivConst.TWikiGuestFirstPaper" to="CompPrivConst.UdiKarklinskyFirstPaper" |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| | |