08:37:39 RRSAgent has joined #privacyws 08:37:39 logging to http://www.w3.org/2014/11/21-privacyws-irc 08:37:53 rrsagent, please set log public 08:37:58 scribe:Chaals 08:38:03 scribenick:chaals 08:37:53 Meeting:W3C Workshop on Privacy and User–Centric Controls 08:37:53 Agenda:http://www.w3.org/2014/privacyws/agenda.html 08:37:53 Chair: FrederickHirsch MatthiasSchunter 07:51:38 present+ rigo GökhanBal MatthiasSchunter FrederickBorgesius MeikoJensen DominicBattré 08:06:19 present+ FrankWagner Chaals FrederickHirsch SebastianAmorim 08:06:19 present+ VolkerBirk ChristosPerentis ChristianFuhrhop RobertBrauer 08:06:19 present+ SebastianAmorim AxelNennker JörgHeuer AndreasKuehne 08:06:19 present+ ChristineRunnegar KarimaBoudaoud FrederikBraun MartinKurze 08:06:19 present+ JohannesLandstorfer EroBalsa ReubenBinns DavidSinger SörenPreibusch 08:06:19 present+ MartaPiekarska MarkusTschersich AlinaHua IstvanLajtos 08:06:19 present+ HaakonBratsberg SigbjørnVik AngeloReale Carlos 08:06:19 regrets+ Ninja Marnau 08:06:19 Topic: GSMA Privacy Guidelines 08:37:43 … Looking at what it would mean for Operators to provide identity management etc. 08:38:04 … among other things we need to do. 08:38:09 haakonfb has joined #privacyws 08:38:49 … Mobile privacy: it's complicated (we can say that now facebook joined). 08:39:03 alina has joined #privacyws 08:39:23 … Since 2010 we have made some good progress. 08:40:19 … Main points [slide] basically looking for a baseline. 08:41:13 .oO( privacy is nothing you can add to your system – it's data sparingness in the first place ) 08:43:28 q+ to ask about international applicability... 08:43:54 schunter has joined #privacyws 08:43:59 … One challenge is the number of guidelines being developed around the world - it is a pretty fragmented space. 08:44:17 … Weare trying to get our members to adopt our guidelines - with some success. 08:44:42 Q? 08:45:36 … [less than half the users who are worried about privacy say they will do something about it if they are unsure what will happen to their information] 08:45:41 q? 08:45:41 q+ 08:46:03 q+ RobVanEik 08:46:14 chaals: if you do international guidelines. To what extend do you respect national restrictions 08:46:25 kboudaou has joined #privacyws 08:46:25 christine has joined #privacyws 08:46:29 ack chaals 08:46:29 q? 08:46:29 chaals, you wanted to ask about international applicability... 08:46:29 +q 08:47:04 Ack p 08:47:07 Istvan: That's the challenge. We look for the lowest common denominator across different jurisdictions, and draw a line there. Above it is good, below it is clearly bad. 08:47:16 Soren: Do you come with a carrot or stick or? 08:47:25 q+ (Gökhan) 08:47:32 Frederik-Amsterdam has joined #privacyws 08:47:47 Istvan: This is a guideline, not a standard. It's a set of Recommendations. We have seen fragmentation as operators try to follow the minimum standard. 08:48:01 Soren: You have a stick… you can block things… 08:48:06 DominicB has joined #privacyws 08:48:07 Istvan: Not really. 08:48:13 … we can make recommendations. 08:48:20 angeloreale has joined #privacyws 08:48:32 Matthias: No enforcement power? 08:48:37 Istvan: Not really. 08:48:44 ack R 08:48:59 kristina-nk has joined #privacyws 08:49:02 RobVE: What is the scope? If developers use a framework for ads, is that addressed? 08:49:35 Istvan: Implicitly. It's difficult to pick it out, and is mentioned in guidelines e.g. in use cases and examples. 08:49:47 RVE: Does that trigger developers to understand it? 08:49:56 q+ to ask about conformance procedures 08:49:58 … It's a stretch... 08:50:03 Istvan: Right. 08:50:03 ach c 08:50:07 ack c 08:50:10 s/ach c// 08:50:33 Christine: Guidelines have been there for 2 years. Do you have examples of how practice has changed in response? 08:50:42 s/2/4/ 08:51:03 fwagner has joined #privacyws 08:51:16 Istvan: No. I'll take the question away. We have operators who have worked on developing communities and follow things. Our biggest challenge is to work with platform vendors and handset manufacturers. 08:51:37 … I've only been in this area for 6 months, I need to talk to people who are closer and can answer the question. 08:51:40 ack gö 08:51:43 ack ( 08:51:52 Gökhan: Do you have feedback from app developers on adoption? 08:52:09 Istvan: Challenge we are facing is that we don't have direct contact with developers. 08:52:17 Q+ martin 08:52:30 ack ri 08:52:30 rigo, you wanted to ask about conformance procedures 08:52:30 … We work through our members to reach their communities of developers. 08:53:16 Rigo: If the guidelines are not as precise as a specification, they can be complemented by an in- or outhouse procedure to check if someone claiming compliance really is compliant. 08:53:41 … do you have such procedures, or are you just in the encouragement phase? 08:53:46 Istvan: The latter. 08:53:46 Ack m 08:53:53 + q I want to ask for examples of requirements that are different from country to country. Is EU always the strictest? 08:54:07 Martin: Did you talk to carriers and OEMs about including your guidelines in their requirements etc? 08:54:11 Istvan: Yes 08:54:20 q+ frederik-Ams 08:54:37 s/+ q I want to ask for examples of requirements that are different from country to country. Is EU always the strictest?// 08:54:37 erobalsa has joined #privacyws 08:54:51 Istvan: This is the way we are trying to promote the guidelines in practice 08:55:26 Martin: In DT we are inserting privacy requirements in our terminal requirements that manufacturers need to meet. Then things might get to app developers. 08:55:34 q+ 08:55:42 DT_Martin has joined #privacyws 08:56:10 Istvan: We're working in that way now. Other opportunity is to work with W3C to promote the work - we're interested in looking at the opportunities. 08:56:56 Istvan: Don't think there is any plan to collate requirements globally. 08:57:12 Martin: So privacy depends on the country? 08:57:17 Istvan: Yes. 08:57:31 It's a different requirement. 08:58:10 [rathole on what operator requirements are and how much they matter] 08:58:43 q+ 08:58:55 Martin: GSMA requirements effectively provide the lowest common denominator - the intersection of requirements. 08:59:07 q- 08:59:09 ack fre 08:59:50 q+ to say that OEM guidelines and GSMA guidelines should provide the hooks for the interface 09:00:02 Frederik-AMS: Saw this map with different requirements in different parts of the world. I've spoken to US companies who say "we comply with EU law, and then we're good everywhere". Can you give examples where that isn't true? 09:00:13 Istvan: That's not really my department, but… 09:00:31 Ack p 09:00:35 … There are minimum requirements that are common everywhere, but there is a lot of fragmentation. I could dig out some details if you're interested. 09:01:33 Soren: I thought your requirements are on the software side. But thinking of operator hardware requirements, if there is a pre-installed app that doesn't require consent and you say that won't meet requirements, OEM can't put things on the device. 09:01:50 Istvan: Yeah. But there ar only recommendations, I cannot force this to be followed. 09:01:54 Ack r 09:01:54 rigo, you wanted to say that OEM guidelines and GSMA guidelines should provide the hooks for the interface 09:02:10 rrsagent, generate minutes 09:02:10 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/11/21-privacyws-minutes.html fjh 09:02:47 + 09:03:01 Rigo: The relation between OEM requirements and what we do here, the device gives an interface, and that's where you can do things. The device has to give the interface to understand what happens. So the GSMA role could be to coordinate with Telcos to put things in OEM guidelines 09:03:14 Q? 09:03:28 … We don't have unification to the point where we have everything already, do we? 09:03:44 Istvan: Right. We want to have guidelines for the industry to start at. 09:03:55 Rigo: I am looking for concrete leverage. 09:04:25 fwagner: We have internal requirements for app development, aligned with GSMA guidelines, a bit more detailed on a company / country level. 09:05:10 … Thinking about addressing privacy requirements in OEM requirements, on a more generic level, for example we might only want to get handsets that support privacy setup for the user. 09:05:14 Soren: Great. 09:06:18 Topic: Standardised privacy policies. Post-mortem, promising developments. 09:06:53 RB: A few reasons to be negative about previous attempts and why they failed, and why it might be possible to do it right. 09:07:22 … Example company policy. We started trying to standardise this in 1997 with P3P. 09:07:55 … The individual incentives aren't sufficient - standards work when they are adopted throughout the ecosystem. 09:08:22 … but we all want to use our own. 09:08:27 q+ to question tranlating legalese 09:08:46 q- 09:08:50 … Moving from legalese to human readable to machine readable is a big challenge - it is hard to do it accurately. 09:09:01 s/… but we all want to use our own.// 09:09:09 If the privacy policy reflects the actual process, as engineered, no translation from legalese to machine-readable format is necessary. 09:09:19 q+ to ask about legalese 09:09:20 … The combination of skills required are actually quite rare 09:09:44 [http://xkcd.com/927 in text form] 09:09:58 RB: So why keep trying, what will make this work? 09:10:37 … Lots of small companies are trying to do this. There are databases of legal clauses that are the kind of standardisation we want to see - we got the lawyers out of the equation 09:10:57 s/lawyers/need for individual lawyers each time we want to do something/ 09:11:02 q+ 09:11:27 … People are making legal compliance tools 09:11:38 Istvan has joined #privacyws 09:11:44 [Terms of Service: Didn't read] 09:12:28 … You don't need to ask permission, you just go around explaining what other people are doing until they decide to do it right. If you succeed you get companies coming forward to ask how to get it right. 09:12:42 q+ RobVanEijk 09:12:46 q+ to ask about policies as a source for input into the metrics machine 09:13:01 … promising, but will only be a subset of what's out there - how do you scale it? 09:13:16 … Would it be possible to use this data to train machine learning on policies? 09:13:48 … e.g. Legalsifter has a bit of a look through freelance contracts that way. Natural Language processing. 09:14:06 … I've been looking at whether there are clauses we can detect easily and match to things we know. 09:14:30 … Important to be clear that something was done on best-guess statistics based on a human model, not an actual assessment by a real brain. 09:15:22 … Carnegie-Mellon are working on a similar question - can you find policies and determine automatically whether they are transparent? Some success. Can you delete your account? Couldn't figure it out. 09:15:37 Q? 09:15:38 … You need data to feed whatever user interface you decide to work on. 09:15:46 … These are ways to deal with a large corpus. 09:15:53 Ack f 09:15:53 fjh, you wanted to ask about legalese 09:16:18 + q 09:16:40 FJH: It's futile to translate a privacy policy into english. Lawyers are careful to deal with ambiguity. But interesting to see the simplification. Is it possible the policies get simpler and the nuances addressing corporate risk get thrown out? 09:16:46 s/+ q// 09:16:54 q+ frederic 09:17:25 RB: The question is whether they need to collect what they want? What's the business case - is there one? 09:17:33 FJH: You want to keep the doors open. 09:17:51 Ack p 09:17:55 RB: OK. But if you provide pressure, you might get people to close off opportunities they think are unlikely 09:18:27 SP: I think the idea of turning a privacy policy into something simple is flawed. It is meant to describe what we do, rather than a lawyer write rules and engineers go code them. 09:18:28 q+ 09:18:36 q+ 09:19:09 … There is a reason why the policies are so long. It is better to make them specific to the website at hand. Just cobbling clauses together you get a simplistic policy - "we collect stuff and use it". And it is accurate. 09:19:40 .oO( a text which is long and complicated is usually being writting not to be understood ) 09:20:07 RB: You could go looking at full legalese content and rate something, without simplifying. Or you could make a simpler explanation of what happens. I don't think every policy is long and covers everything. There are real differences in place. If we can uncover them, that is meaningful progress. 09:20:20 Ack r 09:20:20 rigo, you wanted to ask about policies as a source for input into the metrics machine 09:20:20 … Agree there is a danger in over-simplifying legal text. 09:20:36 q+ to ask about policies as a source for input into the metrics machine 09:20:41 Q+ rigo 09:20:43 ack Ro 09:20:44 Rob: You showed some projects. Many are no longer active. Which of these would you pick as worthy of attention? 09:20:47 Ack ro 09:21:21 marta has joined #privacyws 09:21:37 s/writting/written/ 09:21:57 RB: I would say ToS:DR is the most promising. Doesn't require anyone to agree in order to rate them. Although there are possiblities for abuse. But it is open, ergo transparent. 09:22:14 … They are making it easier to submit things. 09:22:20 ack r 09:22:20 rigo, you wanted to ask about policies as a source for input into the metrics machine and to 09:22:23 Ack ri 09:22:44 Rigo: When we did P3P, we had a policy generator before it was even finished. 09:23:04 … questionnaire led to human- and machine-readable policy. 09:23:59 … We haven't looked at privacy policies in W3C for 10 years except in PRIME-LIFE, which was inconclusive. I think policies merit their own workshop. But here, what can we draw from our interfaces from such policies 09:24:03 Rigo calls for a Workshop dedicated to privacy policies. 09:24:39 … Most promising new approach is from Raggett. Let's throw away stuff that didn't work in P3P, and use a javascript library to connect to a Primelife form. 09:24:44 q+ 09:24:56 … [position paper, 2010 W3C privacy workshop] 09:25:20 RB: I'm not addressing the controls, but what goes intothem. 09:25:32 Ack fred 09:25:39 Rigo: DNT has policy - what we do... 09:26:27 q+ 09:26:30 Frederic: Don't see an easy solution, but reason for complexity of privacy policies is that they are kind of a contract, and american law makes that painful. In EU law, privacy policies are not contracts but serve another function: transparency. EU law requires firms, in short, to describe the goals for which it uses personal data, and other information that's required to ensure fairness. 09:26:44 … If you only had to have a EuropeWideWeb things would be a lot easier 09:26:47 Paper from Dave Raggett: http://www.w3.org/2010/09/raggett-fresh-take-on-p3p/ 09:26:50 s/PRIME-LIFE/PrimeLife/ 09:27:04 RB: In ToS:DR there is a tension between "what do they do" and "what are my rights" 09:27:14 Ack ds 09:27:35 DSinger: Problem - lawyers write policies so they could do more than they can. Because if they don't set the envelope wider, they are worried about getting caught out later. 09:28:02 … Some projects tried to explore the idea of making a library of common clauses. 09:28:05 q+ 09:28:10 framework: http://www.w3.org/2010/policy-ws/ 09:28:24 … Do you think that approach has any viability? Like Creative Commons? 09:28:39 Rigo: Short Notices - P3P for people who don't have a computer. 09:29:00 DS: Yes, a lego approach to privacy policies. Might help comprehensibility. Is that possible? 09:29:16 Wider privacy policies allow for changes in the product functionality and service features. Otherwise, costly changes to the privacy policy would need to happen more often. 09:29:20 Ack fw 09:29:31 RB: You can see a convergence where crowd-sourcing pushes, but I don't see a lego approach working. 09:29:59 Rigo: Short notices didn't allow for edge cases companies wanted to keep open, so companies didn't go with it. 09:30:13 Q+ operaguy 09:30:24 RB: It's an inefficient process if you try to get some icons and get lawyers to match them. 09:30:32 Soren: You always need lawyers 09:30:34 .oO( but a Lego approach is the only way to make people understand legal texts, so this probably concludes to “it will never work” ) 09:30:36 RB: Not neessarily. 09:30:38 q- operaguy 09:30:54 fwagner: Who is reading actual privacy policies? Lawyers, privacy nerds, and nobody else. 09:31:08 q+ Sigbjørn 09:31:09 … so who are they for? users, or contract requirements? 09:31:23 s/privacy nerds/privacy advocates/ 09:31:43 … When users come to privacy policies, they have concrete quetions. Why can't we write them in form of FAQ? 09:31:44 nuance is essential to law 09:31:48 q+ 09:31:50 is that true? 09:32:21 RB: They are written for lawyers, privacy advocates, and for regulators. 09:32:30 … would like to see the information collect to be shared 09:32:33 Q? 09:32:43 zakim, close the queue 09:32:43 ok, chaals, the speaker queue is closed 09:32:47 Zakim, close the queue 09:32:47 ok, schunter, the speaker queue is closed 09:32:52 Q? 09:33:08 .oO( the idea of a contract was two parties are agreeing on certain points at one point in time – if one party even does not understand, we shouldn't see that as a contract at all ) 09:33:15 fjh: I think rigo said that we got a useful vocab out of P3P, a JS library would make them useful. Maybe Schema.org would be appropriate to that. 09:33:31 [as the only guy in the room who is part of schema.org directly, I'll notice it] 09:33:43 Ack fj 09:33:51 RB: That's the approach Creative Commons took. Didn't work out, but similar path. 09:34:10 JSON-LD would also bring the privacy vocabularity into linked data etc 09:34:38 Ack ang 09:34:39 sounds like a great idea to me 09:34:55 Angelo: Suggest building on convergence. Would be interesting to gnerate multimedia output from each paragraph - animation, audio, flashing lights… 09:35:03 you wanted to say, sounds like a great semantic web project 09:35:12 ACTION: chaals to talk to schema.org about privacy policies. 09:35:30 no, JSON-LD means nobody knows about semantic web but mechanisms can work 09:35:37 Q+ 09:35:46 … devise a sequence hierarchy to generate videos for an entire contract - build-your-own Contract: The Movie 09:35:48 a beautiful thing 09:35:58 q? 09:36:00 RB: There have been a lot of intersting approaches to do that. 09:36:22 ack MarkusT 09:36:50 Markus: 1/3 of apps analysed in a project actually have a privacy policy. The reading level required is very high to understand it. Important to reduce complexity, and provide enforcement of the requirement that everyone has a policy. 09:37:00 … App stores should enforce that. 09:37:09 RB: Maybe GSMA could enforce that… 09:37:10 Ack si 09:37:37 Sigbjørn: Most apps either get sold, or go bankrupt (and are required to sell their user data in liquidation). Can you avoid this in any way? 09:37:51 RB: There are some ToS that deal with liquidation. But not generally. 09:37:57 Link to the publication: http://jamia.bmj.com/content/early/2014/08/21/amiajnl-2013-002605.abstract 09:38:23 are contracts void upon bankruptcy ? 09:38:25 Ack dt 09:38:36 A good example I've seen recently is McAfee's (Intel) privacy policy: the full notice or a cartoon-style walkthrough that explains the most important concepts: http://www.mcafee.com/common/privacy/english/index.htm 09:38:56 Martin: Apps can provide 2 kinds of policy. The full legal document, and a simple non-legally-binding but legible version. 09:39:16 RB: Right. 09:39:56 Zakim, please open the queue. 09:39:56 ok, Preibusch, the speaker queue is open 09:40:07 Topic: Empowerment and Protection 09:40:19 FB: I'm a legal researcher, not a computer scientist. 09:40:34 … In law you can empower people, or protect them. 09:40:48 … (to defend privacy). 09:41:22 … e.g. every law I know requires data holders to keep it secure. Whatever users do. 09:41:47 … An example of empowerment is food labeling requirements. 09:42:18 … Example of protection is banning certain ingredients. Or requiring safety standards in cars. 09:43:19 … Some of the problems might not be best solved by empowerment. On a website for debt problems, every social media site knows I was looking, and zillions of general trackng sites. 09:43:51 … I am not sure this CAN be made transparent enough to allow empowerment to be useful. We should consider protection here. 09:44:08 … But then, I also don't think protection alone is going to solve our problems. 09:44:39 q+ to talk about automatically securing 09:44:47 … How do we translate this? We want transparency and informed consent. But what about actually securing communications authomatically? 09:45:04 Q? 09:45:06 … Services that are frugal with data and don't store it mitigate risk. 09:45:23 q+ 09:45:59 q+ 09:46:09 Rigo: Auto-secured data - we have seen interfaces using metrics to display a colour or icon. You can use them to trigger a reaction of the browser - switch off javascript when things look shaky. 09:46:37 … I suggested making data protection a function of the entropy of data. And it got the response I deserved as a person, rather than what the idea deserved. 09:46:43 q+ 09:46:50 q+ 09:46:55 … You can be wrong in calculating risk, but it isn't obviously destined to fail. 09:46:55 Ack ri 09:46:55 rigo, you wanted to talk about automatically securing 09:46:57 ack rig 09:47:03 Ack vo 09:47:33 Volker: Basic problem with protection is that the custodians have no way to enforce the rules. 09:48:01 … if people ignore the law, there are no consequences. So protection is chimerical. Can we change that? 09:48:21 my suggestion is to take the metrics we saw in the opera presentation, use those metrics to calculate the level of risk and make the software react on the threat - level by switching off functionality selectively 09:48:38 FB: Important remark. There is hope in Europe that a new regulation will introduce serious penalties. 09:48:55 … We'll have to see how that plays out. 09:49:05 q+ 09:49:31 … We could look at building class-action systems for teh case where the individual damage is low but the overall damage is high. 09:49:38 … (probably for lawyers, not W3C) 09:50:59 VB: Don't agree on kicking away the legal idea. Empowerment is not failing because people don't *want* privacy, nor because people are stupid, but because people are unaware that they have to think before they act about privacy. 09:51:20 I suggest people have greater trust on online activities based on trust on physical activities due to consumer protection laws 09:51:24 … With icons or something similar, you can raise awareness. 09:51:43 DominicB has joined #privacyws 09:51:45 … What can be done in empowerment to create awareness in the actual situation of users? 09:51:47 rigo, there are equivalents of "class action". For instance, Verbandsklagerecht in Germany 09:51:53 s/suggest/hypothesize/ 09:52:31 q- 09:52:36 FB: Agree people care, but it is hard to act according to your preferences. Analagously I am against child labour, but don't know how to act effectively on that. 09:52:59 … We haven't *seriously* tried empowerment - we still accept that nobody will read a privacy policy. 09:53:11 q+ 09:53:20 Ack ang 09:54:08 FB: At some point lawyers say "no, we are just going to ban things, whatever the user does". 09:54:13 … maybe something like that works. 09:54:18 Q? 09:54:43 Angelo: Important to facilitate display of metrics, but also encourage companies to protect by default. 09:55:00 … prompting user first time is common, but simplify updating of settings. 09:55:03 FB: Agree. 09:55:38 q+ 09:55:48 Soren: Follow suggestion to make software more aware of the environment, to support the user make good privacy choices. I am sceptical that software has all the information to make the optimal choice, but we can go in that direction to have a big 80/20 impact. 09:56:33 … This is where security and privacy can go hand in hand, especially with personal devices like mobiles. We could have a privacy-aware personal assistant based on machine learning… 09:56:52 ack p 09:57:07 Markus: You talk about defending privacy. So there is a need for regulation. EU is working in this area. 09:57:09 q+ 09:57:24 … there are companies not willing to accept regulation. So what is the basis for policymakers? 09:57:45 s/policymakers/making policies?/ 09:58:16 FB: Fundamental rights are important, and another good reason is market failure. There is a clear market failure to protect user privacy, transparency requirements are not working. 09:58:44 … If there is a market failure and no market-based answer, we use protection. 09:59:51 Markus: The good guys say "we have a decntralised architecture, the bad guys have a centralised one. But the bad guys are winning in the market. Why should regulators push the market to do privacy if peopleare not choosing the privacy-friendly providers anyway? 09:59:55 s/protection/market intervention/ 10:00:26 FB: Hope privacy becomes a competitive argument, but information asymmetry means there is no need to actually compete 10:00:29 fwagner_ has joined #privacyws 10:00:46 [why information asymmetry breaks markets…] 10:00:57 … the way to solve that is through regulation 10:01:08 .oO( Critical mass: if your friends are all on Facebook, you'll join in wether you find another SN ways better or not ) 10:01:17 [volker - right] 10:01:34 q? 10:01:36 FB: If the market solves the problem, the regulator should stay out. But otherwise... 10:02:19 Volker: not necessarily, if some of your best friends are on a better SN you might find it more interesting 10:02:34 angeloreale: if 10:02:35 FJH: Agree that the answer may be regulation to improve things. Food regulation means people trust it. People have transferred that trust to the internet, where the same principles don't apply. 10:03:11 [repeating what rigo was suggesting] 10:03:36 Ack dom 10:04:11 Dominic: About icons. Google is criticised for sharing anonymised 3rd-party data. How can I get rid of that criticism from Chrome? 10:04:45 s/from Chrome/in the context of the Chrome product/ 10:04:59 … users who opt into metrics share anonymised aggregated information about the web that is shared with the community to help develop the web, or to detect malware and warn others. 10:05:22 lynXintl has joined #privacyws 10:05:31 … Both of these are good for the world, but we get criticised. 10:05:41 … What do I do? 10:05:55 CMN: Go to ToSDR, and argue your case. 10:06:00 Ack dom 10:06:06 makes sense to come to the irc chan 1.2 days late ;) hi everyone 10:06:09 RB: Was there a negative judgement? 10:06:40 DB: The icons incentivise poor decisions - stop helping the web, to make ourselves look better? 10:06:43 Ack cha 10:06:44 i haven't ever heard the room laugh because of a joke on irc… or maybe i was distracted? 10:06:53 Volker: true, but sometimes the critical mass premise keeps people from believing / investing or devising better solutions for SNing when it shouldn't be seen as definitive. Markets are not bound to fb for eternity and even though it's not easy (i.e. g+) there might be some technological / philosophical (privacy and security?) upgrades that shall retake their market. (I personally wouldn't... 10:06:55 ...think twice to leave fb if I would know at least 1 friend is using a SN that feels better by using it) 10:07:17 Q? 10:07:31 angeloreale: my personal hope is that teenagers don't wanna use what their parents use. 10:07:37 chaals: legal protecion is important , relates to expectations 10:07:45 chaals: Why Rigo's technology idea is important. In some countries, changing regulation is difficult. Working for Yandex, I can say that technology could help where the law cannot be changed for the befit of the user. 10:08:06 s/protecion/protection/ 10:08:06 i love how this debate is obsoleting many of my slides… because i have 20 for 20 minutes, so i can skip at least 6 or 7 10:08:57 yes i am afraid… i hope your upload channels are still fresh and open :) 10:09:14 chaals: "Let's build systems that can support users that can support users". Protection can be combined with empowerment when thresholds are user-adjustable. 10:10:08 convenience convenience eonvenience 10:10:10 DominicB has joined #privacyws 10:10:20 s/convenience convenience eonvenience// 10:10:26 diaspora doesn't scale 10:10:36 otherwise it would have had its chance 10:10:37 convenience vs privacy discussion 10:10:48 chaals: Positive network effects amongst social network users work against migration to alternative networks. 10:17:57 erobalsa has joined #privacyws 10:31:12 reuben has joined #privacyws 10:33:57 scribenick: reuben 10:33:57 scribe: ReubenBinns 10:33:57 Topic: A Web in Respect of the Constitution is Possible 10:40:39 MarkusT has joined #privacyws 10:41:06 DominicB has joined #privacyws 10:42:06 fjh has joined #privacyws 10:42:22 s/Positive network effects amongst social network users work against migration to alternative networks/People care about privacy, but it isn't a binary proposition. They will generally trade it for convenience (see yesterday's discussion about the difficulty of predicting long-term cumulative consequences of immediate atomic decisions)/ 10:42:34 fwagner has joined #privacyws 10:45:05 MarkusT has joined #privacyws 10:45:38 marta has joined #privacyws 10:47:25 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HBGary#Astroturfing 10:48:03 [do you want to send a packet back from an intermediate transit point?] 10:48:26 q+ 10:48:34 Zakim, please open the queue. 10:48:34 ok, Preibusch, the speaker queue is open 10:48:36 zakim, open the queue please 10:48:36 ok, chaals, the speaker queue is open 10:48:37 q+ 10:59:05 Frederik-Amsterdam has joined #privacyws 11:00:03 q+ 11:01:15 BTW, Facebook has an .onion address now. 11:01:27 [yeah, a nice one...] 11:01:30 p≡p is based on GnuNet 11:02:23 kristina-nk has joined #privacyws 11:02:41