Computers, Privacy & the Constitution

View   r10  >  r9  ...
RickSchwartzSecondPaper 10 - 03 May 2009 - Main.MislavMataija
Line: 1 to 1
 
META TOPICPARENT name="SecondPaper"
Line: 88 to 88
 Also, to add to what was previously said about existing privacy add-ons, it looks Ghostery is something close to a proof of concept in terms of displaying what kinds of tracking techniques a given site is using. I would imagine that Ghostery's functionality could be easily integrated and simplified to enhance the functionality of a PrivacyMinder? .

-- RickSchwartz - 30 Apr 2009

Added:
>
>

Great article, Rick. Personally, I'm wondering more about how to get companies on board. Correct me if I'm wrong, but making it work would require 1) developing the labels themselves; 2) developing standards for both human assessment and machine-readability; 3) getting companies to conform to these standards; 4) getting browsers to include them; 5) getting users to care.

To have any hope of widespread adoption, the companies (at least a sort of a critical mass of them) would probably want to have a say on every step. They would probably either want to agree among themselves on what the standard should be, or you could play off their instinct to seem better than the rest of the pack. In the first case, you may as well forget about the whole thing. In the second case, there's no real incentive for those who know their privacy standards are not great to join at all.

-- MislavMataija - 03 May 2009

 
 
<--/commentPlugin-->
\ No newline at end of file

Revision 10r10 - 03 May 2009 - 08:02:01 - MislavMataija
Revision 9r9 - 30 Apr 2009 - 00:37:13 - RickSchwartz
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.
Syndicate this site RSSATOM