Replying to @null and @__homophone, @ericlaw
That fails to account for the fact that it is the best browser for tracking.
September 2019
251 tweets
Replying to @garjoh_canuck and @adambroach, @rochemathieu, @johnwilander
DNT by default is what matches user expectations. What is unsustainable in the legacy advertising model is that it is hostile to user preferences while claiming to deliver more relevant ads that users want. It can't work both ways.
♥ 4
Ne ratez pas la rentrée de @ConquetFI à 17h sur @franceinter!
Replying to @rochemathieu and @garjoh_canuck, @adambroach, @johnwilander
There is no evidence that the choice is between privacy and paying. That's just where things got stuck, advantaging specific players who are neither users nor publishers.
Replying to @johnwilander and @rochemathieu, @garjoh_canuck, @adambroach
Audiences are more valuable if they're scarce rather than addressable by every last cookie-syncing Dick and Jane who can tap the bidstream.
♥ 1
Replying to @rochemathieu and @adambroach, @garjoh_canuck, @johnwilander
I hear brands aren't entirely uninterested in first-party data.
Replying to @rochemathieu and @johnwilander, @adambroach, @garjoh_canuck
There are several measurement approaches on the table. They are all relatively easy to deploy.
Replying to @rochemathieu and @johnwilander, @adambroach, @garjoh_canuck
We already have legislation, most notable amongst which the GDPR. And all of these problems were solved in part through private action too.
↺ 1
Replying to @rochemathieu and @johnwilander, @garjoh_canuck, @adambroach
Bid listening is how programmatic is expected to work now. Privacy in the browser solves that problem well.
Also consent without fraud is *exactly* DNT by default!
♥ 1
Replying to @rochemathieu and @adambroach, @johnwilander, @garjoh_canuck
Users actually do care about privacy, and the more educated they are on the topic the less they want the incumbent system.
Replying to @rochemathieu and @johnwilander, @adambroach, @garjoh_canuck
How would Safari prevent the first party from using data? It only protects against third parties.
Replying to @rochemathieu and @adambroach, @johnwilander, @garjoh_canuck
That argument can hold if the data is actually processed by the first party or by processors it can make reasonable representation for. That is completely different from the world we are in.
Replying to @rochemathieu and @adambroach, @johnwilander, @garjoh_canuck
What you describe is actually a lot closer to what ITP enables, and is exactly what DNT was designed to enable. There is nothing wrong with using personal data, but it needs to happen in a way that can be explained to the user.
Replying to @rochemathieu and @adambroach, @johnwilander, @garjoh_canuck
The current system makes it impossible for publishers to tell their users what is happening. You can't ever have the conversation you describe on those terms!
♥ 1
Replying to @garjoh_canuck and @rochemathieu, @adambroach, @johnwilander
If users want it so much why not switch to an opt in model? The power of defaults is well documented, trying to argue low opt outs without reference to that fact is dishonest.
Replying to @rochemathieu and @adambroach, @johnwilander, @garjoh_canuck
The IAB has been giving the "more transparent" talk for a solid decade now with close to nothing to show for it. Nothing is unilateral here, and "all" tracking is not at play, only hidden third party. It's not that dramatic!
Replying to @rochemathieu and @marionpdaly, @johnwilander, @adambroach, @garjoh_canuck
Stakeholders were called to the table for DNT. They worked their best to derail the process. The door is still open if they want to act in good faith now but no one can complain about anything happening unilaterally. The web community spent enormous energy on this.
♥ 1
Replying to @garjoh_canuck and @adambroach, @rochemathieu, @johnwilander
Users switch DNT on at high levels even in Chrome where the setting is really hard to find and they were never prompted.
♥ 1
Replying to @garjoh_canuck and @rochemathieu, @adambroach, @johnwilander
I wasn't questioning your honesty in general and I'm sorry if it came across that way. I only meant in the context of the single tweet argument.
♥ 1
Replying to @garjoh_canuck and @adambroach, @rochemathieu, @johnwilander
It's what I've seen first hand from access to major Web properties logs. It might be possible to get actual data m
♥ 1
Replying to @garjoh_canuck and @johnwilander, @adambroach, @rochemathieu
The DNT API can make opt in work decently well I would think.
Replying to @ericlaw and @johnwilander, @marionpdaly, @rochemathieu, @adambroach, @garjoh_canuck
I wonder if there are choice opeds from back then about how killing popups will be the end of the free Web 😏
♥ 1
Replying to @ericlaw and @johnwilander, @marionpdaly, @rochemathieu, @adambroach, @garjoh_canuck
I can see a rince and repeat with fingerprinters 😋
♥ 1
Replying to @scottmichaud and @adambroach, @garjoh_canuck, @rochemathieu, @johnwilander
That's a common misunderstanding. DNT was not created to protect against malicious actors, but to tie into the legal infrastructure. By your definition, contracts are also useless because people can just ignore them.
Replying to @scottmichaud and @adambroach, @garjoh_canuck, @rochemathieu, @johnwilander
A browser works first and foremost for its users, that's documented as the Priority of Constituencies. If Microsoft had reason to believe that its users favoured DNT by default it is their responsibility to act on that.
♥ 1
The whole point of having a DNT API was meant to be that the browser could have a default but the website could ask for exemptions from that default, no matter what it is.
Replying to @random_walker and @MelMitchell1
wrote a great overview of the field:
smile.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/019979…
♥ 2
Replying to @DanGendler and @kyleejohnson, @MaxGendler
shocked_face.gif
Replying to @ericlaw
The change seems pretty cosmetic, what am I missing?
Replying to @ericlaw
I think what I'm missing is the following phases? It's a nice addition, but so long as it requires manual intervention I don't see the value. But I'm psyched if there's something cool from this down the line!
Someone needs to tell the FTC about percentage-of-revenue fines.
Quoting a tweet by @natashanyt ↗
♥ 11
Replying to @v0max
Yeah, couldn't agree more.
Outstanding visualisation work about the usage of plastic bottles (via @mollyatnyt). graphics.reuters.com/ENVIRONMENT-PL…
♥ 4↺ 4
One of the great things about struggling with depression on the Internet is that you can have more relevant advertising about it.
Quoting a tweet by @privacyint ↗
♥ 5↺ 3
Replying to @null and @SimonDeDeo, @MastodonProject, @urbit
Opera tried the "browser for the server side" thing but it tanked pretty fast (you can certainly still find copies). I wonder how much of the vision @BeakerBrowser enables.
Replying to @null and @SimonDeDeo, @MastodonProject, @urbit
Also, why do interesting things with TCP/IP when you can hack some QUIC to do interesting things with UDP? 😏
Excellente analyse de la situation politique des Tories face au Brexit par @C_Berthezene.
lemonde.fr/international/…
♥ 10↺ 6
Replying to @triblondon and @C_Berthezene
Tldr that show isn't done jumping sharks any time soon.
"Nobody's Victim", by @cagoldberglaw.
If you're in any kind of doubt that we've seriously fucked up building the Internet and its supporting policies then I would really like you to read this book.
♥ 8
I should warn you that much of it is heart-rending. Sobbing or rage may ensue - it certainly did for me.
Yet it is written with a fiery warpath spirit that makes it clear there is a way forward worth fighting for. Taking from her first paragraph, I'd have that as my epitaph:
♥ 1
Replying to @C_Berthezene
Oui, ça semble trop court!
"Moi je pense ça va génial."
♥ 16
My 10yo daughter is looking for a pen pal who speaks both Swahili, which she wants to learn, and either English or French. Thoughts?
♥ 4↺ 6
Replying to @dabitch
Yes, that's the sort of thing I had in mind. I was mostly wondering if I should go with one of those sites that offer to find pen pals (I have no idea if they're good!) or if someone on this site might know the right kid!
Replying to @dabitch and @dasVitamin
Yes, I think email would work perfectly well. I don't trust USPS not to lose half the letters anyway!
Replying to @annapieti
Thank you 🤗
Replying to @ka_iwanska and @dabitch
Thanks, yeah, I was worried about creeps, it seems like exactly the perfect place to go looking for trusting kids 😕I'll look into Italki, thanks!
Replying to @null and @DSepDC, @kickstand
Bringing people back to the table will take some convincing, it really wouldn’t hurt if the IAB initiated the process.
♥ 2
Replying to @JimBaggott
I *think* they see it as a bargaining chip because it’s the option that hurts the EU the most. But concluding from that that it’ll be enough to make the EU blink is a gross miscalculation.
♥ 1
Replying to @JimBaggott
To some degree you could make that comparison, it’s not very different from when two companies need to renew a contract but disagree on terms — not reaching agreement could lead to a discontinuation of service harmful to both.
♥ 1
Replying to @JimBaggott
But what’s at stake for the EU is existential survival: if they yield then they risk facing other exits. So they’ll take the no-deal harm over risking disintegration, even if it really is painful. Not getting that is leading the UK to overplay a poor hand.
♥ 1
Replying to @JimBaggott
One way of looking at it is that the UK is playing a single game but the EU is playing an iterated one. They're not costing outcomes in the same way.
A great set of issues in this article, from whether Big Tech can learn from Microsoft's mistakes to how to build a worldwide regulatory environment for tech.
theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/…
♥ 5↺ 2
Replying to @JustinBrookman and @CharlottesWWWeb
If you have a massive tracking infrastructure and reams of personal data, it’s in your interest to push the industry in the direction of thinking that’s the only, or at least the most effective, way of running ads.
↺ 1
Replying to @JustinBrookman and @CharlottesWWWeb
Put differently, there’s a killzone in ad innovation around solutions that don’t involve personal data. Google’s position also allows them to impose their legal interpretation on others, as happened with the GDPR. So there is a link.
Replying to @JustinBrookman and @CharlottesWWWeb
But in general I agree that looking at any one aspect of Alphabet on its own is unlikely to spot the forest. They need to look at it as a conglomerate that self-deals and hedges against itself to always win — that’s the anticompetitive system.
Replying to @JustinBrookman and @CharlottesWWWeb
Well sure, I mean if we’re taking wishes then yeah. But I don’t think US AGs could easily do that one :)
♥ 1
Replying to @null and @arainert, @buzz, @pieratt
Wow, I so want. Goodreads is totally useless; the only social network I’ve found usable to talk about books is on here and let’s just say it’s not really built for it.
♥ 1
Replying to @yoavweiss and @marcosc, @brucel, @w3c
Disco, karaoke — why choose?
Just one sentence, but read the whole @matthewstoller: "Google and Facebook both compete with publishers for ad revenue and force those publishers to hand over data about their readers and subscribers, data which is the main input that advertisers want." amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
♥ 17↺ 10
Replying to @kickstand and @dmarti, @DSepDC
If you genuinely want to get this back up, happy to chat in a venue with longer messages.
Starting with identity is probably a nonstarter but identity can be part of the solution, Don and I have discussed this before.
Replying to @kickstand and @dmarti, @DSepDC
Chrome muddies this but the browser's job is literally to represent the user, that's why it's called a "user agent". Putting this with the browser would make sense.
DNT by default and/or a ban on all 3P tracking plus an opt-in browser controlled identity might work.
♥ 2
Replying to @null and @marcosc, @yoavweiss, @brucel, @w3c
Dude, with Bruce's sense of fashion he can give his booty the slightest of shakes and he's outdiscoing the whole dance floor.
♥ 1
Replying to @dmarti and @kickstand, @DSepDC
Exactly, and this could work with governance to ensure it adheres to a high standard of opt-in (not TCF), is mindful of vulnerable users, allows for multiple IDs, only works with auditable data chains, etc.
♥ 1
Replying to @null and @DSepDC, @dmarti, @kickstand
Yup. Shared doc? GitHub repo? Happy with either.
Replying to @larry_irving and @dmarti, @kickstand, @DSepDC
Yeah, that's definitely part of the plan. The point here is that privacy is about appropriate flow of information. We will only have a sustainable data economy if it becomes appropriate for all, and that can't mean covert tracking by default.
♥ 3
But it doesn't mean it has to be about full secrecy either. It's all about treating users respectfully, as responsible adults.
♥ 2
Replying to @nicksrockwell and @donohoe
I'm just sad that your routine love got messed up.
This is what the alt-right looks like when it doesn't have the power of Google, Facebook, or Twitter to back it. I could see more of this. t.co/tCt8dwOSNZ
♥ 49↺ 20
Replying to @null and @marionpdaly, @johnwilander
Framasoft has framagenda.org — I haven’t tried any of their offering in a while. It then works with any DAV client (which may or may not be a scary proposition).
Replying to @lvedkhanna and @lvedd
I've decided internal memos aren't subject to the style guide 😁
"Villains of All Nations: Atlantic Pirates in the Golden Age", by Marcus Rediker. Pirates are pretty damn cool, and not just in fiction!
♥ 2
Replying to @michaelehead
No, we're well past that.
Replying to @dmarti and @kickstand, @DSepDC
Purely as a signalling mechanism, yes, though it needs some solid governance and enforcement backed by stronger processing requirements (ie. it needs to be industrialised as a standard). But no need to throw the ideas away indeed.
Replying to @Forsheit and @jason_kint, @TheTakeaway
It’s worth noting that the fact that the current advertising ecosystem does finance *some* volume of journalism should not be taken for evidence that it does so effectively, fairly, or competitively, in a manner advantageous to the press.
Replying to @Forsheit and @jason_kint, @TheTakeaway
The decimation of the free press does not make the case for maintaining the status quo entirely evident, on the face of it.
Replying to @Forsheit and @jason_kint, @TheTakeaway
I don’t think it’s about imagining a better world; it’s hard to imagine a world in which the press is being wiped out faster than it already is. At the current pace most of those publishers are dead if we don’t change tack.
Replying to @Forsheit and @jason_kint, @TheTakeaway
I also don’t think it’s about ads vs subs. We need a regulated ad market if we don’t want behemoth intermediaries to steamroll smaller players. I agree that the CCPA is problematic there in that it doesn’t do enough.
Replying to @RealMadLogician and @WayneMyrvold, @LogicalAnalysis
You need to disable whatever tracker or ad blocker you have. @sciencedirect breaks if the Adobe tracking doesn’t load, and so the redirect fails. Or try sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
♥ 1
Replying to @lukemulks and @johnnyryan, @LizCarolan
You can get this kind of targeting through geo, or in some places through medical data brokers. It's possible that all Twitter got was an opaque audience segment. (Which makes none of this OK, but they might not be the targeting culprit.)
♥ 3
Replying to @msdixon
It's just the small ones though, so just go for a big one and it'll be fine, right?
Replying to @amreeryan and @RA_Costello, @rossamcmahon
Same!
Replying to @SarahTaber_bww
Ha! I applied for the same job for similar reasons. And too started noticing that their tech wasn't... that great.
♥ 10
Replying to @_aurelienfabre
Il y avait exactement cette illustration et cette histoire dans le bouquin! :)
Replying to @jyasskin and @tobie, @othermaciej, @annevk, @infrastandard
Back when I was young, crazy, and innocent I remember that there was an OMA task force dedicated to defining what a mobile device is. It was three years in with no consensus.
If they’re not all dead they’re probably still at it.
♥ 1
Replying to @erikphoel and @gmusser
I wonder what one could see comparing citation and Twitter networks.
♥ 1
Replying to @lukemulks and @johnnyryan, @LizCarolan
Of course. But my broader concern here is that opaque segments are likely to grow in popularity as tracking unravels, yet the first party has no ability to govern them nor users to evade them other than with one-off email addresses or the such.
I've been wondering what kind of traceability standard one could attach to segments such that some form of verification would be possible. I can think of legal mechanisms but nothing technical.
Replying to @TheAnnaGat
I want to influence the world in my spare time.
A great look behind the scenes at the production of a single compelling story.
Quoting a tweet by @BlackiLi ↗
♥ 3
Replying to @fatemehx2 and @k_johnsn, @nytimes, @aliceafung
I wanted to, I forgot 😑 DM me an address and I will mail some. Or come to The Times!
Replying to @xMartin and @benmolineaux
After carrying your box across the desert on camelback, everything got a little mixed up.
♥ 8
This is an amazing piece by @mariafarrell. The parallel between emotional labour and attentional labour struck me as particularly but the entire piece is worthy of your time, *especially* if you think it unlikely to be a good lens on the issue.
Quoting a tweet by @seanmcarroll ↗
♥ 5↺ 5
The one thing I would add is that I think this ties into the dearth of innovation we are going through in tech. Power imbalances lead to static social orders, which in turn are naturally hostile to innovation.
↺ 1
Sure enough we keep getting shiny gadgets, but what really is new? It's all innovation theatre.
Even the blockchain is 10 years old. Mobile 20, the Web 30, the Internet 50.
We're stuck because almost everything new coming out of tech is a stream of user-less products designed for no purpose other than to maintain the imbalance while tricking users into thinking they're in a great relationship.
♥ 1
Not to mention pervasive user-blaming under the so-called privacy paradox, well beyond phones. "They say they want privacy but they keep coming back. Stupid users are asking for it!"
♥ 2
I wonder if we should have "userism" as a concept.
Either way thank you @mariafarrell!
♥ 2
Replying to @_elena and @mariafarrell
Everyone should read it! I have @seanmcarroll to thank for bringing it to my attention.
♥ 1
#NotAllDataBrokers, apparently.
Quoting a tweet by @PrivacyProject ↗
Replying to @johnwilander and @jason_kint
Who did that?
Replying to @can
There's some signal, well more than anecdotal, that Facebook is having trouble recruiting, at least out of college. Yes, it might be top-funnel.
♥ 1
Also, I'm not sure that this is the best metric. Several people I know who've recently joined Google have told me "sure, they're evil, but I might as well get some of the money before they get knocked back to size."
♥ 1
Replying to @Chronotope
Crazy stuff.
Replying to @can
I don't disagree, it's just that the income difference is such that I would expect it to erase much if not all of the signal.
Replying to @JokFP and @can
I’m not claiming it’s in any way a representative sample :) It’s almost certain that the people I hang out with are more aware of Google’s problematic practices around antitrust, privacy, publishers, radicalisation, etc.
Replying to @JokFP and @can
And it’s just an example of an attitude that might dampen the recruitment funnel as a metric of the techlash.
Replying to @JokFP and @can
What you’re describing is good data protection and I don’t doubt that. That’s very different from being good at privacy.
Replying to @JokFP and @can
Yes, I completely believe that most people at Google don’t realise just how destructive a force it is. People already there seem content to make the trains run on time and the problems are “not their area.” This is what I’ve heard from recent joiners.
Replying to @JokFP and @can
The privacy issue is that the data was inappropriately acquired in the first place. That it is then well protected would be necessary to claim good privacy practices, but is not sufficient.
Replying to @JokFP and @can
How did I misinterpret it? I am not pointing fingers or blaming anyone, just observing that people inside Google seem to be less aware of Google-caused issues than those on the outside. I’m not sure what I’ve said to irk you?
Replying to @JokFP and @can
Happy to agree to disagree! Your description leads me to a question though (if you don't mind). You seem to describe a system of strong internal accountability, through transparency, docs, etc.
So when research like twitter.com/Miles_Brundage… is published (not a curve ball, literally just something I have in a tab) I presume you can look at some internal docs that eg. disprove the research or outline a plan to fix the issue?
My question is: if I indeed correctly understood the accountability that grounds your trust, how do you explain that the public-facing response on this topic is so poor (basically "the algorithm did it")?
This @tim_libert article is my favourite from the @PrivacyProject so far! 🔥
nytimes.com/2019/09/18/opi…
♥ 13↺ 6
People often seem to think that the independence of our news and opinion from the interests of the business is just something we say.
But here you have our friends from @nytopinion deliberately getting someone on our high-traffic site to tell we could suck less at privacy.
♥ 5
Sure enough we're far from perfect, but that kind of striving for integrity and accountability make for a pretty damn interesting place to work at.
♥ 6
Replying to @tim_libert
I know the feeling! But thankfully I don't need to convince my bosses, our questions aren't about "should we do this?" but rather "how do we make it work?" It's hard, I can't promise details or deadlines, but we're on it.
Replying to @tim_libert
And I'm not surprised they published it, it's a good and well-balanced piece, and when they say they're independent they really mean it!
It's why this matters: "the old model of a independently managed and free press is being replaced by one where giant technology companies control user data and the purse strings."
Some people don't include this in their privacy threat model. That's a problem.
♥ 1↺ 2
Replying to @tim_libert
Anyway, if you're ever in town we'd love you to come over for a chat!
Replying to @tim_libert
Thanks! Definitely reading that in the morning.
Replying to @MaxGendler and @jorge__nyc
Also, brie is awesome. I will have your brie, Max.
One of my favourite SEP articles, ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐, would totally buy again.
Quoting a tweet by @dailySEP ↗
♥ 3↺ 1
Replying to @TzviyaSiegman and @amyvdh
Me too!
Replying to @can
Every now and then I get a little bit tired of listening to the sound of my tears...
♥ 1
"We did not consider bad actors" is the Nuremberg defense of product design.
Quoting a tweet by @kottke ↗
♥ 15↺ 1
Replying to @tim_libert and @nytimes
I'd love to! I'd be really interested in frank feedback about what we're thinking and working towards. And I can probably hop over to CMU easily. My DMs are open if you want to hash out details!
Replying to @othermaciej and @BrendanEich, @DSepDC, @jason_kint, @ashk4n, @johnwilander, @JustinBrookman, @johnnyryan, @dmarti, @pdolanjski
Yeah, I don't think publishers would be interested either. I appreciate the willingness to look for alternatives, though, and we certainly have ideas for accountability to contribute.
♥ 2
Replying to @sheeraf
Try copying "Trump Yelling at Lawn-mowing Boy" captions over, it works better than I thought.
♥ 2
Replying to @hibaymj and @awwscript, @RubenVerborgh
In fact, people have died from the effects of radicalisation, harassment, etc.
No one is saying that you can foresee every malicious use, the baddies are creative for sure. But not trying is negligent, in some cases criminally negligent.
♥ 1
Replying to @awwscript and @hibaymj, @RubenVerborgh
Superhuman is a clear-cut case. It’s not “tracking” in the generalised surveillance sense, it’s allowing one specific person to monitor the behaviour — including location — of a specific other person. It’s spyware. Thinking about misuse for one minute is enough, it’s not hard.
♥ 1
Replying to @awwscript and @hibaymj, @RubenVerborgh
Saying “we didn’t consider malicious actors” is very precisely like saying “we didn’t think about making this product safe”.
Someone who said that for a physical product would — rightly — get their asses kicked for it.
♥ 1
Replying to @awwscript and @hibaymj, @RubenVerborgh
We have to lose this screwed up notion that digital products don’t need to be safe.
When you get harmed in cyberspace you get harmed in real life.
♥ 3↺ 3
Replying to @tabatkins
In my experience the jet lag does that more than the change of input.
It's Friday! Which in the public relations world stands for:
Facebook
Reveals
Inappropriate
Disclosures
About
You.
Quoting a tweet by @kateconger ↗
♥ 57↺ 22
♥ 2
If you're looking for something uplifting I highly recommend just going through all the #ClimateStrike pics that @GretaThunberg is posting.
♥ 7↺ 1
This reminds me of the Google+ purge that revealed data had been extracted at scale but mysteriously Google had no logs...
Quoting a tweet by @F_Kaltheuner ↗
♥ 2
Replying to @awwscript and @benlikestocode, @hibaymj, @RubenVerborgh
It sometimes takes several people to screw up. But they didn't just embed an image, they built a service to enable people to know exactly when and where an email was opened.
Replying to @awwscript and @hibaymj, @RubenVerborgh
The Superhuman people, and many many others.
Replying to @awwscript and @hibaymj, @RubenVerborgh
I have no idea why you're interested in shifting blame around nor why you think that digital products have no obligation to be safe, but unless you have a clear argument I'd kindly suggest we leave it at that.
♥ 1
Replying to @ohunt and @Google
We're hiring, in case there's something in there you might like: nytimes.wd5.myworkdayjobs.com/en-US/Tech
♥ 18
Replying to @TomEtty and @ohunt, @Google, @nytimes
We have people on the inside. See thread.
♥ 3
Replying to @TomEtty and @ohunt, @Google, @nytimes
Thanks. The hard part though is not so much allies in the sense of supporting that direction, it's finding people who can figure out how to make alternatives work. We'll get there, but it's a tricky path.
♥ 2
Replying to @TomEtty and @ohunt, @Google, @nytimes, @decorrespondent, @The_Corres
Yes, I'm aware of this and I'm glad that it's being explored as an option (also eg. by @team_markup). It's not clear (yet) how to extend that to a massive newsroom with dozens of bureaus, correspondents, etc.
Replying to @LeaVerou
Make the request while in the EU. Threaten to report them to the app store (scarier than lawyers) for GDPR infringement.
♥ 42
Replying to @dareljedid and @temptoetiam
Je n'en ai lu que 3, je ne sais pas si l'ordre importe, mais dans le doute j'ai commencé par le premier (Consider Phlebas) et j'ai bien aimé.
Replying to @temptoetiam and @dareljedid
Tu me sembles donner une bonne raison de s'y coller 😀
Replying to @j_camachor
I'm pretty sure that degrowth is the wrong approach, but technosolutionism has shown its failures.
Replying to @johnwilander and @ohunt
Thanks John. Yeah, I wasn't suggesting a journalism position 🙂
♥ 3
Replying to @sl007 and @rhiaro
Are those “think privacy” posters available somewhere?
Replying to @rhiaro and @sl007
Ah rats. I've signed up for updates, thanks!
Replying to @PrivacyProject and @GerritD, @technology
That’s not how consensus works. It would be a veto if unanimity were required. Google’s formal objection requires a Director decision, but it’s in no way a veto. No member has veto power.
♥ 2
Replying to @GerritD and @PrivacyProject, @technology
Yes, I read the story and it calls it “an effective veto” and mentions consensus as the reason for that. It’s a good story, and I’m happy and thankful to see it because standards aren’t covered anywhere near enough, but this characterisation is inaccurate.
Replying to @GerritD and @PrivacyProject, @technology
A formal objection (FO in the lingo) is an escalation, not a veto. It is meant to be a continuation of the consensus process in that it is expected to suggest changes that would lead to its resolution by bringing dissent to the Director for consideration.
Replying to @GerritD and @PrivacyProject, @technology
The distinction matters because the goal of the consensus process is to produce the outcome with the least objections; and in this case the converse decision might lead to more FOs than we are seeing here. If these were vetoes it’d all be stuck.
Replying to @GerritD and @PrivacyProject, @technology
To wrap up: I’m sorry for being pedantic at you, I know that standards are weird, and again I’m very thankful that you’re covering this. On the off chance that you’re crazy enough to want to cover them more, I think that understanding these bizarre subtleties can help :-)
Replying to @GerritD and @PrivacyProject, @technology
Yeah — be mindful that it’s a bit like Interstellar in reverse though: what is experienced as two months on the outside is really just a couple of days in the standards world ;-)
♥ 1
Replying to @GerritD and @PrivacyProject, @technology
Indeed, I’m no longer in that world, but we don’t do a great job of explaining ourselves to the world…
Replying to @cwarzel
I presume you’re familiar with this classic @Chronotope thread?
Quoting a tweet by @Chronotope ↗
♥ 11
Hear me out: what if we put all Android apps in some kind of centralised “app store”, that way there would be one single entity in charge and they would have the power to enforce policies to protect users?
Quoting a tweet by @v0max ↗
♥ 8↺ 3
Replying to @v0max
I know, I’m probably just dreaming. It’s waaaay too competitive a market to get all those different companies running app stores to agree to this.
♥ 2
Replying to @Chronotope
I was already thinking it was looking that way just looking at my news notifications at 8am this morning…
♥ 1
If you enjoyed the CCPA I think you’ll love… the next CCPA! 🎉
washingtonpost.com/technology/201…
♥ 11↺ 3
Producing behavioral data generates value. It's work that someone else profits from.
So, how do we go about unionising as behavioral data producers? ✊
♥ 9↺ 2
Replying to @_abialas and @femalegazebot
Scab! 🐀
Replying to @_abialas and @femalegazebot
Awww, I know you would never betray the cause for real 🤗
Replying to @ka_iwanska and @Beltrandroid
Ooh, Data Workers Union, I want it!
Replying to @adambroach and @marionpdaly
It’s entirely possible we might have already been talking ;-)
♥ 2
Replying to @anabrandusescu and @anabmap, @TeresaScassa
Hahahaha, then again what’s the other way of doing data governance? ;-)
♥ 1
Replying to @anabrandusescu and @anabmap, @TeresaScassa
I certainly agree it shouldn’t be tick-the-box, I was just making this joke because in DG it often feels like we’re always making stuff up as things happen because so much is relatively novel ground. “On the fly” is often hard to avoid.
♥ 1
Replying to @baekdal
We should pick our leaders based on their haircuts.
Replying to @jyasskin
I don't think that's fair, apart from old farts and standards people no one knows what a mailing list is.
♥ 2
Replying to @jyasskin
I think that someone who has experiences threads in social networking is very, very unlikely to recognise the notion when they look at a hypermail archive page :-D I mean: lists.w3.org/Archives/Publi…
Replying to @jyasskin
(I’m not saying this to annoy you — mailing lists and archives are something the W3C could really do something about if we hope to have any manner of accurate reporting into this…)
Replying to @jyasskin
I don’t disagree, but I think that in general we have to acknowledge just how insanely fucking hard it is to report on standards. You’re 100% right that it’s not a blog, but I spoke to the guy and he clearly put in a lot of homework to figure this story out.
Replying to @jyasskin
I reached out to explain that this isn’t a veto — and it’s clear that he really tried to understand the Process, which I can only feel sorry he had to… Indeed it’s not a blog, but I’d cut him some slack :)
♥ 1
Important question: how are we pronouncing #CPREA2020? I've been going with "see-prey-ah".
♥ 5
Replying to @null and @marionpdaly
I believe there's Diet on 3 and 14, but maybe not consistently. They take feedback!
♥ 1
Replying to @PeterSmith
My demonology is pretty rusty but I’m not aware of demons being reported as necessarily of binary gender nor necessarily male, so I’d go with “they”.
♥ 1
Replying to @wbm312 and @joejerome, @caprivacyorg, @PrivacyPros
One alternative would be to produce privacy regulation through a consensus-based open standards process which would then be bound into law. The downsides are that it would be slow, and it would require tough leadership to protect it from bad faith participants.
♥ 3
Replying to @benadida
This one is particularly shameful, but it's not like the other French "intellectuals" are faring that much better...
Quoting a tweet by @arretsurimages ↗
Replying to @can
Not just you.
Replying to @null and @koalie, @Pedigo_Chris, @technology, @Google
To be honest it doesn't feel targeted, they're just reporting the news.
Replying to @gsnedders
And why would the extension only work in Chrome?
Things missing from the web platform: competition?
♥ 2
Replying to @ebellis and @molly_struve
I was going to say the same. At this point I'm increasingly surprised that the Internet doesn't spontaneously disintegrate. Clearly computers are held together by a supernatural force; the jury is still out on how benevolent, or in fact sane, that force is.
♥ 3
Replying to @ka_iwanska and @mozilla, @panoptykon
Yay! This is awesome, we're lucky to have you working on this.
♥ 1
Replying to @modalizing
Wow, yes! Though, I mean, now that you’ve mentioned a wombat I wonder if you could maybe work it in there? Playing under the tree?
♥ 4
Replying to @modalizing
It’s not on preorder yet?
J’ai parfois l’impression que la fonction première des intellectuels français est d’obscurcir le débat en étalant le maximum de spéculation sur un sujet dont ils sont studieusement ignorants.
Quoting a tweet by @AlexDevecchio ↗
♥ 2↺ 1
Replying to @0gust1
Haha. Pas faux, mais en même temps c’est le rôle et la position qui leurs sont conférés. Ils sont publiés, invités, débattus, etc.
♥ 1
Replying to @trekonomics
Well, when Boris closes the Chunnel that way they can use the Eurostar trains to go to Belgium.
♥ 2
Replying to @GLadvie and @0gust1
Tu veux dire l’homme qui “prédit la transformation de l’Europe en colonie numérique chinoise?”
Je n’arrive pas à rouler des yeux assez fort.
♥ 2
This small detail is interesting: what is Netflix paying to get your viewing data when you’re watching TV _outside_ Netflix, and what do they do with it?
Quoting a tweet by @random_walker ↗
♥ 4↺ 2
Outstanding thread about how your TV tracks your behaviour. I’m surprised that Pi-Hole isn’t more effective, I need to dig in to see if it details why.
Quoting a tweet by @random_walker ↗
♥ 7↺ 4
This is essentially a solved problem, but between those who think Word is good enough, those who feel LaTeX is proof of some intellectual ability, and editors who believe their own citation format is the cornerstone of civilisation nothing can change.
Quoting a tweet by @DrJPChaput ↗
♥ 18↺ 10
Replying to @null and @koalie
It's true though, in some fields it's basically a shibboleth. As if using a poorly designed markup language to generate dated typesetting were a good in-group factor...
Replying to @AlecStapp
You... You are measuring traffic in bytes. And you're not measuring sources of traffic, but traffic to sources. Words... words fail me.
♥ 23
Replying to @null and @koalie, @inria_sophia
Hahaha, that's brilliant 😁
Replying to @liquidizer
It's interesting, the problem would be convincing people to use it, no?
Replying to @trekonomics
There's an episode of Sliders in which Napoleon doesn't sell Louisiana, makes peace with England, and invades America instead.
♥ 1
Part of the problem is that the LAPD is probably genuinely surprised that Google is monetising fascism.
Quoting a tweet by @mattdpearce ↗
♥ 15↺ 6
I could live in a Pierre Cardin future.
♥ 2
If I knew where to find this jumpsuit I'd wear it every day.
♥ 1
Or these pants!
♥ 1
This is hard to read, and I can't imagine how hard it is to work on. Let's not look the other way.
Quoting a tweet by @gabrieldance ↗
♥ 6↺ 3
This is an issue I struggle with repeatedly as well. I've been in tech almost 25 years, I know a lot of outstanding people — people with *local* moral excellence. But some (I feel) support morally dubious behaviour at a higher organisational scale.
What can we do about this?
Quoting a tweet by @slightlylate ↗
♥ 2↺ 2
My basic contention is that "governance is ethics at scale". Not in the sense of having an organisation virtuous in the same way that an individual is, but rather following the view that we can build structures that enable global moral excellence (from varied local excellence).
♥ 1↺ 1
That might sound cool (to me, at least ;) but how do you go about this? The details are complex but one simple notion is tying local action to global and nth-degree outcomes, with a focus on adversarial thinking to help avoid motivated reasoning and "unintended" consequences.
♥ 1
Replying to @ethicistforhire and @mitpress
Well there you go. As a minor correction I think it’s worth considering.
♥ 1
Replying to @ethicistforhire and @mitpress
You know, I really think you would benefit from having your son involved much earlier in your publication process.
♥ 3
Replying to @cepcam
Classique. La question c’est est-ce que vous vous en seriez rendus compte si ça avait été un taux de réussite moins suspect (ex. pour cause de dates se chevauchant un peu)?
♥ 1
Replying to @cepcam
Oui oui, c’est un problème qui n’est pas surprenant, j’étais surtout curieux de savoir ce que vous aviez comme approche pour détecter ce type de problème. Un modèle qui marche à 100% tu sais qu’il te ment.