Today's NewsGang (at least the 2nd half) discussed controls (programatic, regulatory, awareness) to maintain personal information.
My interpretation of the discussion topic is that either:
- the controls should be personal, in that an individual will use or not use a service thereby giving implicit consent to the service provider to use information per the usage agreement
OR - basic controls should be provided (by well meaning vendors), to help customers understand the 'contract'
OR - Regulations will be imposed.
In addition, there was an question of the responsibility of individuals and vendors to providing/supporting these controls (programatic, awareness) for other travellers on the information superhighway (couldn't help myself).
While I personally attempt #1, it is sometimes difficult to assess whether a service is trustworthy. I believe that the community can help here, but viral awareness will probably not reach the less sophisticated users.
Some basic controls (#2) are in place and are a useful mechanism (like TRUSTe). I think more would be better to help #1. Individuals and vendors who support basic controls and transparency should be applauded, not throttled. It might be idealistic, but much has been accomplished under that umbrella. This mechanism is the answer if you believe in a social contract and someting less than all out "Caveat emptor". This is why the FDA exists and why Ralph Nader has a positive legacy.
Lastly there is a place for regulations, as a mechanism to remove the real SOBs from circulation. These guys (of all sexes and races) prey on those least able to and should be removed.
Once again, Steve is a few years ahead in this conversation, but I'm not sure that the discussion is over because of that or that it should be.
Comments
Post new comment