W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > June 2012

Re: Towards a Grand Compromise

From: Peter Cranstone <peter.cranstone@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2012 16:16:02 -0600
To: Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>, Tamir Israel <tisrael@cippic.ca>
CC: Jeffrey Chester <jeff@democraticmedia.org>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, Jonathan Mayer <jmayer@stanford.edu>, "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CC03ADC2.39B6%peter.cranstone@gmail.com>
Shane,

If only it was that easy - if all else fails dismiss the person.

Building protocols is hard, building them on a public forum using email is
really hard. Simply dismissing people doesn't solve your core problem. DNT
is in big trouble and you know it. I've been re-reading Roy's email a lot.
While I'm not a PhD., I've worked with enough of them and have learned to
carefully parse what they say. While I may not agree with Roy on a lot of
things (he and I go back aways) I've learned to respect what he says.

His email is as close as I've seen to saying that a single  HTTP header
that only has a "1" or a "0" after it, can never possibly achieve Privacy
on the Internet. He correctly points out (read between the lines) that it
will take a very complicated system of procedures to pull that off,
including lots of new HTTP headers.

While there need to be a whole lot of rules on the server side to prevent
collection and sharing of user data, the REAL battleground is going to be
on the Client side. It is the browsers that can do the most starting with
an "extremely safe" method vs. the current approach which is absolutely
nothing. And for this to really work you're going to have to figure out
"how to get the users permission" to start doing this stuff (tracking).

When you started this design Privacy was not a big deal. And then all of
sudden it's now a huge deal. Regulators (Policy makers) are now going to
force technical changes, whether you like it or not.

There's a reason that all current Mobile browsers from the OEM who control
the OS do NOT allow plugins. The whole stability reason is utter nonsense.
It's because they figured out immediately that mobile really is the
future, and if advertising is really going to take off (i.e. generate
gazillions more in revenue) then they didn't want any 3rd party vendors
messing with their ability to track users and monetize them.

Every carrier and mobile OS vendor knows exactly what every user is doing
every second that device is turned on. What they haven't figured out yet
is how to get my permission to abuse my privacy.

At stake is Web 3.0 - mobile apps were just the hors d'oeuvre's, the main
course is precise targeted local advertising - all they need is my
permission. If you didn't want the regulators in the mix then you should
have allowed plugins from day 1. But now it's too late, the industry will
be regulated, Privacy is here to stay and DNT in it's current format needs
a complete rethink.

Roy's rightŠ read his email.



Peter
___________________________________
Peter J. Cranstone
720.663.1752








-----Original Message-----
From: Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>
Date: Sunday, June 17, 2012 1:43 PM
To: Tamir Israel <tisrael@cippic.ca>
Cc: Jeffrey Chester <jeff@democraticmedia.org>, "Roy T. Fielding"
<fielding@gbiv.com>, Jonathan Mayer <jmayer@stanford.edu>, W3 Tracking
<public-tracking@w3.org>
Subject: RE: Towards a Grand Compromise
Resent-From: W3 Tracking <public-tracking@w3.org>
Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:44:44 +0000

>I'll no longer be replying to your emails as I'm trying to focus my energy
>and efforts to those that are part of the formal Working Group process (at
>least for a little while - too much history you're missing and rehashing
>old
>arguments).
Received on Sunday, 17 June 2012 22:16:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 21 June 2013 10:11:30 UTC