- From: Karl Dubost <karld@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 14:53:37 -0400
- To: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
- Cc: public-privacy@w3.org, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Le 18 oct. 2011 à 12:55, Rigo Wenning a écrit : > I think we need further research on the "right to be forgotten" to erase > content from the web. But this is tricky. Before that, there are low hanging fruits that we do not use. Increasing opacity (or if you prefer increasing friction in sharing features.) Many issues we have with erasing or "right to be forgotten" come from a very poor framework for controlling how we share. For example tumblr is checking the license of an image before allowing users to make a copy of it on their system. It will not block über users but it will create more "opacity". http://la-grange.net/2009/09/05/tumblr-partage Another feature in the preferences of tumblr is search engine blocking. This is a kind of robots.txt. I would like to see robots.txt evolved in a way that would allow to give UI for users to easily set the ACLs for each of their resources. robots.txt is dumb and often the only solution for a proper blocking of user agents is .htaccess (when running under Apache). http://la-grange.net/2009/04/03/tumblr-searchengine Another one which is a bit harder. I haven't seen any social network doing that. When you meet someone physically for the first time, you will reveal bits of your past at your will, your narrative, etc. On the Web, once someone joined your "private" profile (in fact shared with the company providing the service), the person has access to all your past activities and information instead of showing only data in the future. This would remove a pressure on adding "friends". -- Karl Dubost - http://dev.opera.com/ Developer Relations & Tools, Opera Software
Received on Thursday, 20 October 2011 18:54:18 UTC