Fwd: [GNU/consensus] [RFC][SH] User Data Manifesto

FYI:  Richard Stallman's comments on the User Data Manifesto

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Date: 1 January 2013 03:05
Subject: Re: [GNU/consensus] [RFC][SH] User Data Manifesto
To: "hellekin (GNU Consensus)" <hellekin@gnu.org>
Cc: consensus@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org


This text has a lot of problems.  Several points are stated in very
broad terms that have serious problems.  Hold your horses!

    1. Own the data
    The data that someone directly or indirectly creates belongs to the
    person who created it.

The words "own" and "belong" will give people the wrong idea.
Meanwhile, "data" is too general.

What if the data is program?  This seems to say that the program
should gave an owner -- and we are against that.

    2. Know where the data is stored
    Everybody should be able to know: where their personal data is
    physically stored, how long, on which server, in what country, and what
    laws apply.

    3. Choose the storage location
    Everybody should always be able to migrate their personal data to a
    different provider, server or their own machine at any time without
    being locked in to a specific vendor.

I guess so, but in the long term, this is aiming low.  The real goal
should be that everyone has a server and keeps her data there.

    5. Choose the conditions
    If someone chooses to share their own data, then the owner of the data
    selects the sharing license and conditions.

"Owner of the data" has the same problems as in the first item.

    6. Invulnerability of data
    Everybody should be able to protect their own data against surveillance
    and to federate their own data for backups to prevent data loss or for
    any other reason.

"Invulnerability" is too strong.  Nobody can achieve that.

    7. Use it optimally
    Everybody should be able to access and use their own data at all times
    with any device they choose and in the most convenient and easiest way
    for them.

This is a demand for perfect convenience.  I suspect it is impossible;
more importantly, it is a distraction, since it is not an ethical issue.
Mere convenience issues should not be elevated to the same status
as ethical issues.

    8. Server software transparency
    Server software should be free and open source software so that the
    source code of the software can be inspected to confirm that it works as
    specified.

Please don't use the term "open source" here.  This is part of the
free software movement.  "Open source" is the slogan of people who
disagree with our ethical ideals.

--
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation
51 Franklin St
Boston MA 02110
USA
www.fsf.org  www.gnu.org
Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software.
  Use Ekiga or an ordinary phone call