- From: Steven Rowat <steven_rowat@sunshine.net>
- Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2013 09:50:07 -0800
- To: public-webpayments@w3.org
On 2/6/13 1:18 AM, Iris Peetz wrote: > Secretariat > Berlin Commissioner for > Data Protection and Freedom of Information > > International Working Group > on Data Protection > in Telecommunications Greetings, To me their email is an interesting development. The "White Paper on Privacy and Electronic Micropayment on the Internet" attachment they sent I find succinct and cogent. I'm fully in agreement with what they ask for, that either anonymous or pseudonymous payment should be built into the open payment standard as a necessary available option for an end-user. I also agree with their reasoning: the surreptitious theft of data and the rise of an advertising economy built on this data is an unhealthy development. If this becomes attached to people's purchases, even micropayment purchases, it will only get worse. I'm in this group largely because I believe the things the Berlin group are asking for. I think it's a pivotal idea. So I strongly recommend that this be included. I'm not familiar enough with PaySwarm at the coding level to know if this, as a necessary option, is already built into it. Is it? To me, having this as a requirement in PaySwarm is a very good thing. It will mean that if PaySwarm is adopted by, say, both FireFox and Chrome, Google can't say, "we refuse to allow anonymous or pseudonymous payments through Chrome because we want to steal people's personal and payment data and sell it to advertisers." It appears from the Berlin group's letter and White Paper that governments -- at least in the EU -- may get involved in legislating the necessity for this option. But I'm probably preaching to the converted. :-) What's the state of this in PaySwarm? Steven Rowat
Received on Wednesday, 6 February 2013 17:50:37 UTC