- From: timeless <timeless@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 10:30:34 +0300
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Charles McCathieNevile <chaals at opera.com> wrote: > If I understand correctly, I disagree. :) > I might trust a given entity > sometimes, or with some kinds of information, without wanting to simply say > "sure whatever you want". And I'm still haunted by web sites which pester me to click on things before allowing access to content. It's pretty clear that if we let web sites hold users for ransom, they will (privacy be damned). So we really should have a model of "privacy secured by default". > That's probably for the "hard-to-use mode" in the > UI, but I think it's legitimate. I'm hoping it isn't that hard. > In practice, even given something as simple > as twitter's geolocation request I *sometimes* allow it to know where I am > and sometimes don't. I'm hoping we'll eventually move to a model where users are able to provide default values for things, e.g. "If anyone asks [about GeoPositioning], I'm in Paris" (I'm currently sick in HEL, but no one needs to know that). Or "If anyone wants to see what's outside my window [i.e. visible from my Camera], show them this picture I took the last time I had sunlight" (In case my cave doesn't have any lighting). When a site accesses this information, it should show the user the information it accesses, and the user (being the one who selected the information) will understand what it means, if the user wants to give a different GPS, Picture, etc. to the application, the user would trigger a site option, and say "allow twitter to see my current Location <until I get distracted, for this session, until 2pm, forever>." Someday I'll try to make a decent mock up of this, I think I'll eventually publish something @ http://timeless.justdave.net/blog/182/ (no, that url isn't finished, it's only finished when I publish it in my atom feed)
Received on Thursday, 5 May 2011 00:30:34 UTC