November 28, 2014 at 1:13 pm
Comments posted to this topic are about the item Facebooking Up to Your Social Responsibilities
Best wishes,
Phil Factor
November 29, 2014 at 5:22 am
Thought provoking article which I am sure will raise a lot of issues drawn from personal experience.
In my professional career I have sometimes had to try to take a 'common sense' approach to disclosing otherwise sensitive material to statutory bodies. But apart from that 'sense' have had little or no practical guidance, and am concerned that what my 'gut feeling' (for want of a better expression) prompted me to take 1 course of action at any given time could have been overturned if other points of view had been presented. Although I take a keen interest in all 3, I am not a lawmaker, and not a politician, and not an opinion maker/trend setter (the latter having changed what is acceptable behaviour quite a significant amount in my lifetime).
Also (perhaps unlike a large corporation) I have not had the resources to seek assistance from the legal profession every time a potential tendentious issue has arisen.
I look forward to reading how others, perhaps in similar situations to my own, deal with these matters.
November 29, 2014 at 7:03 am
It doesn't surprise me that there are countries that want their residents servers hosted in the country they are from.
November 30, 2014 at 10:23 am
>> We can't stop technology to let the law catch up.
Correct
>>Terrorists and criminals will find and exploit the new opportunities that open up as technology develops.
Correct. It's kind of how life is. See https://medium.com/message/everything-is-broken-81e5f33a24e1
We have to prevent this happening.
>> You can't and I was surprised to hear you say that! This is nothing new, it just happens faster these days.
>>The technology giant companies of the US cannot, for long, play one jurisdiction off against another, in order to avoid responsibility.
A) I think they probably can and B) I'm not sure it's their responsibility anyway. We already know that Facebook has a fairly heavy investment in trying to remove the worst offenders accounts. I'm not sure that it's also their duty to be an adjunct to forces of "law and order". And in any case, whose laws? Any nations laws or just the ones you approve of?
>> Goodwill, collaboration, thoughtful custodianship of data, and sensitivity towards legitimate privacy seem to be the only viable option.
Bland, says nothing
We've got to be able to allow governments to perform their function without restriction.
To "perform their function without restriction" That was meant be ironic, yeah? I think history is pretty clear about what happens when governments are allowed to "perform their function without restriction".
>> Technologists generally make poor politicians.
But generally no worse than Politicians.
December 1, 2014 at 6:02 am
Nigel - excellent points. You saved me the effort of formulating my own response.
December 1, 2014 at 11:02 am
Excellent points by Nigel. In addition to technologists generally making poor politicians, politicians are almost always poor technologists. This is one of the reasons that it takes so long to work these issues through the "legal" channels. The political class is almost entirely composed of lawyers who have little to no knowledge of technology.
December 3, 2014 at 6:25 am
There is no point offloading "policing" duties to technology companies as they will just send all positives to the appropriate authoroties. This will lead them to being snowed under and being ineffective themselves. If you look at a lot of the youth language (for many generations but particularly now) it often appropriates violent language and, as such, it is very difficult to differentiate someone's First Person Shooter banter with someone's random terrorist like statement.
Gaz
-- Stop your grinnin' and drop your linen...they're everywhere!!!
Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply