Caspar,

Thank you for your thoughtful paper.

>>So fwiw, I'm not at all keen on that recommendation. Note that I only
>> mean I disagree with the recommendation for this purpose, there are
>> probably lots of other good reasons why locally provided services are
>> a good thing. (Actually, I'd like this to go towards its logical
>> conclusion that everyone have their own server box in their home,
>
>I agree. But elastic scalable massively parallel computation cannot be
>disinvented (maybe it should be cos such centralization is always
>dangerous), and there will be a demand for that

The economics will drive the outcome, as ever. Accordingly I believe that
the prevailing focus of "what can the IETF do to improve privacy" is
misplaced. We should instead focus on "what can the IETF do to reduce the
cost of privacy". If we make it cheaper, we will help providers (and their
jurisdictions) to bid for the business where consumers want to
discriminate between providers on that basis.

Having the right regulatory environment will encourage that kind of
discrimination, if it imposes penalties and provides incentives. There is
a clear role for ISOC here, and I look forward to some substantive
movement that goes beyond a press release that they are "alarmed" by these
events. The IAB should be engaged at the next level down, considering how
the policy and regulatory environment should map to the technical
architecture.

Josh.


Janet(UK) is a trading name of Jisc Collections and Janet Limited, a 
not-for-profit company which is registered in England under No. 2881024 
and whose Registered Office is at Lumen House, Library Avenue,
Harwell Oxford, Didcot, Oxfordshire. OX11 0SG. VAT No. 614944238

_______________________________________________
ietf-privacy mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-privacy

Reply via email to