| In a trust network, governance is done by separation of concern.
luk On 12 Mar 2013, at 08:38,
">
wrote: Katherine
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Who certifies the certifiers?
Best regards from Cologne, Graham
-- Dr. Graham Hill
">
UK +44 7564 122 633 DE +49 170 487 6192 http://twitter.com/GrahamHill http://www.linkedin.com/in/grahamhill http://www.customerthink.com/graham_hill Partner Optima Partners http://www.optimapartners.co.uk Senior Associate Nyras Capital http://www.nyras.co.uk
Gesendet: Montag, 11. März 2013 um 23:27 Uhr
Von: "Katherine Warman Kern" <
">
>
An: "'Doc Searls'" <
">
>, "'T.Rob'" <
">
>
Cc: "'Project VRM'" <
">
>
Betreff: RE: [projectvrm] Tough day for VRM
Doc, I’ve always felt that one purpose of Project VRM should be to certify projects. There is so much “forked tongue” out there, one thing *we* need is a checklist and reassurance that a VRMy project is what it says it is. This could take a lot of time and wary eyeballs. Something I think many interested in meeting the test would be willing to help fund with an application fee. It would be well worth the investment.
K-
From: Doc Searls [mailto:dsearls@cyber.law.harvard.edu]
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 8:40 AM
To: T.Rob
Cc: Project VRM
Subject: Re: [projectvrm] Tough day for VRM
Thanks, T.Rob.
You understand the VRM philosophy just fine.
There are two problems here.
One is tracking, as you say. We're about to start a series on ethics at Linux Journal dealing with exactly this stuff. As I understand it, so far, the problem for publishers is that, in order to have any advertising on one's site, one (or one's third parties) needs to track. That's just how it's done. Or so goes the conventional wisdom (or stupidity) of the moment. This needs to be discussed and unpacked.
The other is a polyscopic vision of tracking that has remarkably few consistencies between each of the eyes on the problem. Take a look at the graphic in this blog post here:
That's the set of tracking monitors and ad blockers I have just on Firefox.
I love them all, and regard them all as VRM developers; but here is remarkably little consistency between them.
We lack a common symbology, a common lexicon, a common approach to seeing and talking about the problem.
One issue is just complexity. Take a look at the graphics in this post here:
Those companies and categories are numerous beyond even the comprehension of those in them.
But we need to get on top of them.
This isn't just a matter of having a common "experience" of tracker monitoring and blocking, though that's part of it.
We need to agree among ourselves about how to identify and talk about tracking. We need symbols. Vocabulary and pattern language. Whatever it takes.
It's not up to the adtech business and site publishers of the world. Again that would put too much responsibility in the seller's hands rather than the buyer's: one more job for the cow, rather than liberating the calf by giving him or her ways to be human.
This is one of our jobs, and it's front and center right now.
We should far enough downstream before IIW that we can drill down on it face to face there.
Today I set some time aside to go sign up for some of the VRM-y services I’ve been reading about. There’s a lot of good stuff out there but I did find something puzzling. I run Ghostery. On these sites that practice a VRM philosophy, I expected to find social widgets. Shoot, you almost can’t exist on the web without a slew of “like” and “share” buttons. But what I didn’t expect to find was trackers. But I did and on most of the sites I visited. While it’s true that all these sites had no more than one or two non-social Ghostery hits, why do they have even one?
For example, while on the miicard privacy page, where the text says “From the details you choose to verify your identity to the information you share, miicard puts you in charge at every stage,” Ghostery blocks ChartBeat and Pardot (as well as expected widgets from Facebook, G+ and LinkedIn). http://i.imgur.com/ygMaodd.png There’s nothing I could find on the web site that mention ChartBeat or Pardot as partners nor explain what is shared with them. Although it’s true that it isn’t *miicard* releasing my data (ChartBeat & Pardot collect it directly), it is true that miicard intentionally chose to embed stealth analytics and tracking on the very page that explains how they protect your their privacy and identity.
So I have to ask… am I the only who looks at these things when signing up? Or am I completely misunderstanding the philosophy of VRM in my expectation of how my data is collected and shared?
(PS - Sorry miicard to single you out. I found this on most sites I visited today but your privacy page had the largest delta between perception and reality, as seen in the image. I didn’t think a name-and-shame spree would be productive and if the tracking on miicard is deemed acceptable by the community here then it will be on the other sites as well. In that case, I’ll have to go re-read Intention Economy and the VRM web site because I’ll have completely misunderstood the intent.)
<image002.jpg>
|