I spoke with Wired about the domestic and international policy implications of the UK’s data protection regulator being physically absent and structurally passive.
It might be yours.
A musing on the Piglet’s Code and the Online Farms Framework.
One of the many problems I have with the UK government’s determination to build an “age appropriate” internet that will be the “safest place in the world to be online” is that this goal is entirely subjective and inachievable. It attempts to create internet regulation through undefined emotive rhetoric.
A tweet conversation this morning has spurred me to pour a cup of tea and share this story about what happens when “age appropriate” is allowed to become a subjective and politicised decision, nodded through by authority, about how information should be delivered – and filtered – to the young people who need it the most.
I updated my Brexit side blog, so I did.
Several years of watching Parliamentary hearings, participating in the shaping of legislation, and observing the politicisation of the fundamental rules of the open web have proven the old axiom: if you regulate the web as if only Facebook and Google exist, the end result will be that only Facebook and Google exist.
Let’s talk about democracy, and technology, and how sausages are made.
When I retired from open source projects in February, I did so with more than a little curiosity about what new opportunities would come up to fill the void. That’s how life works, after all. Here is the first one.