-
UK Gov *rejects* “privacy by design” architecture, GDPR-mandated data minimisation now supposedly “makes children unsafe”
Disappearing messages exist in order to empower people to take control of their digital exhaust trail and to minimise the opportunities for third parties to abuse older information. The government is now against this key precept of information security, because children:
-
Observation: The UK & EU now must deregulate & promote globally competitive AI/LLM provision on grounds of Digital Sovereignty
“Mistral” is not adequate. Anthropic: “Statement on the US government directive to suspend access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5” https://www.anthropic.com/news/fable-mythos-access
-
The End of the Open Internet | Foreign Affairs
Europe is following where China and Iran lead, America dithers: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/europe/end-open-internet
-
“Signal President Meredith Whittaker threatens again to pull the encrypted messaging app out of the UK”
Signal will not compromise user privacy in order to satisfy the UK Government. They could withdraw from UK app-stores, but further: they could block any account with an associated “+44” phone number – me included. Such a “nuclear option” would beneficially put the burden of responsibility on the UK Gov’t without background narrative nitpicking about
-
Some day Civil Society must grapple with whether platforms can differentiate markets on the basis of delivering Privacy & Security features
I blame DRM: the artificial market segmentation of DVDs being “region locked” led to much “free market” backlash from civil society; but now we have: …yet somehow the latter is “bad” and the former two are “good”? Can we please have some consistency?
-
Compare and Contrast: what is the likely consequence of such simultaneous positions?
I would argue that denying kids before 16 the opportunity to use social media would be denial of their access to political information necessary for them to be informed voters.
