Re: Proposal to revise ISOC's mission statement

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hiya,

On 07/11/17 07:49, Gonzalo Camarillo wrote:
> Hi Keith,
> 
> ah, now I see where you are coming from. Yes, we are also discussing
> whether ISOC should be closer to a neutral "convener" or, instead,
> "advocate" more strongly in certain areas... and the ideal role may
> depend on the particular area, actually.
> 
> In summary, yes, we are thinking about it... and, FWIW, based on my
> discussions many IETFers share your view.

As an input there, (not that you'll be short of them:-),,, I
hope that ISOC don't differentiate too much between government
surveillance and corporate surveillance. While the latter
may have some fig-leaf of so-called "consent" or clicked-EULA,
it's the same information being gathered/centralised etc. (And
of course the latter form of surveillance can nicely feed the
former when companies are compelled.)

I realise that commenting on corporate surveillance might be
harder for ISOC and IETFers as we end up criticising basically
ourselves/our-employers, but ISTM that logic and consistency
call for doing just that.

Cheers,
S.


> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Gonzalo
> 
> 
> On 07/11/2017 9:38 AM, Keith Moore wrote:
>> Having "activities", and prominently taking a stand for what's right, are very different things.
>>
>>
>> On Nov 7, 2017, at 2:30 AM, Gonzalo Camarillo wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Keith,
>>>
>>> yes, ISOC has activities on that front. For instance, a couple of weeks
>>> ago ISOC organized the following Chatham House Roundtable on Encryption
>>> and Lawful Access:
>>>
>>> https://www.chathamhouse.org/event/encryption-and-lawful-access
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Gonzalo
>>>
>>> On 07/11/2017 2:00 AM, Keith Moore wrote:
>>>> Hi Gonzalo,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks your your reply.  I understand that it's necessary to word things
>>>> carefully, but I hope ISOC can find a way to specifically call out both
>>>> mining of personal data (whether or not traceable to individual
>>>> identities) and mass surveillance (whether or not by state-supported
>>>> actors) as significant threats to the public welfare.
>>>>
>>>> Keith
>>>>
>>>> On 11/06/2017 05:34 AM, Gonzalo Camarillo wrote:
>>>>> Hi Keith,
>>>>>
>>>>> thanks for your comments.
>>>>>
>>>>>> In the context of ISOC it's important to understand that the Internet
>>>>>> can be used for good or ill, but it's in danger of becoming more of the
>>>>>> latter.   Promoting the Internet as if it were a universal good, while
>>>>>> ignoring the various ways it can be used to exploit or harm its users,
>>>>>> does not seem either responsible or consistent with ISOC's history.
>>>>>> There are of course limits to what ISOC can do about it, but I don't
>>>>>> think ISOC should be silent and/or pretend that it's not a problem.
>>>>> I agree with you. In fact, this is a topic I also brought up in my
>>>>> closing talk at ISOC's 25th anniversary event a few weeks ago. In the
>>>>> past, it was assumed that more connectivity was always good. Nowadays,
>>>>> as you point out, ubiquitous and constant connectivity has clear
>>>>> downsides as well. In addition to the examples you discussed, Internet
>>>>> addiction and the social problems it is already causing in some parts of
>>>>> the world (e.g., increases in car accidents, social isolation, etc.) is
>>>>> an important concern as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> I also agree with you that there are clear limits to what ISOC can or
>>>>> should do about it. As I mentioned in previous emails, in addition to
>>>>> the work on the mission statement we are working on defining ISOC's
>>>>> scope in more detail in different areas, "policy" being one of them. We
>>>>> are currently working on identifying particular areas where, based on
>>>>> ISOC's capabilities, we should engage. We are also identifying areas
>>>>> where ISOC should not get involved.
>>>>>
>>>>> With respect to capturing this in the mission statement, the proposed
>>>>> text reads as follows: The Internet as "a force for good in society".
>>>>> That sentence tries to capture the social benefits we are after (as
>>>>> opposed to just wanting connectivity for the sake of it, without any
>>>>> "higher" purpose).
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>> Gonzalo
>>>>
>>
> 
> 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]