| | |
|
BrettJohnsonFirstPaper 15 - 07 Sep 2011 - Main.IanSullivan
|
|
<
< |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper" |
|---|
| >
> |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper2009" |
|---|
| | | I. INTRODUCTION | | | I added this comment box. Feel free to delete it if you didn't want one; just find the percentage-sign COMMENT percentage-sign text in the editing screen and delete it. | |
<
< | The paper reads well. In terms of suggestions, I have only a few. First, you should link to Steven Wu's essay in discussing that some people choose aggregation in return for customized services. You might also look at Dana Delger's essay in that regard. I tend to agree that an opt-in system is the best approach, for the reasons you outline: those who wish to sign-up for data aggregation should be allowed to do so, and free-for-all monitoring is highly problematic. If I were to suggest revision to the essay, I would think saying more about just what sort of information people must be given when deciding to opt-in or not would be helpful. You don't want the opt-in option to be like the Windows Vista User Access Control, but you need it to also not overload the user with info (as you suggest). Maybe on the federal site you mention, you could also have a sort of opt-in wiki? Where people can post and discuss the results of their opting-in and out. The initial opt-in/out button gives essential, basic info (just a few sentences), and the link takes you to the federal page and a wiki where you can learn more? Whatever the optimal opt-in model, I think saying more about ideas for it would be helpful. Otherwise, it looks pretty good. | >
> | The paper reads well. In terms of suggestions, I have only a few. First, you should link to Steven Wu's essay in discussing that some people choose aggregation in return for customized services. You might also look at Dana Delger's essay in that regard. I tend to agree that an opt-in system is the best approach, for the reasons you outline: those who wish to sign-up for data aggregation should be allowed to do so, and free-for-all monitoring is highly problematic. If I were to suggest revision to the essay, I would think saying more about just what sort of information people must be given when deciding to opt-in or not would be helpful. You don't want the opt-in option to be like the Windows Vista User Access Control, but you need it to also not overload the user with info (as you suggest). Maybe on the federal site you mention, you could also have a sort of opt-in wiki? Where people can post and discuss the results of their opting-in and out. The initial opt-in/out button gives essential, basic info (just a few sentences), and the link takes you to the federal page and a wiki where you can learn more? Whatever the optimal opt-in model, I think saying more about ideas for it would be helpful. Otherwise, it looks pretty good. | | | -- BrianS - 20 Nov 2009 |
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| | |