<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:creativeCommons="http://backend.userland.com/creativeCommonsRssModule"	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: on privacy, quality, and autonomy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://autonomo.us/2008/07/on-privacy-quality-and-autonomy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://autonomo.us/2008/07/on-privacy-quality-and-autonomy/</link>
	<description>Toward Free Network Services</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Mar 2010 11:47:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: autonomo.us &#183; new thinking on privacy and data portability</title>
		<link>http://autonomo.us/2008/07/on-privacy-quality-and-autonomy/comment-page-1/#comment-165</link>
		<dc:creator>autonomo.us &#183; new thinking on privacy and data portability</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2008 12:47:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://autonomo.us/?p=9#comment-165</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;[...] argued here (and elsewhere) that privacy in network services is a problem best solved by data portability. The [...]&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] argued here (and elsewhere) that privacy in network services is a problem best solved by data portability. The [...]</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: luis</title>
		<link>http://autonomo.us/2008/07/on-privacy-quality-and-autonomy/comment-page-1/#comment-60</link>
		<dc:creator>luis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jul 2008 05:54:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://autonomo.us/?p=9#comment-60</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;Most importantly, I think people can have very different ideas about what constitutes a good approach to privacy while being completely in sync with each other when it comes to the core issues of technological empowerment and autonomy.&lt;/i&gt;
Absolutely, especially since (relatively speaking) our notions about privacy are vastly immature when compared to our notions about empowerment/autonomy.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Most importantly, I think people can have very different ideas about what constitutes a good approach to privacy while being completely in sync with each other when it comes to the core issues of technological empowerment and autonomy.</i>
Absolutely, especially since (relatively speaking) our notions about privacy are vastly immature when compared to our notions about empowerment/autonomy.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mako</title>
		<link>http://autonomo.us/2008/07/on-privacy-quality-and-autonomy/comment-page-1/#comment-59</link>
		<dc:creator>mako</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 18:50:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://autonomo.us/?p=9#comment-59</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks Luis! I also think we&#039;re going to be best served by keeping issues of empowerment and control over one&#039;s technology orthogonal to issues of privacy.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;You may be correct (and I suspect you are) that autonomy leads to a better privacy situation. That said, I can imagine quite a few different privacy situations that people seem to like. There are wonderful network services (nearly every Mediawiki installation) that basically say that they don&#039;t do private data (or rather, it&#039;s all open, or all closed). There are others that have much more nuanced privacy policies. Most importantly, I think people can have very different ideas about what constitutes a good approach to privacy while being completely in sync with each other when it comes to the core issues of technological empowerment and autonomy.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;In other words, I think that we can build a stronger coalition around autonomy and network services by leaving out the discussions of privacy and agree that a good privacy situation (or a multiplicity of privacy situations to fit different definitions of good) will sort itself out.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Luis! I also think we&#8217;re going to be best served by keeping issues of empowerment and control over one&#8217;s technology orthogonal to issues of privacy.</p>

<p>You may be correct (and I suspect you are) that autonomy leads to a better privacy situation. That said, I can imagine quite a few different privacy situations that people seem to like. There are wonderful network services (nearly every Mediawiki installation) that basically say that they don&#8217;t do private data (or rather, it&#8217;s all open, or all closed). There are others that have much more nuanced privacy policies. Most importantly, I think people can have very different ideas about what constitutes a good approach to privacy while being completely in sync with each other when it comes to the core issues of technological empowerment and autonomy.</p>

<p>In other words, I think that we can build a stronger coalition around autonomy and network services by leaving out the discussions of privacy and agree that a good privacy situation (or a multiplicity of privacy situations to fit different definitions of good) will sort itself out.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
