I’ve already gotten pings (don’t you people have other things to do? ;) about this morning’s post on the LinkedIn blog, mostly around a more detailed explanation of the data portability goals with some privacy overtones, so I’ll give a terse summary here:

Some useful jumping-off points:

I’m only just getting caught up with what’s gone before on this effort, so I don’t have much more to offer than to say openness is good as long as it clearly respects privacy. It’s that last bit about privacy which I think is getting lost in the thundering herd of press coverage, but that’s what motivated me to get involved. It’s my firm, personal belief that portability must account for privacy; you own your profile and your connection to me, but you don’t get my profile and personal data in the bargain (unless I offer it).

While I don’t agree with Mr. Howlett’s title assertion, I absolutely adore the UK Data Protection Act (hey, Congress, you might have read this prior to the DMCA) and its intent and I’d expect it can and will be fully embraced in this effort; in that regard, I think Danny Ayers has some ideas heading down the right path, and in fact Robert Scoble had thoughts along these lines just after the debacle that shined a spotlight on data portability in the first place.

Context matters. Context always matters.

blog comments powered by Disqus


10 January 2008


data portability identity privacy reputation social networks trust web 2.0