Computers, Privacy & the Constitution

View   r3  >  r2  ...
LeoFarbmanFirstPaper 3 - 28 Jun 2016 - Main.EbenMoglen
Line: 1 to 1
 
META TOPICPARENT name="FirstPaper"

The Edible Road Back to Privacy

Line: 40 to 40
 http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/26/us/politics/obama-administration-set-to-expand-sharing-of-data-that-nsa-intercepts.html?_r=0 http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/01/28/senate_passes_critical_privacy_bill/
Added:
>
>
Why in writing for the web would you dump URLs at the bottom of the text in a source list instead of making links with them, so the reader can use them to gain context in the course of reading?

 
Deleted:
<
<
You are entitled to restrict access to your paper if you want to. But we all derive immense benefit from reading one another's work, and I hope you won't feel the need unless the subject matter is personal and its disclosure would be harmful or undesirable. To restrict access to your paper simply delete the "#" character on the next two lines:
 
Deleted:
<
<
 
Deleted:
<
<
Note: TWiki has strict formatting rules for preference declarations. Make sure you preserve the three spaces, asterisk, and extra space at the beginning of these lines. If you wish to give access to any other users simply add them to the comma separated ALLOWTOPICVIEW list.
 \ No newline at end of file
Added:
>
>

So the purpose of the essay is comparison. On one side is a consumer movement about food, which has a purity proposition: partly about the chemistry of what we eat, and partly about the ethics of how we grow and process it. On the other side of the comparison is the subject this juxtaposition is supposed to illuminate.

But the value of the exercise lies in the detailed evocation of relevant correspondences. This can take us only so far, before the reader will need to cross back over and use those correspondences to increase her understanding of the actual subject. But even this first step is not very completely taken here. Little is really said about our subject, and what is for some reason hinges on "metadata," without explanation of the reason that fabled distinction is so important. Your comparison mostly also crosses a line between market activity and state activity subject to constitutional limitation, but without acknowledgment or analysis of that difference.

The route to improvement is rebalancing: more space for the subject to be explained, less to the comparand intended to catalyze the explaining.

 \ No newline at end of file

Revision 3r3 - 28 Jun 2016 - 11:04:59 - EbenMoglen
Revision 2r2 - 15 Mar 2016 - 15:16:31 - LeoFarbman
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.
Syndicate this site RSSATOM