Why “Specific & Informed Consent” is Nonsense (or Not)

Why “Specific & Informed Consent” Is Nonsense (or Not)

Thursday 11E

Convener: Julian Ranger

Notes-taker(s): Julian Ranger & James Pasquale

Tags for the session - technology discussed/ideas considered:

#informedconsent, #consent, PrivateSharing,#trustedsharing

Discussion notes, key understandings, outstanding questions, observations, and, if appropriate to this discussion: action items, next steps:

1. Notes received from James Pasquale:

Resources: meaningfulconent.org

• No norms exist today
• Need trust marks by third parties who set minimum levels
• No real Binding Laws and regulations circumventing the need for consent in general
• Fairness mechanisms  like agents (BOTS) who will fight on individuals behalf to stop crappy uses of data previously shared to high the individual has no access or control over
• GDPR give individuals the right to have and use a copy of their personal data
  • It also defines a set of rules requesters of data must follow
    • Right to access
    • Right to correction
    • Right to erasers 
    • Notice and consent for use.
• Define what ill happen to data next or post sharing
• Notice of sharing it’s other and or new data processors
• No selling of an individual’s data with out notice and or new consent
• Scalability of levels of consent from complex uses to innocuous uses
  • Complex will never scale well without AI (resonates assistants working for individuals with set rules of rather road of use.
  • Too long versions of consent will force individual to always just accept with out regard.
  • Trust marks of the kinds of data and use of sharing can over come simple consent.
  • No wordsmithing of consent must be clear and unambiguous for individuals to understand rules an rights AKA what ill happen as a result of sharing. Duration, value exchange for sharing, etc... other rights now and in the future.
• Companies will always find dark ways to coerce individuals to just consent. 
• Without an individual hold a record of consent legal recourse becomes more difficult. Swaying the balance of power in the legal realm.
• We need laws to define must do when handling data, and must not do pre and post individuals sharing data, regardless of consent or not.

By the end of the session the room was split between is consent or is not consent nonsense.  With one quarter of the room in agreement consent is required and new laws and regulations around how data is acquired and used need to assist each other protecting individuals from creepy behavior by data requesters