This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/27/point-scoring-web-freedom

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Point-scoring our web freedom Point-scoring our web freedom
(2 months later)
We are a ratings-obsessed culture. Critics award stars and points for films, books, restaurants, hotels, gadgets and a vast number of other products and services. Sometimes, a professional critic does the scoring, but increasingly, the public collectively creates averaged scores. Some ratings gathered with great detail, such as wine critics' commonly used 100pt scales. Others are as simple as Facebook's "like" button, purely a measure of marketing prowess.We are a ratings-obsessed culture. Critics award stars and points for films, books, restaurants, hotels, gadgets and a vast number of other products and services. Sometimes, a professional critic does the scoring, but increasingly, the public collectively creates averaged scores. Some ratings gathered with great detail, such as wine critics' commonly used 100pt scales. Others are as simple as Facebook's "like" button, purely a measure of marketing prowess.
Some of the most useful ratings combine verifiable metrics. Consumer Reports, which has been an essential part of my reading for many years, comes up with what I consider highly trustworthy scores for automobiles and other products. A car goes through a variety of tests; the magazine then weights them according to its longstanding practices and comes up with a total score on a 100pt scale.Some of the most useful ratings combine verifiable metrics. Consumer Reports, which has been an essential part of my reading for many years, comes up with what I consider highly trustworthy scores for automobiles and other products. A car goes through a variety of tests; the magazine then weights them according to its longstanding practices and comes up with a total score on a 100pt scale.
NGOs and thinktanks take this approach to measuring such imponderables as economic and press freedom, scoring countries around the globe for policies that aid or restrict such things. As with auto ratings, the results depend on the criteria, and there's plenty of debate about what the surveyors decide is important.NGOs and thinktanks take this approach to measuring such imponderables as economic and press freedom, scoring countries around the globe for policies that aid or restrict such things. As with auto ratings, the results depend on the criteria, and there's plenty of debate about what the surveyors decide is important.
I've been wondering if we could create a system of this sort to gauge our liberty in the technology and communications ecosystem. My goal is a fill-in-the-blanks online form that people could use to: a) say what gear and services they use; and then, b) give them a "liberty scorecard".I've been wondering if we could create a system of this sort to gauge our liberty in the technology and communications ecosystem. My goal is a fill-in-the-blanks online form that people could use to: a) say what gear and services they use; and then, b) give them a "liberty scorecard".
The more I've explored this idea, the less sure I've become that it's doable – but that only convinces me it's worth trying. The problem, as we see with all such efforts, is that topic is loaded with complexity, in part because technology and communications presents so many kinds of trade-offs – convenience, cost, security, privacy – in the choices we make. (Trade-offs of this sort exist in all other fields as well; we could make a perfectly safe car if we were willing, and able, to pay ridiculous amounts of money for it.) Moreover, the rise of centralized online services has brought about vast choices within certain domains, but at the cost of ceding an enormous amount of control to them.The more I've explored this idea, the less sure I've become that it's doable – but that only convinces me it's worth trying. The problem, as we see with all such efforts, is that topic is loaded with complexity, in part because technology and communications presents so many kinds of trade-offs – convenience, cost, security, privacy – in the choices we make. (Trade-offs of this sort exist in all other fields as well; we could make a perfectly safe car if we were willing, and able, to pay ridiculous amounts of money for it.) Moreover, the rise of centralized online services has brought about vast choices within certain domains, but at the cost of ceding an enormous amount of control to them.
Several examples: Apple is highly restrictive with its iOS mobile ecosystem, but the devices are super-convenient to use. The GNU/Linux operating system offers the ultimate in flexibility, but isn't as convenient or easy. Microsoft's Skype is easy and convenient, but not secure from government spies who are vacuuming up all kinds of communications. Running your own mail server is safer in some respects from government dragnets than Hotmail, but it's a pain setting up and maintaining it. Netflix has zillions of movies and TV shows on its streaming system, but uses heavy-duty digital locks to ensure that you can only watch when you're online (and stores vast amounts of data about everything you do when you're using it). You get the idea.Several examples: Apple is highly restrictive with its iOS mobile ecosystem, but the devices are super-convenient to use. The GNU/Linux operating system offers the ultimate in flexibility, but isn't as convenient or easy. Microsoft's Skype is easy and convenient, but not secure from government spies who are vacuuming up all kinds of communications. Running your own mail server is safer in some respects from government dragnets than Hotmail, but it's a pain setting up and maintaining it. Netflix has zillions of movies and TV shows on its streaming system, but uses heavy-duty digital locks to ensure that you can only watch when you're online (and stores vast amounts of data about everything you do when you're using it). You get the idea.
There are degrees of safety, too: you have to decide what are the likely threats. If you set up an unsecured WiFi network at home and use that for your main connection (you shouldn't), you need to use encryption for your online activities. This is the same notion as putting a lock on your front door, to deter other people from casually wandering around your house when you're away. If you want more security, from more serious threats, you have to do much more. (Insurance companies have scores they keep for various ways you secure your home and valuables from theft and fire, and your premiums reflect that.)There are degrees of safety, too: you have to decide what are the likely threats. If you set up an unsecured WiFi network at home and use that for your main connection (you shouldn't), you need to use encryption for your online activities. This is the same notion as putting a lock on your front door, to deter other people from casually wandering around your house when you're away. If you want more security, from more serious threats, you have to do much more. (Insurance companies have scores they keep for various ways you secure your home and valuables from theft and fire, and your premiums reflect that.)
The kind of threat makes a huge difference. Skype is insecure if a government is after you, but if I'm chatting with my spouse when one of us is traveling, I'm not going to worry about it.The kind of threat makes a huge difference. Skype is insecure if a government is after you, but if I'm chatting with my spouse when one of us is traveling, I'm not going to worry about it.
In thinking about a tech-liberty scorecard, the topic of a talk I gave this week at the O'Reilly Open Source Conference in Portland, I've opted for simplicity – fully aware that my lack of nuance makes any such model deeply flawed. (As expected, I got a bunch of excellent suggestions from the audience on how to improve this project.) Moreover, my scoring system is loaded with value judgments, which create their own collection of problems.In thinking about a tech-liberty scorecard, the topic of a talk I gave this week at the O'Reilly Open Source Conference in Portland, I've opted for simplicity – fully aware that my lack of nuance makes any such model deeply flawed. (As expected, I got a bunch of excellent suggestions from the audience on how to improve this project.) Moreover, my scoring system is loaded with value judgments, which create their own collection of problems.
How simple am I going to be with this, at least at the outset? I'm giving myself 2pt for extra effort to retain my independence from those who'd restrict it and protect my communications from those who'd spy on them. I'm giving 1pt for following what should be standard precautions. Minus 1pt for subscribing to services (like most telecommunications carriers) that have long records of cozying up to government. Minus 2pt for stupidity and laziness (for example, easy-to-guess passwords on sites involving important personal data), and for unavoidable losses of privacy and control (hello, NSA). Zero for everything else.How simple am I going to be with this, at least at the outset? I'm giving myself 2pt for extra effort to retain my independence from those who'd restrict it and protect my communications from those who'd spy on them. I'm giving 1pt for following what should be standard precautions. Minus 1pt for subscribing to services (like most telecommunications carriers) that have long records of cozying up to government. Minus 2pt for stupidity and laziness (for example, easy-to-guess passwords on sites involving important personal data), and for unavoidable losses of privacy and control (hello, NSA). Zero for everything else.
So, by these scores, I might get +2pt for installing Linux on my main computer; +1pt for always using a VPN; +1pt for religiously keeping my software up to date; -1pt for subscribing to Comcast's internet service; -2pt for NSA dragnet surveillance that is happening no matter what else I do; zero for using the centralized Twitter and Google+ services; and so on. You may disagree with some of these assessments, of course.So, by these scores, I might get +2pt for installing Linux on my main computer; +1pt for always using a VPN; +1pt for religiously keeping my software up to date; -1pt for subscribing to Comcast's internet service; -2pt for NSA dragnet surveillance that is happening no matter what else I do; zero for using the centralized Twitter and Google+ services; and so on. You may disagree with some of these assessments, of course.
If I proceed with this approach, I'll make clear that the goal isn't to give people a grade that defines their tech liberty in any serious way. Rather, I'll hope it's food for thought – and the start of a debate folks should have with each other, the companies they patronize and the governments that rule them. It's a conversation we all need to have.If I proceed with this approach, I'll make clear that the goal isn't to give people a grade that defines their tech liberty in any serious way. Rather, I'll hope it's food for thought – and the start of a debate folks should have with each other, the companies they patronize and the governments that rule them. It's a conversation we all need to have.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.