Re: [hrpc] HRPC recharter

[Mallory Knodel <[e-mail]>]

On 1/7/23 8:59 AM, John Curran wrote:

>> On Jan 6, 2023, at 4:33 AM, Eliot Lear <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> ...
>> Nobody disputes that human rights concerns are a problem now. What many of us have concerns about is how to balance the different and often conflicting rights and interests at the time of protocol design.
> I am fine with the revised charter.
>
> (I had hoped that the update would include more focus on protocol research topics that would allow us to deliver on these conflicting rights, but it appears to take a different approach and presume that such matters are unsolvable – and instead work on building “evidence and guidance for policy makers on the necessary design tradeoffs that should be made.”   This is a tad unfortunate, since we know that policy makers will not engage in the hard technical protocol research necessary into solving these problems, and this “research group” resigning itself to documenting recommended guidance on tradeoffs rather than working on exploring technical solutions for protocols nearly assures that some human rights will never be satisfied on the Internet.)

Thanks John,

I like your optimism and it would be great if we could explore technical 
solutions for human rights at the protocol layer. I think tradeoffs is 
there because of lessons learned, practicality and prior suggested 
language, but I'm happy to put in some "yes, and" language so that 
tradeoff remains but we can also indicate that there may be direct 
solutions, too.

What about: "evidence and guidance for policy makers _on technical 
solutions and_ the necessary design tradeoffs that should be made."

-Mallory

>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> hrpc mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc

-- 
Mallory Knodel
CTO, Center for Democracy and Technology
gpg fingerprint :: E3EB 63E0 65A3 B240 BCD9 B071 0C32 A271 BD3C C780