In his introduction to "#ThePlan", @OliverDowden says he'll "shortly publish a #plan for a pro-growth data regime" 🤔
If he has an ACTUAL plan, or frankly a clue, then why not just #publish the damn thing? Why all the waffle?
Hand-wavy platitudes like these 👇 ain't worth Jack:
Just so we're clear, this "#Plan" is supposed to "start a #conversation" about "#TenTechPriorities" that @DCMS published on a "shorthand stories"(?) page that DOESN'T ONCE MENTION PEOPLE'S #RIGHTS!!
...that only a bunch of naïve, entitled, tech eager-beaver types at the #MinistryOfFun and a cabal of ahistorical, rights-averse, out-of-touch grey men listening to their patrons could ever think would '#stimulate' anything.
As anyone with any experience of the process will tell you, one 'tell' that gives away poor #legislation or #regulation is that it disproportionately relates to a particular 'use case'.
Obviously Ministers and officials at @DCMS (wrongly) believe this doesn't apply to them...
And as anyone with any understanding of the internet over the last 30 years will tell you, undermining #encryption not only undermines EVERYONE'S #safety and #security; it stifles #innovation too.
On "Embedding our principles", it can be quite funny watching a tail try to wag the dog!
But, given @DCMS's lamentable lack of delivery meant it couldn't even hold onto (all of) #digital policy, good luck with this 👇
I dunno. Does this 👇 and the rest of the #WordSalad look like "a #Plan" to you?
Or more of a desperate #ploy to be seen as #salient? And making busy...
And in case anyone (HM Opposition?) is thinking there aren't far clearer, better alternatives, it'd be worth checking in with the bits of #CivilSociety that actually GET #digital, #tech and #innovation before writing us off as "those pesky #privacy people".
We'll still be here.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Before I start a geeky 'deep dive' on the #NHSnumber, to provide some (personal/professional) context that will hopefully become apparent, I'll just drop these two images here:
So, to begin.
After the Second World War, in a time when we started to think (again) what a #civilised society would be, and when our leaders tried to agree #principles like #UDHR that might prevent the recurrence of genocide, and support #dignity and #HumanRights for all...
1) The #NationalDataOptOut, while it was (cack-handedly) introduced alongside #GDPR in May 2018, had in fact existed since #caredata - when it...
...was known as a #Type2 opt out - in case you were wondering about the derivation of #Type1s.
2) There was no announced date for the "expiration" of #Type1 opt-outs - certainly NOT "June 2021". There's no mention of this in the #GPDPR#DPN issued on...
And in this single statement 👇 @MattHancock demonstrates not only his profound ignorance, but his underlying thinking - that information about you is a #TradableAsset.
Who "owns" the fact of your relationship with your sister? You? Her? Or your date of birth? Your current age?
Let's not even get started on things like #genomic data (i.e. data derived from your #DNA) which says things not only about you, but your relatives. Who "owns" that?
The reason the #powerful want people to think they "own" their #PersonalData - rather than it being protected...
...by a strong, well-enforced #rights framework - is that they can #force or #fool you into surrendering it, so the data you give them becomes THEIR "#property" to #exploit.
If '#DataIsTheNewOil', as they want you to believe, then what does that make YOU?
Indeed, it says the strategic dashboard "will display ... record level pseudonymised data” and (as a data expert) you will of course know that #pseudonymised data is #personal data…
...and has been *in law*, as well as in practice, since at least May 2018.
@ICOnews published some helpful (draft) guidance just last month that can point you in the right direction if there's any confusion: