Quote:
Originally Posted by jelv
That is a very dangerous line to take!
Suppose the PIA pulls the rug out from under Kent's feet. You're giving Kent the perfect excuse to ignore it - "If those opposed to Phorm were prepared to ignore the PIA if they didn't agree with it's conclusions they must consider that it carries little weight, they can't have it both ways and now complain if we chose to ignore it".
I suggest we all stop speculating about what it will or will not say and wait until it is published.
---------- Post added at 00:42 ---------- Previous post was at 00:36 ----------
|
I'm afraid that we can't change the facts to suit our purpose. That would make us liars. As Kent is fond of having Simon trot out for him
"publish and be damned"
then we too have to accept the facts of the situation and if it works against our cause then so be it, change tack.
To be fair though arguing about the content of a PIA that is not valid will not suit anyone. It's not legally going to change anything so if it does not suit us we can dismiss it and go on. If it does not suit Phorm they can dismiss it. It will have no impact on the legality of the technology.
Remember a PIA is still only an opinion of people who feel they have the ability to make one under the terms of the ICO guidelines. I could make one myself given an invitation and cooperation.