Quote:
Originally Posted by James_Firth
I don't know him personally but the organisations he represents goes a long way to vouching for his credentials. PI is not just some ramshackle protest group who employ anyone they can get. They have briefed parliament and they have done this because their view is respected; because they have taken time to study and prepare opinion as learned individuals.
That's not to say I agree with all his views, just that I respect his background and prominence. Simon believes Phorm can provide a secure and safe way of delivering targeted advertising, I say the issues are wider than Phorm.
I don't represent any group so when I spoke out about Phorm back in mid February, the BBC, El Reg, etc ignored my view. That's not to say my, or your, or Alex's opinion is any less valid than Simon's, just that Simon is in a position of trust representing the organisations he does.
I believe from your posts that you agree with Fipr's view that Phorm is illegal and should be banned. If so, why is it you trust Nicholas Bohm's or Richard Clayton's view? Self-appointed defenders of electronic privacy? The O.R.G.?
That was intended to be a rhetorical question, but obviously you're in your rights to answer. At the risk of putting even more people off I'll leave this here.
|
Simon may well yet turn out to be my hero. I hope so. I really do. You're right, let's leave it there or someone will run out of headache pills
p.s. I trust
my own views based on my own assessments.