Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnHorb
Whilst I agree there is a lot of 'tin-foil hat' around Phorm, I do think that the move from BT to Phorm by
http://www.phorm.com/about/exec_scleparis.php
has made people wary of ANY connections between ex-BT staff and ANYTHING to do with Phorm. |
I completely agree. Especially as this said executive was most likely involved in the illegal BT/Phorm trials of 2006 and 2007 where no attempt was even made at obtaining consent from those involved.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnHorb
On a more general point, you do seem to regard Phorm as a minor issue in the grand scheme of things. For example, I think you raised the issue of mass finger-printing. Speaking purely for myself, I see a massive difference between an 'invasion of privacy' for the greater good (prevention/detection of crminality) and invasion of privacy for pure commercial gain. I suspect you won't agree with this perspective, but I think it explains just why Phorm has created such a backlash, whereas other 'privacy' issues haven't.
|
Again I am in complete agreement. There is a huge difference between issues of privacy where the intent is to combat crimes such as child pornography, terrorism, organised crime and invasions of privacy for pure commercial profit. Its very clear where Phorm sits in that spectrum.