3 ms·

This is the kind of black-and-white dogmatic thinking that is the tell-tale sign of software engineer applying their software engineering context to a context w

This is the kind of black-and-white dogmatic thinking that is the tell-tale sign of software engineer applying their software engineering context to a context where it doesn't fit. I have no doubt many people on this board (not necessarily you) share a similar view, yet are similarly disdainful of privacy protections in the US around one's use of technology (e.g., cell phone tracking, DNS monitoring, cookies, ad-tech).

jfengel 6y ago
I suspect they're all for privacy. They don't want people's data made public, either. Rather, they're OK with the fact that policy can't be made, because they're not especially interested in the policy implications. They likely assume that any regulation will be bad by default unless it's proven to them -- and won't put any effort into reading that proof when offered. Software engineers get used to the notion that things either work or they don't. Policy is a much messier process, where you do the best that you can with incomplete information. And software engineers are generally comfortable enough under the status quo that they will set high standards for change -- and aren't interested in how that affects anybody not in their immediate circle.
wheybags 6y ago
That's definitely not me. The point is that an effort should be made to make available the data to the fullest extent possible. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect anonymised data to be made available. If the data connot meaningfully be anonymised that might be a special case, but I find it hard to imagine a scenario like that, unless the study only involved a very small number of participants (which would also make it less valuable). Maybe there are such scenarios though, I'm not stating categorically that there aren't, just that it seems unlikely, and if there is I'd expect them to be a small minority.

jfengel 6y ago

I suspect they're all for privacy. They don't want people's data made public, either. Rather, they're OK with the fact that policy can't be made, because they're not especially interested in the policy implications. They likely assume that any regulation will be bad by default unless it's proven to them -- and won't put any effort into reading that proof when offered. Software engineers get used to the notion that things either work or they don't. Policy is a much messier process, where you do the best that you can with incomplete information. And software engineers are generally comfortable enough under the status quo that they will set high standards for change -- and aren't interested in how that affects anybody not in their immediate circle.

wheybags 6y ago

That's definitely not me. The point is that an effort should be made to make available the data to the fullest extent possible. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect anonymised data to be made available. If the data connot meaningfully be anonymised that might be a special case, but I find it hard to imagine a scenario like that, unless the study only involved a very small number of participants (which would also make it less valuable). Maybe there are such scenarios though, I'm not stating categorically that there aren't, just that it seems unlikely, and if there is I'd expect them to be a small minority.