3 ms·

I think these are all examples of teams that can have concrete goals: accessibility teams can be enforcing a standard or regulation (like WCAG), privacy teams c

I think these are all examples of teams that can have concrete goals: accessibility teams can be enforcing a standard or regulation (like WCAG), privacy teams can be auditing for compliance to GDPR or COPPA, security teams can be monitoring for security updates, pen-testing, and auditing for compliance to standards like PCI DSS. "Responsible Innovation" is kind of nebulous and I would expect it to be problematic unless given clear rules of engagement and supplied with a strong leader. That said, somebody needs to be responsible for dealing with the endless stream of products that are deeply flawed out of the box: builtin racism, builtin stalking/harassment tools, "0-day" doxing of existing users ...

UncleMeat 4y ago
Consider privacy. I'd wager that most people on HN would prefer it if major social media and advertising companies were doing more than waiting for legislation and implementing the bare minimum. "Privacy" in the aggregate is vague rather than concrete. Similarly, you could imagine a team who is responsible for addressing actual policy concerns around things like amplifying sectarian violence and also having a broader and more vague mission around "harm".
- Ensorceled 4y ago
  I think most privacy teams are responsible for compliance to legislation and, hence, have clearly defined, concrete goals. Are you disagreeing?
  - detaro 4y ago
    One would hope the goal of a privacy team would be to work to improve and maintain privacy, even if they are not strictly legally compelled to do so in the specific case.
  - UncleMeat 4y ago
    No. I am saying that privacy teams often go beyond that and that this "beyond" is in the vague and ill defined territory.
AstralStorm 4y ago
Legal is the barest.minimum,.and at times actually can force bad practice to boot. (e.g. UK Network Security Guidance) Thing is, any way Twitter can innovate in a way that would bring income is likely unethical. Either it will try to increase engagement by polarizing people - increasing heat; selling user data; showing advertising or additional worse things.

UncleMeat 4y ago

Consider privacy. I'd wager that most people on HN would prefer it if major social media and advertising companies were doing more than waiting for legislation and implementing the bare minimum. "Privacy" in the aggregate is vague rather than concrete. Similarly, you could imagine a team who is responsible for addressing actual policy concerns around things like amplifying sectarian violence and also having a broader and more vague mission around "harm".

Ensorceled 4y ago
I think most privacy teams are responsible for compliance to legislation and, hence, have clearly defined, concrete goals. Are you disagreeing?
- detaro 4y ago
  One would hope the goal of a privacy team would be to work to improve and maintain privacy, even if they are not strictly legally compelled to do so in the specific case.
- UncleMeat 4y ago
  No. I am saying that privacy teams often go beyond that and that this "beyond" is in the vague and ill defined territory.

AstralStorm 4y ago

Legal is the barest.minimum,.and at times actually can force bad practice to boot. (e.g. UK Network Security Guidance) Thing is, any way Twitter can innovate in a way that would bring income is likely unethical. Either it will try to increase engagement by polarizing people - increasing heat; selling user data; showing advertising or additional worse things.