PL 1: Global digital governance – Can technical solutions respond to policy questions?
¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0 Stefania Grottola
- ¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0
- The current status quo is featured by a variety of legal tools with various degrees of effectivity. Approaches should be principle based and facilitate statutory rules and restrictions with duties of care.
- ¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 5
- Ensuring trust in hardware and software devices has long been focused on lengthy and expensive certifications which could undermine innovation. A different approach could consist in making users more responsible for their actions, and thus in charge of their online privacy and security. This would give control back to the users.
- ¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 2
- The role of governments and policymakers should be a future-oriented one. Policymakers need to develop long-term strategies to address existing challenges, such as but not limited to, inequalities, the digital divide, and the impact of digitalisation on jobs. Such strategies need to have a long-time vision to ensure effectivity in an exponentially evolving digital and technological scenario.
- ¶ 5 Leave a comment on paragraph 5 1
- Regulation is not enough: there is a need for norms, standards, and safety nets. The approach needs to be human-centric, focused on the protection of individual rights and a global regime where human rights standards are respected.
- ¶ 6 Leave a comment on paragraph 6 2
- As a society, we should be aware of two existential threats: the destruction of the environment we are evolving within, and the automation of the exploitation of human psychological weaknesses at scale. Such industry-created threats need to be tackled in the next ten years. In order to achieve a healthy digital environment by 2030, an effective regulation of digital platforms should be developed. Moreover, the excessive power and influence of digital giants should be tackled.
We also mentioned the role of self-certification, and the “establishment of global good practice” to which suppliers should live up to.
being informed by standards, labels, and self-certification that is enforced by third parties
standaridsation setting processes and lengthy and expensive certifications
Not break, but violate*
“A different approach could consist in making users more responsible for their actions, and thus in charge of their online privacy and security.”
(1) Edit – of making users, not in making users.
(2) Comment – I find this sentence incredibly problematic, as it would imply that ensuring trust is solely the responsibility of the user and not the private sector. I suggest rewording to something like:
A more inclusive approach could be addressing issues of trust through a multi-stakeholder lens that would include more standardised, efficient, and streamlined certification processes for the private sector, investing in skill building and privacy/security literacy for users, and holding vendors accountable for events that break public trust, such as data breaches.