recentpopularlog in

multistakeholder

Effective Standards Work, Part 2: Threading the Needle | Infrequently Noted
An argument for having more impact on Web features by working iteratively on feature designs outside of a traditional standard-setting process, with some explanation as to how those actually work and some complaints.

Also:
There’s a meta-critique of formal standards and the defacto-exclusionary processes used to create them. This series didn’t deal in it deeply because doing so would require a long digression into the laws surrounding anti-trust and competition.
standards  web  w3c  via:octodon  wicg  whatwg  multistakeholder  participation 
august 2018 by npdoty
Information Technology Standards
Curricular modules on technical standard-setting. Some useful articles here on the theory of standards in particular, and some modules specific to Web standards. (NIST-funded.)
standards  research  teaching  nist  multistakeholder 
march 2018 by npdoty
The Internet Should Be a Public Good | Jacobin
But the fight is not over. The upcoming ICANN handoff offers an opportunity to revisit the largely unknown story of how privatization happened — and how we might begin to reverse it, by reclaiming the Internet as a public good.

There's a deep, important misunderstanding in here somewhere. I think the key thing is this: that the Internet isn't controlled by the government doesn't mean that it's not a public good. Goods controlled by the cooperative efforts of people (including, yes, people who are employed by corporations) can be public goods even if (perhaps especially if) they're not controlled by the State.
internet  icann  dns  governance  techdel  socialism  multistakeholder 
october 2016 by npdoty
Partnership on Artificial Intelligence to Benefit People and Society
We believe that by taking a multi-party stakeholder approach to identifying and addressing challenges and opportunities in an open and inclusive manner, we can have the greatest benefit and positive impact for the users of AI technologies. While the Partnership on AI was founded by five major IT companies, the organization will be overseen and directed by a diverse board that balances members from the founding companies with leaders in academia, policy, law, and representatives from the non-profit sector. By bringing together these different groups, we will also seek to bring open dialogue internationally, bringing parties from around the world to discuss these topics. A key operating principle is that we will share our work openly with the public and encourage their participation. The actions of the Partnership, including much of its discussions, meetings, results, and guidance, will be made publicly available.

Multistakeholderism proposed in coming up with ethical best practices regarding AI.
ai  multistakeholder  techdel  via:slack  society  ctsp 
september 2016 by npdoty
draft-nottingham-for-the-users-00 - Considering the Users of Internet Standards
A proposed priority of constituencies for Internet standards:
Internet standards serve and are used by a variety of constituencies. This document contains guidelines for explicitly identifying those constituencies, serving them, and determining how to resolve conflicts between their interests, when necessary. It also mandates end users as the highest priority constituency for Internet standards.
mnot  standards  ietf  multistakeholder  constituencies  users  ethics  engineering 
august 2015 by npdoty
The government’s plan to regulate facial recognition tech is falling apart - The Washington Post
Consumer advocacy groups to withdraw from NTIA MSH process on facial recognition, due to lack of concrete scenarios for requiring subject consent from companies. NTIA is disappointed, but will continue the process; companies say they'll continue to participate.
privacy  multistakeholder  ntia  facialrecognition  cdt  standards  codeofconduct  washingtonpost 
june 2015 by npdoty
Europe, we need to talk about institutional corruption.
“The “multi-stakeholder model” is nothing more than a fancy name for the institutionalisation of corporate influence on public policy.” A follow-up to the Al Jazeera Inside Story by Aral on his blog.
institutionalcorruption  eu  europe  multistakeholder  corporatesurveillance  policy  indie  indieroundup  27feb2015 
february 2015 by laurakalbag
[rtcweb] MTI Video Codec: a novel proposal
However, even if nothing else has changed, I think one salient point may have become quite important: we're all tired of this. Over two years ago, in March of 2012 -- before I even had an particular interest in WebRTC except as a user -- this had already become such a long-running acrimonious debate that I was brought in as a neutral third party to try to mediate. I'm weary of this argument; and, with the exception of a few aggressive voices who seem to enjoy the battle more than the outcome, I'm hearing a similar exhausted timbre in the messages of other participants (and the key stakeholders in particular).

So, I want to float a proposal that represents a compromise, to see if we can finally close this issue. First, I want to start out by reiterating a well-worn observation that the hallmark of a good compromise is that nobody leaves happy, but everyone can force themselves to accept it. And I want to be crystal clear: the solution I'm about to float just barely clears the bar of what I think I can live with. This proposal is based on an observation that the dominating issues in this conversation remain those of licensing, not technology or even incumbency. I’ve discussed this extensively with representatives of all three of the players I mention above, and they are willing to sign on.
standards  ietf  consensus  compromise  webrtc  rtcweb  video  codec  multistakeholder 
november 2014 by npdoty
Why Internet governance should be left to the engineers - The Washington Post
An editorial on leaving Internet governance to engineers -- but is that an accurate description? Identifies ISOC and BITAG as the relevant groups, which sounds to me like a misunderstanding (what about IETF, ICANN?), calls multistakeholderism democratic (definitely not the case). Most of the discussion is an argument against net neutrality regulations at FCC or otherwise which would interrupt engineer governance of the Internet by using regulation as an anti-competitive practice.

I think maybe someone needs to write a response to the idea of "neutrality" of policies. Is the FCC just being "neutral" by not implementing any regulations, or by doing so would it actually be favoring a particular corporate view? Are engineers being neutral by not implementing a particular feature or standard? Or do they inevitably embed values in the numerous choices they make?
multistakeholder  governance  neutrality  netneutrality  engineering  ietf  isoc  values-in-design  values 
september 2014 by npdoty
Press Release - Announcing Internet Network Interconnection Topic (June 2014) - Press_Release_-_Announcing_Internet_Network_Interconnection_Topic_(June_2014).pdf
BITAG is a non-profit, multi-stakeholder organization focused on bringing together engineers and technologists in a Technical Working Group (TWG) to develop consensus on broadband network management practices and other related technical issues that can affect users’ Internet experience, including the impact to and from applications, content and devices that utilize the Internet.
bitag  multistakeholder  bestpractices  internet  peering  netneutrality 
june 2014 by npdoty

Copy this bookmark:





to read