大象传媒

The Phorm privacy debate - London

• Darren Waters
• 15 Apr 08, 18:33 GMT

I'm at the privacy meeting in London, where the creators of the controversial online ad system are coming face to face with some of their most vocal .

I'll be blogging throughout the meeting with key impressions and writing a report on the meeting for Wednesday's news pages.

UPDATE 20.43:
That's a wrap. up tomorrow morning.

UPDATE 20.12:
Mr Hanff says: "Phorm has to be opt in. You can't take implied consent on a human right."

Mr Hanff argued that privacy is a human right.

He added: "I'm concerned about the potential future use of the technology and the potential for creep."

UPDATE 20.06:
The final speaker is Alexander Hanff, someone who has campaigned against Phorm.

He says: "What Phorm is trying to do is to turn people into products; a global warehouse selling pieces of us to highest bidders."

UPDATE 19.53:
Phorm's technical officer Mark Burgess takes to the stage.

He emphasises that Phorm does not "compromise the user experience".

After concerns raised that Phorm can cause some page requests bouncing back and forth between the destination website and the Phorm system, he says that happens in less than 1% of the browsing experience.

UPDATE 19.45:
The mood of the meeting is very good. There are about 100 people here, in case you wondered.

UPDATE 19.38:
Dr Clayton wraps up saying: "It has to be informed opt in. I don't think it improves the stability of the internet. I think it's downright illegal in the UK."

UPDATE 19.25:
Dr Richard Clayton, who has said Phorm is potentially illegal, says Phorm is making the internet more dangerous and not safer.

He also says the system is counter intuitive because it uses a cookie to opt out, not opt in.

"Deleting cookies means you delete the cookie that opted you out and so you opt in. This is backwards and not helpful."

UPDATE 19.17:
Mr Ertugrul concludes by tackling the issue of legality and whether Phorm breaches RIPA because it makes an ilegal interception of people's browsing.

He makes the point that the body which is questioning Phorms's legality with respect to is the same body which attacked RIPA when it was first being proposed by government.

UPDATE 19.02:
Kent Ertugrul says Phorm can transform online advertising, helping everyone from blogs to newspapers because the ads are targeted to the user not to the content on the page.

"The internet today is two to three professionals - Microsoft/Yahoo/Google and 9,999,999 hobbyists. That is the internet today.

"Phorm makes all websites capable of making a living by publishing interesting content to consumers who get it for free.

"Even the smallest website can make money. That is a big deal."

UPDATE 18.53:
Phorm CEO Kent Ertugrul takes to the stage.

"We're saying this is a revolution in privacy. And I hope to convince you of that.

"We cannot know who you are - it's impossible."

UPDATE 18.44:
Simon Davies, of 80/20 Thinking, which carried out a privacy impact assessment on Phorm, introduces the session.

"This meeting cannot possible resolve the issue of legality. It's the elephant in the room.

"But unless there are senior legal counsel here to reflect we will end up with a bunfight.

"It's a crucial issue. But I don't want us to get bogged down in a legal quagmire that results in us having no outcome."

He added: "Hopefully at the end we can reach some sort of conclusion about how to move forward."

UPDATE 18.37:
PR exercise or genuine attempt to engage with the public? Perhaps both?

Attendees are handed a document from Phorm upon entering the meeting which compares Phorm with major search engines.

It makes the point that Phorm does not store any personal data while search engines do.

It's a fair point. But it's not the point that critics have been making for some weeks now.

They question if it's legal. They question the ethics of having an ISP snooping on your browsing activity full stop.

PS: From 1800 UK time this evening (16 April), we'll be doing some essential maintenance to all of the 大象传媒's blogs. As a result of this, you won't be able to leave any comments on our blog posts from that time until early morning on Thursday, 17 April.
There's more about this on the editors' blog from Giles Wilson.

• Permalink
• Comments

Who will determine the future of computing?

• Darren Waters
• 15 Apr 08, 14:30 GMT

In the last few months I've spoken to senior executives at companies like , , and and I'm beginning to think that a new front in the battle for computer dominance is emerging.

Essentially there appears to be two approaches emerging - a "bottom up" approach from companies like Nokia, Symbian and ARM, who are turning mobile phones into portable computers, and a "top down" approach from the likes of Intel who believe spin offs of desktop computer chip technology can power future portable devices, including phones.

The middle ground that everyone is pitching for is the undoubted future of computing - the . In the not too distant future smartphone sales will overtake laptop sales, and in the medium term the power and capability of these phones will rival what we can do with laptops today.

But who will power these phones? Who will provide the wireless networks?

Intel dominates the desktop and laptop landscape and recently launched its - aimed squarely at the portable device market.

Intel boss Paul Otellini has talked often about - pocket computers with the power of a desktop able to give you the full internet experience wherever you are.

But he and Intel know full well that the Atom will need to dent the mobile phone market if it is to grab a slice of the emerging smartphone category.

Standing in the way of Intel is British firm ARM. At the moment ARM dominates the mobile space with about 98% of all handsets using at least one of the firm's chip designs. Six of ARM-designed chips are inside the iPhone, for example.

And the firm is soon moving to multi-core designs for its chips - significantly ramping up the power, while not sacrificing battery life.

So the big question is whether Intel has left it too late to try and crack the mobile market?

If the future of computing is determined by portable computers absorbing mobile phone functionality then Intel will probably win out.

But if mobile phone manufacturers produce devices powerful enough to rival laptops then it will probably be the likes of ARM and Nokia who will dominate.

But it's not just in chip design that the battle lines are being drawn up. These future devices will be able to move seamlessly between different wireless networks - from 3G, to Wi-Fi, and to 4G technologies like and .

And on the one side we have as the 21st Century solution to our wireless needs, while Nokia is squarely behind LTE.

In reality the two may complement each other - just as 3G and Wi-Fi are beginning to.

But given the potential of both technologies - as high-speed, relatively long-distance networks - the battle for the airwaves may be just as fraught as the battle for future of our computers.

• Permalink
• Comments