|
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425 |
- # Consentement
-
- > [en] The Consentful Tech Project’s definition of good ==digital consent== is adapted from Planned Parenthood’s definition of sexual consent, which abbreviates to the easy-to-remember, tasty acronym “FRIES.” According to this definition, consent must be:
- >
- > * **Freely given.** Doing something with someone is a decision that should be made without pressure, force, manipulation, or while incapacitated.
- > * **Reversible.** Anyone can change their mind about what they want to do, at any time.
- > * **Informed.** Be honest. For example, if someone says they’ll use protection and then they don’t, that’s not consent.
- > * **Enthusiastic.** If someone isn’t excited, or really into it, that’s not consent.
- > * **Specific.** Saying yes to one thing doesn’t mean they’ve said yes to others.
- >
- > <cite>*[What is Consentful Tech?](https://www.consentfultech.io/)*</cite>
-
- Jolie découverte [via un auto-commentaire](https://www.internetactu.net/2021/02/03/design-justice-repolitiser-le-design/) ([cache](/david/cache/2021/6faa32ba37a3b1232125db9858700627/)) de la part d’Hubert Guillaud sur un article bien dense aussi. Il y a un [PDF de 300 Ko](http://www.consentfultech.io/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Building-Consentful-Tech.pdf) ([cache](/static/david/2021/Building-Consentful-Tech.pdf)) qui vient compléter la définition et qui donne davantage de précisions — dont celle-ci en particulier :
-
- > [en] “Fail faster” is a maxim of application developers these days. It means putting something out into the world quickly and responding to user feedback in future iterations. This is a great way to optimize the value of your application to your users, by starting with something simple and experimenting until you get the right features.
- >
- > […]
- >
- > It isn’t enough to iterate features in response to harm — ==we must also iterate the process that lead to those features being released==. What would that process look like if it was centered around the privacy and security of survivors of violence? Of people from communities that are regularly subject to state surveillance?
-
- Les plateformes peuvent s’excuser *a posteriori* mais qu’en est-il de [rendre des comptes](/david/2021/01/06/) sur ce qui a été mis en place en interne pour ne pas reproduire de telles situations ? Voilà de quoi ajouter pas mal d’eau au moulin qui me sert de cerveau. Et pendant ce temps là, j’apprends qu’il y a des <q>chiens de garde de la vie privée</q> au Canada :
-
- > Le rapport note entre autres que l’entreprise américaine a constitué une base de données de « plus de trois milliards d’images de visages », y compris ceux d’un grand nombre de Canadiens et d’enfants. Des forces policières y ont eu accès, tout comme des organisations commerciales, et ce, ==sans le consentement des personnes==, déplorent le commissaire Daniel Therrien et ses homologues du Québec, de l’Alberta et de la Colombie-Britannique.
- >
- > <cite>*[Reconnaissance faciale: Clearview AI a violé la vie privée des Canadiens](https://www.ledevoir.com/societe/594536/reconnaissance-faciale-clearview-ai-a-viole-la-vie-privee-des-canadiens)* ([cache](/david/cache/2021/0e0d866f920298fbc0624c03ddc83d24/))</cite>
|
