(C) Alec Muffett's DropSafe blog.
Author Name: Alec Muffett
This story was originally published on allecmuffett.com. [1]
License: CC-BY-SA 3.0.[2]
A note about using application “risk profiles” to improve online safety for children #NSPCC
2022-01-18 00:27:30+00:00
A quick note for the lovely people at @NSPCC_Press:
It's a lot more risky to throw a punch at Conor McGregor than at a typical guy down the pub. This exemplifies why "risk profiles" are generally tied to (a) behaviours & (b) capabilities, of "actors" in an model
As such "risk profiles" are heavily individualised & different from "what could possibly go wrong?" threat modelling.
The Internet, though, lacks up-front individual identity ("anonymous by default") which is a problem with your proposed approach.
"Is this a kid?" – "Dunno."
Season 4 Nbc GIF by The Office
Your proposed approach presupposes that there is positive identity (the actor is Conor McGregor) or at least negative identity (the actor is not a kid).
Neither exist on the Internet. Hence your solution towards "balance" won't work.
The different products (like the different actions, going around punching people) do not yield different risk profiles.
It's a matter of *who* you end up punching, which determines the risk.
And finally: If you can't control the "who" then you can't control the risk — and attempting to control the "who" is a deeply illiberal and exclusive endeavour.
Hence: your proposed solution presumes deeply illiberal and exclusive, and currently nonexistent, behaviour.
Originally tweeted by Alec Muffett (@AlecMuffett) on 2022/01/18.
[END]
[1] URL:
https://alecmuffett.com/article/15857
[2] URL:
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
DropSafe Blog via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/alecmuffett/
