mtl3p

So I’m at the conference. I’m stunned by how small the crowd is. Not more than 200 people so far. Which isn’t a bad thing. It’s actually a big plus because I know that pretty much everyone here is pretty hot at what they do. Very different that something like the CHI con I went to last year.

Oh - and if people were wondering where all the women were (in terms of tech conferences) I found them. They’re all here. :-)

I’m at the morning panel listening to Mara Keisling, a transgender woman talk about privacy. She’s a good + funny speaker. I wasn’t expecting to hear about the US gov’s transit department’s policy on helper-monkeys this morning.

It’s worth it to check out the schedule. I’m busy with family stuff (my dad just had an operation and my mom’s in the big smoke taking care of my grandmother after her hip surgery) but I’m going to make sure to come back from 5-9 tomorrow to see the hactivism + human rights panel, then Michael Geist as a dinner speaker, then the armchair discussion with Diffie and Rotenberg. That’s a dope 4 hours. Especially because it includes getting fed. ;-)

I’m really happy to be speaking next week at the Computers, Freedom and Privacy conference. It will be for the session “Hot Spots are Chilly for Free Speech” moderated by Nicole Ozer from the ACLU and I’ll be with Professors Leslie Regan Shade and Andrew Clement (who I’ve been working with through CRACIN and CWIRP). It’s going to be about what’s happening within the MuniWireless market and what that means for internet freedoms (lame term, but i mean anonymity/privacy, etc).

What will I be talking about?

Instead of looking at how regulation is effecting wireless networks I’ll be asking how does the current wireless environment impact regulation including privacy/security laws? The whole lawrence lessig thing of technology and practice influencing laws, not only the other way around as well as the power of the default design by sandvig (default design of wireless routers being unsecured). Specifically I’ll look at how CWN’s have practiced privacy in the 7 years because it’s an important history/context to consider when thinking through these issues for the Muniwireless market. And even more specifically, looking at how ISF has practiced privacy over the last 3 1/2 years, considering that we’re one of the top CWNs. Hint - it’s because we centralized through creating the wifidog architecture (unlike earlier CWN’s that envisioned decentralized networks) that we’ve had most of our success. Not a good sign for privacy and a direct repudiation - intentional or not - of much of the earlier CWN ideology (both European and NA) which about building to ensure anonymity and lack of centralized control.

relevant articles:

Network must protect privacy