[PP.Skane] Internet of Things for JURI and IMCO

[teirdes at gmail.com]

Yes, the green group needs a strategy, but it's probably not as simple
as boiling it down to comments on four individual initiative dossiers.

Our reactions to these dossiers may provide us with a
foundation for future work on subsequent legislative proposals. I have
thought a lot about "privacy by design", but am also
there convinced that that discussion should not be contained within
Internet of Things but permeate a wide range of Union initiatives,
including smartmetering, smarthousing, intelligent transport systems
and behavioural advertising. I am given to understand at least three
of those discussions are either already far advanced or already
closed.

I put some thoughts further down.

/amelia


On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 06:28:11PM +0100, JOSEFSSON Erik wrote:
> Btw, Stany said the following dossiers come together in a package:
> 
>     Internet of Things
>     http://euwiki.org/INI/2009/2224
> 
>     Defining a new Digital Agenda for Europe: from i2010 to digital.eu
>     http://euwiki.org/INI/2009/2225
> 
>     Community innovation policy in a changing world
>     http://euwiki.org/INI/2009/2227
> 
>     Internet governance - the next steps
>     http://euwiki.org/INI/2009/2229
> 
> It would be great to get a full and consistent perspective on all of
> them together.
> 

This is easier said than done. What it boils down to is:

::There is a lack of social perspective in all these endeavours.
i2010 as well as the Lisbon agenda failed to take into account social
movements, both on a governing level and on a technological
development model. This is now being transferred into Europe 2020 and
may follow into a post-i2010 agenda.

::Innovation policies in the union are tainted with a lack of openness
and social perspectives
Starting with FP5, the amount of funding allocated for research
projects studying open business models, open technology and social
impacts of the same has steadily decreased. Current research funding
goes mostly into commercial, or potentially future commercial
endeavours. Very little money is dedicated to anything but technical
research. This should be changed come fp8.

::A lot of innovation and social cohesion, especially in technological
environments, can be promoted by simply "opening up" existing venues.
Much like the free part of the radio spectrum in the US caused
WhiteFi (UHF spectrum wifi) and cognitive radio innovation, opening up
the satellite spectrum (satellite spectrum "commons"), radio spectrum
commons and public WiMAX (see WorldMax in Amsterdam, for instance)
could increase innovation on small scale as well as large scale.

::Citizen-enablement needs to be a primary target.
This goes along with a social perspective, and we increasingly need to
start seeing consumers as citizens. Privacy will be something we
create, not something that is automatically there. This is a bad thing
only in so far as the choice to create privacy is difficult and
expensive (it can't be a luxury), but promoting innovation, education
and accessibility, interoperability and transparency would greatly
facilitate citizen empowerment. 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.skane/attachments/20100305/d7bf74a9/attachment.pgp>