<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.msdn.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>The Other James Brown - All Comments</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/b/james_brown/</link><description>Public Sector, Identity, Privacy and other bits...</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>Telligent Evolution Platform Developer Build (Build: 5.6.50428.7875)</generator><item><title>re: Insurers use social networking sites to identify risky clients</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/b/james_brown/archive/2010/11/30/insurers-use-social-networking-sites-to-identify-risky-clients.aspx#10227070</link><pubDate>Tue, 18 Oct 2011 18:15:10 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:10227070</guid><dc:creator>Toivo</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;If the insurer charges you based on your risk, depending on where you live and what your genetics and family happen to be you can be priced out of insurance. The point of insurance is the pooling of risk. If each individual&amp;#39;s risk is assessed independently and correctly, then by definition it&amp;#39;s cheaper for the individual to just save their money rather than pay it plus overhead to the insurer in premiums.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=10227070" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Insurers use social networking sites to identify risky clients</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/b/james_brown/archive/2010/11/30/insurers-use-social-networking-sites-to-identify-risky-clients.aspx#10205741</link><pubDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 15:04:13 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:10205741</guid><dc:creator>Ozio Media</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;I actually had an interview for a position not that long ago where the first thing that they told me was that before deciding who to interview, they looked us all up on social networking sites. This was the first I had heard of someone doing that and after that I decided it might be a good idea to be really, really careful about what you say and do. Obviously many people have ways of seeing your comments even if you think they are private. Nothing seems to be foolproof. I don’t know if I agree with this new way of doing things though.. I get the drug test analogy, but you have warning of the drug test. You never know what they are going to find on the Internet. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=10205741" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: SharePoint 2010 accessibility with WCAG 2.0 support</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/b/james_brown/archive/2009/10/19/sharepoint-2010-accessibility-with-wcag-2-0-support.aspx#10102842</link><pubDate>Thu, 09 Dec 2010 20:23:10 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:10102842</guid><dc:creator>Alex</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;I use this thing at work. &amp;nbsp;I hate it. &amp;nbsp;It&amp;#39;s very difficult to navigate using a keyboard. &amp;nbsp;Takes forever to get anywhere in work flow pages. &amp;nbsp;This is even when accessibility is turned on. &amp;nbsp;Thank God I know html. &amp;nbsp;I have to input raw html into edit fields because the rich text accessibility just isn&amp;#39;t there yet. &amp;nbsp;Fields are mislabeled, the tab key doesn&amp;#39;t behave &amp;nbsp;as it ought, the communication between sharepoint 2010 and my screen reader Jaws is just not quite there. &amp;nbsp;I think it&amp;#39;s a bit better than it was in 2007 but it is by no means an engine I would tout as accessible.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Screenreader user&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=10102842" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Insurers use social networking sites to identify risky clients</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/b/james_brown/archive/2010/11/30/insurers-use-social-networking-sites-to-identify-risky-clients.aspx#10102204</link><pubDate>Wed, 08 Dec 2010 18:59:53 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:10102204</guid><dc:creator>Otto</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Umm... If you pose a greater risk, then you *should* pay higher insurance premiums. Insurance companies being able to gauge risk properly means that premiums are lower for those who don&amp;#39;t take such risks.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=10102204" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Gov2.0 and Facebook ‘Like’ Buttons</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/b/james_brown/archive/2010/12/07/gov2-0-and-facebook-like-buttons.aspx#10101745</link><pubDate>Wed, 08 Dec 2010 01:05:47 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:10101745</guid><dc:creator>Mischa Tuffield</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks for bringing this up again, and linking to my blog. Without wanting to pick on facebook the whole time, the &amp;quot;add this&amp;quot; button is pretty intrusive too. May write-up what they get up to. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I think the key issue is that the NHS and their manner of hiding behind their privacy policy annexed with their comment re: logging out. Once again thanks, I feel you have managed to raise all of these issues in your post.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;FWIW, I am still yet to get any response from the NHS, and am getting to the point where I am going to complain to the ICO.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Thanks for your support!&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Mischa&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=10101745" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: The anti-privacy lobby?</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/b/james_brown/archive/2010/11/25/the-anti-privacy-lobby.aspx#10097280</link><pubDate>Fri, 26 Nov 2010 23:20:43 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:10097280</guid><dc:creator>John from Toronto</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;I came across that story and had the very same reaction. I googled &amp;quot;anti-privacy&amp;quot; because I didn&amp;#39;t even know such a movement existed...and that search led me here!&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=10097280" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Cloud Computing and Data Sovereignty</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/b/james_brown/archive/2009/03/18/cloud-computing-and-data-sovereignty.aspx#10012869</link><pubDate>Fri, 14 May 2010 01:44:37 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:10012869</guid><dc:creator>Zebediah</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;This is a fantastic post and it mirrors a larger problem of people being able to control their own data. &amp;nbsp;The only real solution is going to be to have individuals take control of their own data and not let service providers have access to it without agreeing to give them complete control. &amp;nbsp;One could imagine using the tools developed for Digital Rights Management in the record industry to maintain control over personal information proliferation. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=10012869" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: SharePoint 2010 accessibility with WCAG 2.0 support</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/b/james_brown/archive/2009/10/19/sharepoint-2010-accessibility-with-wcag-2-0-support.aspx#9986440</link><pubDate>Sun, 28 Mar 2010 20:17:49 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9986440</guid><dc:creator>Gustavo Degeronimi</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;I've done a compliance test from the beta version using Total Validator. The results are promissing.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Check out here:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="http://degertech.blogspot.com/2010/03/sharepoint-2010-accessibility.html"&gt;http://degertech.blogspot.com/2010/03/sharepoint-2010-accessibility.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=9986440" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Environmental sustainability and IT</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/b/james_brown/archive/2009/01/12/environmental-sustainability-and-it.aspx#9849456</link><pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 01:03:34 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9849456</guid><dc:creator>Naomi Devine</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Great article, however I would suggest that you don't use the term 'environmental sustainability'. Sustainability is a holistic concept that involves thinking of social, economic, and environmental circumstances. In other words, you can't separate the three. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=9849456" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Microsoft Public Sector Government Partner of the year – Spenta Consulting</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/b/james_brown/archive/2009/07/19/microsoft-public-sector-government-partner-of-the-year-spenta-consulting.aspx#9841148</link><pubDate>Mon, 20 Jul 2009 11:31:23 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9841148</guid><dc:creator>David Martos</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Thank you very much, James. I'm not really sure if I deserve your words ;). I followed your advice regarding the translation plug-in. Anything to have one more reader and, specially, THIS new reader ;)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=9841148" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>