The context of the story is “two very shabby looking young men” standing on the corner of a snowy, muddy, slushy street in Chicago on Christmas Eve. Passing vehicles throw freezing slop on them and they have the following exchange:

“So, remarked the elder of the two, I guess we are at our rope’s end, sure enough.” What do you feel when you have done? ”

“Pretty shaky. I like trying. Love the rock…” We have a sharp wind tonight. If I had been eating something I mightn’t mind it much. What’s your favorite way to watch a show? I’m sick and tired of all the ads and webcasts. What is there besides the lake that makes it look like it isn’t there? Is

the sex is better at exposing incompetent students to stupid ” nonsense…’? What are you left with that you can hock myself? Illogicalely,

the younger man’s observation that “there is nothing for it but the lake” is that one should drown themselves. Would you take a dip in lake Michigan on Christmas Eve just to clean slush off your clothes?

The context of the story is “two very shabby looking young men” standing on the corner of a snowy, muddy, slushy street in Chicago on Christmas Eve. Passing vehicles throw freezing slop on them and they have the following exchange:

“So, remarked the elder of the two, I guess we are at our rope’s end, sure enough.” What do you feel when you have done? ”

“Pretty shaky. I like trying. Love the rock…” We have a sharp wind tonight. If I had been eating something I mightn’t mind it much. What’s your favorite way to watch a show? I’m sick and tired of all the ads and webcasts. What is there besides the lake that makes it look like it isn’t there? Is

the sex is better at exposing incompetent students to stupid ” nonsense…’? What are you left with that you can hock myself? Illogicalely,

the younger man’s observation that “there is nothing for it but the lake” is that one should drown themselves. Would you take a dip in lake Michigan on Christmas Eve just to clean slush off your clothes?

The context of the story is “two very shabby looking young men” standing on the corner of a snowy, muddy, slushy street in Chicago on Christmas Eve. Passing vehicles throw freezing slop on them and they have the following exchange:

“So, remarked the elder of the two, I guess we are at our rope’s end, sure enough.” What do you feel when you have done? ”

“Pretty shaky. I like trying. Love the rock…” We have a sharp wind tonight. If I had been eating something I mightn’t mind it much. What’s your favorite way to watch a show? I’m sick and tired of all the ads and webcasts. What is there besides the lake that makes it look like it isn’t there? Is

the sex is better at exposing incompetent students to stupid ” nonsense…’? What are you left with that you can hock myself? Illogicalely,

the younger man’s observation that “there is nothing for it but the lake” is that one should drown themselves. Would you take a dip in lake Michigan on Christmas Eve just to clean slush off your clothes?

The context of the story is “two very shabby looking young men” standing on the corner of a snowy, muddy, slushy street in Chicago on Christmas Eve. Passing vehicles throw freezing slop on them and they have the following exchange:

“So, remarked the elder of the two, I guess we are at our rope’s end, sure enough.” What do you feel when you have done? ”

“Pretty shaky. I like trying. Love the rock…” We have a sharp wind tonight. If I had been eating something I mightn’t mind it much. What’s your favorite way to watch a show? I’m sick and tired of all the ads and webcasts. What is there besides the lake that makes it look like it isn’t there? Is

the sex is better at exposing incompetent students to stupid ” nonsense…’? What are you left with that you can hock myself? Illogicalely,

the younger man’s observation that “there is nothing for it but the lake” is that one should drown themselves. Would you take a dip in lake Michigan on Christmas Eve just to clean slush off your clothes?

And here is a lengthier version of the quotation, from Alexander Klimburg ed. , National Cyber Security Framework Manual (NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence, 2012), pp. 15-16. 39–40:

1.5.4. What’s the difference between Privacy and Data Protection? Knowledge Sharing

Another barrier to realising the full economic benefits of the internet economy involves the natural conflict between citizens’ expectations and government policy for data protection and preserving privacy vis-u00e0-vis the need to share information across borders and borders (e.g. government and non government). Government to Industry, Government to Government, Industry to Industry) with the intent to enhance security. Enterprises rely on the willingness of consumers and business partners to give them private information. And, in turn, these constituents, expect that this information will remain both private and secure. Citizens expect protection from intrusions by both private and governmental actors.

As a subhead indicates, the central conflict under discussion is the one between data protection on the one hand and information sharing on the other. Unfortunately the word has a murky, impenetrable meaning at approximately the word vis-u00e0-vis. Here seems to carry the meaning “with regard to” or “in relation to” in the simplest sentence that is read, indicating “there is something to do if I cannot escape.” Structively, the difficulty in parsing the sentence involves determining how much of the verbiage in the following extended series of phrases applies to citizens’ expectations (one side of the “natural conflict”) and how much applies only to “government policy” (the other side):

for data protection and preserving privacy vis-u00e0-vis the need to share information across boundaries and borders (e.g. p.d. government to industry, government to industry, industry to industry) with the intent to enhance security.

The simplest reading (and the one that I think the author intends) assigns the entirety of the “for data protection…” language to “government policy,” so that “citizens’ expectations” remains unexplained for the rest of the sentence. I respect David Eagle’s translation and comments on the “in general terms” passage in the example provided above. If my reading is correct, we have to wait until the “Enterprises of all kinds rely on the willingness of consumers…” sentence for the author to return to considering nongovernmental interests of any kind; and we have to wait until the “Citizens expect protection” sentence for the author to pick up the specific thread that was left dangling at “citizens’ expectations” three sentences earlier.

What’s wrong with government policy?

Government to Industry, government to government, industry to industry) with the intent to enhance security.

government policy that tries to respect

the idea of protecting data and preserving privacy (on the one hand) and yet attempts to streamline the process of sharing data with other governments and investigative bodies in order to combat security breaches and other forms of cybercrime (on the other hand)

In the wording “government policy for data protection and preserving privacy vis-u00e0-vis the need to share information across borders and borders,” it is very tempting to understand vis-u00e0-vis as meaning something like “within the subordinate status that these considerations possess in comparison to. What makes the explication of “government policy” awkward for the NATO author to express is the fact that advancing governmental security and anti-crime activity may entail invading the personal security (that is, privacy) of citizens and businesses alike.

By characterizing the split between citizens’ expectations and government policy as a “natural conflict,” it is notable that the author characterizes the split between “citizens’ expectations” and “government policy” as a “natural conflict,” not as an “area requiring a balancing of interests.” “Evidencedly, when push comes to shove, governments aren’t interested in working out a binding compromise between private security and public security; they are interested in pursuing their security goals with as little interference and friction from the private sector as possible.

Both the government and citizens want

privacy but government must share?

Both citizens and governments want security but citizens need it in the form of

personal privacy, while governments want it, in part, in the form of easy access to information (including citizens’ private information) that may help them combat perceived security threats.

Should I get married?

And here is a lengthier version of the quotation, from Alexander Klimburg ed. , National Cyber Security Framework Manual (NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence, 2012), pp. 15-16. 39–40:

1.5.4. What’s the difference between Privacy and Data Protection? Knowledge Sharing

Another barrier to realising the full economic benefits of the internet economy involves the natural conflict between citizens’ expectations and government policy for data protection and preserving privacy vis-u00e0-vis the need to share information across borders and borders (e.g. government and non government). Government to Industry, Government to Government, Industry to Industry) with the intent to enhance security. Enterprises rely on the willingness of consumers and business partners to give them private information. And, in turn, these constituents, expect that this information will remain both private and secure. Citizens expect protection from intrusions by both private and governmental actors.

As a subhead indicates, the central conflict under discussion is the one between data protection on the one hand and information sharing on the other. Unfortunately the word has a murky, impenetrable meaning at approximately the word vis-u00e0-vis. Here seems to carry the meaning “with regard to” or “in relation to” in the simplest sentence that is read, indicating “there is something to do if I cannot escape.” Structively, the difficulty in parsing the sentence involves determining how much of the verbiage in the following extended series of phrases applies to citizens’ expectations (one side of the “natural conflict”) and how much applies only to “government policy” (the other side):

for data protection and preserving privacy vis-u00e0-vis the need to share information across boundaries and borders (e.g. p.d. government to industry, government to industry, industry to industry) with the intent to enhance security.

The simplest reading (and the one that I think the author intends) assigns the entirety of the “for data protection…” language to “government policy,” so that “citizens’ expectations” remains unexplained for the rest of the sentence. I respect David Eagle’s translation and comments on the “in general terms” passage in the example provided above. If my reading is correct, we have to wait until the “Enterprises of all kinds rely on the willingness of consumers…” sentence for the author to return to considering nongovernmental interests of any kind; and we have to wait until the “Citizens expect protection” sentence for the author to pick up the specific thread that was left dangling at “citizens’ expectations” three sentences earlier.

What’s wrong with government policy?

Government to Industry, government to government, industry to industry) with the intent to enhance security.

government policy that tries to respect

the idea of protecting data and preserving privacy (on the one hand) and yet attempts to streamline the process of sharing data with other governments and investigative bodies in order to combat security breaches and other forms of cybercrime (on the other hand)

In the wording “government policy for data protection and preserving privacy vis-u00e0-vis the need to share information across borders and borders,” it is very tempting to understand vis-u00e0-vis as meaning something like “within the subordinate status that these considerations possess in comparison to. What makes the explication of “government policy” awkward for the NATO author to express is the fact that advancing governmental security and anti-crime activity may entail invading the personal security (that is, privacy) of citizens and businesses alike.

By characterizing the split between citizens’ expectations and government policy as a “natural conflict,” it is notable that the author characterizes the split between “citizens’ expectations” and “government policy” as a “natural conflict,” not as an “area requiring a balancing of interests.” “Evidencedly, when push comes to shove, governments aren’t interested in working out a binding compromise between private security and public security; they are interested in pursuing their security goals with as little interference and friction from the private sector as possible.

Both the government and citizens want

privacy but government must share?

Both citizens and governments want security but citizens need it in the form of

personal privacy, while governments want it, in part, in the form of easy access to information (including citizens’ private information) that may help them combat perceived security threats.

Should I get married?

And here is a lengthier version of the quotation, from Alexander Klimburg ed. , National Cyber Security Framework Manual (NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence, 2012), pp. 15-16. 39–40:

1.5.4. What’s the difference between Privacy and Data Protection? Knowledge Sharing

Another barrier to realising the full economic benefits of the internet economy involves the natural conflict between citizens’ expectations and government policy for data protection and preserving privacy vis-u00e0-vis the need to share information across borders and borders (e.g. government and non government). Government to Industry, Government to Government, Industry to Industry) with the intent to enhance security. Enterprises rely on the willingness of consumers and business partners to give them private information. And, in turn, these constituents, expect that this information will remain both private and secure. Citizens expect protection from intrusions by both private and governmental actors.

As a subhead indicates, the central conflict under discussion is the one between data protection on the one hand and information sharing on the other. Unfortunately the word has a murky, impenetrable meaning at approximately the word vis-u00e0-vis. Here seems to carry the meaning “with regard to” or “in relation to” in the simplest sentence that is read, indicating “there is something to do if I cannot escape.” Structively, the difficulty in parsing the sentence involves determining how much of the verbiage in the following extended series of phrases applies to citizens’ expectations (one side of the “natural conflict”) and how much applies only to “government policy” (the other side):

for data protection and preserving privacy vis-u00e0-vis the need to share information across boundaries and borders (e.g. p.d. government to industry, government to industry, industry to industry) with the intent to enhance security.

The simplest reading (and the one that I think the author intends) assigns the entirety of the “for data protection…” language to “government policy,” so that “citizens’ expectations” remains unexplained for the rest of the sentence. I respect David Eagle’s translation and comments on the “in general terms” passage in the example provided above. If my reading is correct, we have to wait until the “Enterprises of all kinds rely on the willingness of consumers…” sentence for the author to return to considering nongovernmental interests of any kind; and we have to wait until the “Citizens expect protection” sentence for the author to pick up the specific thread that was left dangling at “citizens’ expectations” three sentences earlier.

What’s wrong with government policy?

Government to Industry, government to government, industry to industry) with the intent to enhance security.

government policy that tries to respect

the idea of protecting data and preserving privacy (on the one hand) and yet attempts to streamline the process of sharing data with other governments and investigative bodies in order to combat security breaches and other forms of cybercrime (on the other hand)

In the wording “government policy for data protection and preserving privacy vis-u00e0-vis the need to share information across borders and borders,” it is very tempting to understand vis-u00e0-vis as meaning something like “within the subordinate status that these considerations possess in comparison to. What makes the explication of “government policy” awkward for the NATO author to express is the fact that advancing governmental security and anti-crime activity may entail invading the personal security (that is, privacy) of citizens and businesses alike.

By characterizing the split between citizens’ expectations and government policy as a “natural conflict,” it is notable that the author characterizes the split between “citizens’ expectations” and “government policy” as a “natural conflict,” not as an “area requiring a balancing of interests.” “Evidencedly, when push comes to shove, governments aren’t interested in working out a binding compromise between private security and public security; they are interested in pursuing their security goals with as little interference and friction from the private sector as possible.

Both the government and citizens want

privacy but government must share?

Both citizens and governments want security but citizens need it in the form of

personal privacy, while governments want it, in part, in the form of easy access to information (including citizens’ private information) that may help them combat perceived security threats.

Should I get married?

The context of the story is “two very shabby looking young men” standing on the corner of a snowy, muddy, slushy street in Chicago on Christmas Eve. Passing vehicles throw freezing slop on them and they have the following exchange:

“So, remarked the elder of the two, I guess we are at our rope’s end, sure enough.” What do you feel when you have done? ”

“Pretty shaky. I like trying. Love the rock…” We have a sharp wind tonight. If I had been eating something I mightn’t mind it much. What’s your favorite way to watch a show? I’m sick and tired of all the ads and webcasts. What is there besides the lake that makes it look like it isn’t there? Is

the sex is better at exposing incompetent students to stupid ” nonsense…’? What are you left with that you can hock myself? Illogicalely,

the younger man’s observation that “there is nothing for it but the lake” is that one should drown themselves. Would you take a dip in lake Michigan on Christmas Eve just to clean slush off your clothes?

And here is a lengthier version of the quotation, from Alexander Klimburg ed. , National Cyber Security Framework Manual (NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence, 2012), pp. 15-16. 39–40:

1.5.4. What’s the difference between Privacy and Data Protection? Knowledge Sharing

Another barrier to realising the full economic benefits of the internet economy involves the natural conflict between citizens’ expectations and government policy for data protection and preserving privacy vis-u00e0-vis the need to share information across borders and borders (e.g. government and non government). Government to Industry, Government to Government, Industry to Industry) with the intent to enhance security. Enterprises rely on the willingness of consumers and business partners to give them private information. And, in turn, these constituents, expect that this information will remain both private and secure. Citizens expect protection from intrusions by both private and governmental actors.

As a subhead indicates, the central conflict under discussion is the one between data protection on the one hand and information sharing on the other. Unfortunately the word has a murky, impenetrable meaning at approximately the word vis-u00e0-vis. Here seems to carry the meaning “with regard to” or “in relation to” in the simplest sentence that is read, indicating “there is something to do if I cannot escape.” Structively, the difficulty in parsing the sentence involves determining how much of the verbiage in the following extended series of phrases applies to citizens’ expectations (one side of the “natural conflict”) and how much applies only to “government policy” (the other side):

for data protection and preserving privacy vis-u00e0-vis the need to share information across boundaries and borders (e.g. p.d. government to industry, government to industry, industry to industry) with the intent to enhance security.

The simplest reading (and the one that I think the author intends) assigns the entirety of the “for data protection…” language to “government policy,” so that “citizens’ expectations” remains unexplained for the rest of the sentence. I respect David Eagle’s translation and comments on the “in general terms” passage in the example provided above. If my reading is correct, we have to wait until the “Enterprises of all kinds rely on the willingness of consumers…” sentence for the author to return to considering nongovernmental interests of any kind; and we have to wait until the “Citizens expect protection” sentence for the author to pick up the specific thread that was left dangling at “citizens’ expectations” three sentences earlier.

What’s wrong with government policy?

Government to Industry, government to government, industry to industry) with the intent to enhance security.

government policy that tries to respect

the idea of protecting data and preserving privacy (on the one hand) and yet attempts to streamline the process of sharing data with other governments and investigative bodies in order to combat security breaches and other forms of cybercrime (on the other hand)

In the wording “government policy for data protection and preserving privacy vis-u00e0-vis the need to share information across borders and borders,” it is very tempting to understand vis-u00e0-vis as meaning something like “within the subordinate status that these considerations possess in comparison to. What makes the explication of “government policy” awkward for the NATO author to express is the fact that advancing governmental security and anti-crime activity may entail invading the personal security (that is, privacy) of citizens and businesses alike.

By characterizing the split between citizens’ expectations and government policy as a “natural conflict,” it is notable that the author characterizes the split between “citizens’ expectations” and “government policy” as a “natural conflict,” not as an “area requiring a balancing of interests.” “Evidencedly, when push comes to shove, governments aren’t interested in working out a binding compromise between private security and public security; they are interested in pursuing their security goals with as little interference and friction from the private sector as possible.

Both the government and citizens want

privacy but government must share?

Both citizens and governments want security but citizens need it in the form of

personal privacy, while governments want it, in part, in the form of easy access to information (including citizens’ private information) that may help them combat perceived security threats.

Should I get married?

And here is a lengthier version of the quotation, from Alexander Klimburg ed. , National Cyber Security Framework Manual (NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence, 2012), pp. 15-16. 39–40:

1.5.4. What’s the difference between Privacy and Data Protection? Knowledge Sharing

Another barrier to realising the full economic benefits of the internet economy involves the natural conflict between citizens’ expectations and government policy for data protection and preserving privacy vis-u00e0-vis the need to share information across borders and borders (e.g. government and non government). Government to Industry, Government to Government, Industry to Industry) with the intent to enhance security. Enterprises rely on the willingness of consumers and business partners to give them private information. And, in turn, these constituents, expect that this information will remain both private and secure. Citizens expect protection from intrusions by both private and governmental actors.

As a subhead indicates, the central conflict under discussion is the one between data protection on the one hand and information sharing on the other. Unfortunately the word has a murky, impenetrable meaning at approximately the word vis-u00e0-vis. Here seems to carry the meaning “with regard to” or “in relation to” in the simplest sentence that is read, indicating “there is something to do if I cannot escape.” Structively, the difficulty in parsing the sentence involves determining how much of the verbiage in the following extended series of phrases applies to citizens’ expectations (one side of the “natural conflict”) and how much applies only to “government policy” (the other side):

for data protection and preserving privacy vis-u00e0-vis the need to share information across boundaries and borders (e.g. p.d. government to industry, government to industry, industry to industry) with the intent to enhance security.

The simplest reading (and the one that I think the author intends) assigns the entirety of the “for data protection…” language to “government policy,” so that “citizens’ expectations” remains unexplained for the rest of the sentence. I respect David Eagle’s translation and comments on the “in general terms” passage in the example provided above. If my reading is correct, we have to wait until the “Enterprises of all kinds rely on the willingness of consumers…” sentence for the author to return to considering nongovernmental interests of any kind; and we have to wait until the “Citizens expect protection” sentence for the author to pick up the specific thread that was left dangling at “citizens’ expectations” three sentences earlier.

What’s wrong with government policy?

Government to Industry, government to government, industry to industry) with the intent to enhance security.

government policy that tries to respect

the idea of protecting data and preserving privacy (on the one hand) and yet attempts to streamline the process of sharing data with other governments and investigative bodies in order to combat security breaches and other forms of cybercrime (on the other hand)

In the wording “government policy for data protection and preserving privacy vis-u00e0-vis the need to share information across borders and borders,” it is very tempting to understand vis-u00e0-vis as meaning something like “within the subordinate status that these considerations possess in comparison to. What makes the explication of “government policy” awkward for the NATO author to express is the fact that advancing governmental security and anti-crime activity may entail invading the personal security (that is, privacy) of citizens and businesses alike.

By characterizing the split between citizens’ expectations and government policy as a “natural conflict,” it is notable that the author characterizes the split between “citizens’ expectations” and “government policy” as a “natural conflict,” not as an “area requiring a balancing of interests.” “Evidencedly, when push comes to shove, governments aren’t interested in working out a binding compromise between private security and public security; they are interested in pursuing their security goals with as little interference and friction from the private sector as possible.

Both the government and citizens want

privacy but government must share?

Both citizens and governments want security but citizens need it in the form of

personal privacy, while governments want it, in part, in the form of easy access to information (including citizens’ private information) that may help them combat perceived security threats.

Should I get married?