Prior informed consent - a highly subjective topic and moral or ethical consideration.

a) no reasonable person would assume any person speaks for all persons when negotiating identity or research

• "no one gives away their identity"
• "no one agrees to research without some form of compensation" 
• "a free application isn't compensation, notice the free application"​

b) no reasonable person would assume a party or population without the same values and economic conditions has the same understanding in good faith

• "We don't know what we don't know"
• "if you know, you are not very ethical and liable for your company and actions of the agents actions"

If two parties enter into an agreement or legally binding contract-both parties must be acting in good faith.

• If either party fails the reasonable expectation test, the contract may be null and void. 
• If a judge elects to set precedence, all laws are void and within weeks of NSA release every social media company was granted a free pass from judges who set precedence. 
  • The private sector pointed to the government as the bad guys or only ones to do harm

​Two use cases of the failures root cause suggest oral language and cultural value systems. 

Example;

Native American cultures are bound by oral language and formal matters are validated when both parties sit and smoke the Chalupa pipe.   A women is present in all formal agreements in tribal communities the matriarch role is vital to formal agreements. 

A written signature was of no importance to the indigenous leaders, in the same context the European settlers had no understanding of the importance behind the Chalupa pipe.  These two differences are critical in understanding communication and oral language. 

Big Data

 Big Data was partly born from a misconception or breakdown in communication amongst the private sector and the citizens across the world. It must be a coincidence that the research on humans was primarily on poor classes of people. 

Many internet users are novice or unlikely to change their settings - technical and marketing types prefer to assume the person isn't concerned about privacy, as they don't currently set their privacy to private. 

• Not a good assumption-most applications start with how much they value users privacy
  • Not many of us expect the fine print later in the same document to contradict the first statements.
  • Not all users are likely to understand the legal language
    • Users have a feature which they mark "only my friends or circles"
      • Changes to the setting seem to restore to default opt in despite the users preference.
      • Time may extend for long periods before the user notices the change
• A way to measure the users maturity
  • Does the user only use Internet Explorer?
    • If true, you are most likely to have a novice users
  • Our older workers are unlikely to be experts in technology
  • Does the user even read the terms?  Do they immediately click "ok"?
  • Do the users have a way to deny the terms and still access their pages?

 
A digital form presented to older persons in social media is like suggesting an older person could change their political or social values.  There's a saying about teaching an old dog new tricks.
A digital form with legal language-even farther reduces the chances of having an audience understand the