June 2016 - nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

Event (Barcellona): "From the Corporate Sharing Economy to Platform Cooperativism"

by J.C. DE MARTIN

From the Corporate Sharing Economy to Platform Cooperativism Trebor Scholz, scholar-activist and Associate Professor for Culture & Media at The New School in New York City, and expert in sharing consumerism. The event is co-organized by CCCBLab and the Dimmons research group of the IN3 The CCCB will host the conference " From the Corporate Sharing Economy to Platform Cooperativism <http://www.cccb.org/en/activitats/fitxa/de-la-economia-collaborativa-al-coo…>" by Trebor Scholz <http://www.cccb.org/en/participants/fitxa/trebor-scholz/223892>. The event is organized jointly with the Dimmons <http://dimmons.net/> research group of the IN3, and the collaboration of Procomuns.net, IGOP.net, P2Pvalue and BCNActiva. The presentation will be led by Mayo Fuster <http://www.cccb.org/en/participants/fitxa/mayo-fuster/45356>, director of the Dimmons group about sharing economy. The session will be held in _English_ and there will be _Spanish simultaneous translation_. This activity _can be seen live_ from the CCCB website. _Free admission but seating is limited_. Trebor Scholz is the author of the book entitled /Cooperativismo de plataforma. Desafiando la economía colaborativa corporativa/ (Dimmons, 2016). The book is an essay on mistrust being created in sharing consumerism. Big companies are eliminating democratic values such as responsibility labor, workers' rights, etc., and Scholz introduces the concept of platform cooperativism to propose an economic movement that benefits most citizens. Cases such as Airbnb, Uber or eBay have popularised the concept of sharing economy. Digital platforms allow for the exchange of products and services, defying the business model of traditional companies. In many cases, though, the expansion of these platforms goes against the rights of their workforces. All these dilemmas and their alternatives will be discussed by Trebor Scholz. For Scholz, however, these software companies have created markets where they did not exist before, basing them on the infrastructure of other people: your car, your apartment, your time… Logistics companies where the intermediary gets paid and the employees lose their working rights: no unemployment, no social security and no retirement. Scholz highlights that we need to understand the long-term implications of these platforms and consider alternatives. Platform cooperativism matches the technology of digital platforms with a cooperative organisation model. It also asks the question of what would happen if the Internet was used and ruled in a different way, bringing the economy closer to its citizens in a way that benefited everyone. *Trebor Scholz* is a scholar-activist and Associate Professor for Culture & Media at The New School in New York City. His book /Uber-Worked and Underpaid. How Workers Are Disrupting the Digital Economy/ (Polity, 2016) develops an analysis of the challenges posed by digital labor and introduces the concept of platform cooperativism as a way of joining the peer-to-peer and co-op movements with online labor markets while insisting on communal ownership and democratic governance. In 2009, Scholz started to convene the influential digital labor conferences at The New School. Today, he frequently presents on the future of work, solidarity, and the Internet to media scholars, lawyers, activists, designers, developers, union leaders, and policymakers worldwide. His articles and ideas have appeared in /The Nation/, /The Chronicle of Higher Education/, /Le Monde/ and /The Washington Post/. Where: The Mirador - CCCB, Centre de Cultura Contemporània de Barcelona, c/ Montalegre, 5, 08001 Barcelona When: Thursday, 09 June 2016 (18:30 - 20:30) […] Continua qui: http://in3.uoc.edu/opencms_portalin3/opencms/en/activitats/seminaris/agenda…

June 7, 2016

Uber denies access to Harvard startup that compared ride-hailing prices

by J.C. DE MARTIN

Dalla serie: la concorrenza è la cosa più bella del mondo, ma solo se riguarda gli altri. juan carlos Uber denies access to Harvard startup that compared ride-hailing prices For this startup, Uber's claims of supporting competition ring hollow. By Eric Levenson June 5, 2016 Uber on Tuesday moved to revoke a price-comparison app’s access to Uber’s open software, sparking criticism that Uber was acting in contrast to its supposed ideals supporting competition. “They are absolutely a champion of competition when it’s them against taxi companies or them against regulators,” said Amber James, a co-founder of the startup, called Urbanhail. “However, in its own ride-hailing niche of the transportation market, Uber’s stance is ironically absolutely anti-competitive.” […] Continua qui: https://www.boston.com/news/technology/2016/06/05/uber-app-urbanhail-startu…

June 7, 2016

Opinion: Is your data really safer in Europe?

by J.C. DE MARTIN

*Opinion: Is your data really safer in Europe?* /The European privacy watchdog's rebuke of the EU-US data transfer deal known as Privacy Shield should prompt reforms on both sides of the Atlantic. In the meantime, we’d rather our data reside in the US, subject to publicly available legal frameworks, judicial oversight, and a strong tradition of civil society watchdogs./ By Kenneth A. Bamberger, Contributor Deirdre K. Mulligan, Contributor June 6, 2016 […] Continua qui: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Passcode/Passcode-Voices/2016/0606/Opinion-I…

June 7, 2016

Freedom of expression and the private sector in the digital age

by Alessandro Mantelero

Freedom of expression and the private sector in the digital age The 2016 report of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression, David Kaye, to the Human Rights Council is now available online. (Advance Edited Version) This report marks the launch of a new project exploring issues at the intersection of State action, the private sector and freedom of expression in a digital age. Online expression is increasingly mediated through private networks and platforms created, maintained and operated by a diverse range of companies commonly referred to as the Information and Communications Technology (“ICT”) sector. While the rapid growth of the ICT sector has led to unprecedented opportunities for access to information and communication, it has also triggered new forms of State regulation that threaten the very existence of a free and open Internet. The activities of the private sector also have an outsized impact on the freedom of expression of millions of users, given their role as gatekeepers of the global exchange of information and ideas. This report provides an overview of the regulatory ecosystem that underpins the Internet and trends in State and private action that implicate freedom of expression online. Among the issues the Special Rapporteur discusses are the role of key participants in the ICT sector; the relevant human rights standards applicable to States and the private sector; and the legal and policy concerns that he will examine over the course of his mandate. While this report principally aims to map the private ICT sector, it also concludes with some general recommendations. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/FreedomOpinion/Pages/Privatesectorinthedigit… -- Prof. Avv. Alessandro Mantelero Politecnico di Torino Nexa Center for Internet and Society | Director of Privacy Politecnico di Torino–Tongji University| Coordinator, Double Degree program in Management and IP Law Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology | Part-time Expert, School of Public Administration European Data Protection Law Review | Associate Editor http://staff.polito.it/alessandro.mantelero EMAIL POLICY: twice a day (Mon-Fri)

June 6, 2016

German privacy regulator fines three firms over U.S. data transfers

by Alessandro Mantelero

German privacy regulator fines three firms over U.S. data transfers By Julia Fioretti BRUSSELS (Reuters) - A German regulator has fined three companies for still relying on a Safe Harbour agreement to electronically transfer personal data to the United States, despite the deal being declared invalid by the EU's highest court last year on concerns about U.S. mass surveillance activities. The Hamburg Data Commissioner said on Monday it had fined Adobe Systems, fruit juice maker Punica, a subsidiary of PepsiCo, and Anglo-Dutch consumer goods group Unilever a total of 28,000 euros ($32,000) for failing to set up alternative legal channels for cross-border data transfers quickly enough. http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0YS23H -- Prof. Avv. Alessandro Mantelero Politecnico di Torino Nexa Center for Internet and Society | Director of Privacy Politecnico di Torino–Tongji University| Coordinator, Double Degree program in Management and IP Law Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology | Part-time Expert, School of Public Administration European Data Protection Law Review | Associate Editor http://staff.polito.it/alessandro.mantelero EMAIL POLICY: twice a day (Mon-Fri)

June 6, 2016

Re: [nexa] EU warns governments against banning Uber and Airbnb

by Giuseppe Attardi

+1 — > On 03 giu 2016, at 19:10, nexa-request(a)server-nexa.polito.it wrote: > > A costo di sembrare ripetitivo... Invito a leggere i capitoli relativi nel > mio libro. > Il modello competitivo dato dal quadro regolamentare porta a > monopsoni/oligopsoni > Vanno fatte regole diverse. > Però appena parli di ciò, sembra che oggi non ci siano regole (falso) e che > necessariamente regole= limite alla concorrenza. > In realtà abbiamo bisogno di regole che aumentino la concorrenza, imho. Non > le attuali che favoriscono i più capitalizzati fino al winner takes it all, > con effetti di concentrazione anche nel mercato dei capitali. A me > piacerebbe più concorrenza e più capitalizzazione su più soggetti. > Ciao, s.

June 6, 2016

Call: Ethicomp/CEPE 2017 Values in Emerging Science and Technology (Turin, June 2017)

by J.C. DE MARTIN

Ethicomp/CEPE 2017 Values in Emerging Science and Technology Università degli Studi di Torino (University of Turin), Turin, Italy June 5-8, 2017 The Ethicomp series of conferences fosters an international community of scholars and technologists, including computer professionals and business professionals from industry. Since 1995, conferences have been scheduled across Europe and Asia, with our main events coming every 18 months. Ethicomp considers computer ethics conceived broadly to include philosophical, professional, and practical aspects of the field. CEPE (Computer Ethics Philosophical Enquiry), as the name implies, is more narrowly focused on the philosophical aspects of computer and information ethics. CEPE events have been held every 18 months since 1997. Since the CEPE community overlaps considerably with the Ethicomp community, it makes sense for our two conference series to work together. In light of this, our next conference will be a jointly sponsored event, hosted at the Università degli Studi di Torino (University of Turin), Turin, Italy in June of 2017. In the two decades since the inception of Ethicomp and CEPE, computing has gone from being esoteric and newfangled to ubiquitous and everyday. The ensuing transformations of our cultural and social institutions are liable to accelerate and metastasize as information technologies find their ways into every field of research and every pursuit. Our shared mission of promoting the ethical use of computer technology consequently demands an inquiry into values as these relate broadly to emerging sciences and technologies. Important Dates Call for abstracts June 2016 Initial submission September 12, 2016 Reviews due October 17, 2016 Paper acceptance / rejection November 7, 2016 Final full paper submissions February 1, 2017 Conference June 5-8, 2017 Submission As in previous ETHICOMP and CEPE conferences, papers written in English and not published nor submitted elsewhere will be accepted on the basis of an extended abstract of between 1000 and 1500 words after a careful,*double-blind review*overseen by the Program Committee. Authors may submit more than one abstract, but acceptance of multiple proposals by a single author or co-author will be weighed against available space to ensure we can include as many authors as practical for ETHICOMP/CEPE 2017. Final papers should be no more than 8000 words. Extended abstracts, stripped of identifying information to facilitate the double-blind process, should be submitted to EasyChair at https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=cepeethicomp2017 If you submit an abstract with author names and/or other identifying information in the text of the abstract, it may not be accepted.

June 6, 2016

Prisoners’ code word caught by software that eavesdrops on calls

by Alberto Cammozzo

[..] Every call into or out of US prisons is recorded. It can be important to know what’s being said, because some inmates use phones to conduct illegal business on the outside. But the recordings generate huge quantities of audio that are prohibitively expensive to monitor with human ears. To help, one jail in the Midwest recently used a machine-learning system developed by London firm Intelligent Voice to listen in on the thousands of hours of recordings generated every month. “No one at the prison spotted the code word until software started churning through calls“ The software saw the phrase “three-way” cropping up again and again in the calls – it was one of the most common non-trivial words or phrases used. At first, prison officials were surprised by the overwhelming popularity of what they thought was a sexual reference. Then they worked out it was code. Prisoners are allowed to call only a few previously agreed numbers. So if an inmate wanted to speak to someone on a number not on the list, they would call their friends or parents and ask for a “three-way” with the person they really wanted to talk to – code for dialling a third party into the call. No one running the phone surveillance at the prison spotted the code until the software started churning through the recordings. This story illustrates the speed and scale of analysis that machine-learning algorithms are bringing to the world. Intelligent Voice originally developed the software for use by UK banks, which must record their calls to comply with industry regulations. As with prisons, this generates a vast amount of audio data that is hard to search through. [..] <https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg23030762-200-prisoners-code-word-cau…>

June 6, 2016

Airbnb’s racism problem isn’t going away any time soon | Fusion

by J.C. DE MARTIN

http://fusion.net/story/308759/airbnbs-racism-problem-isnt-going-away-any-t… (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

June 6, 2016

Cyber Act of War

by Alberto Cammozzo

The Cyber Act of War Act: A Proposal for a Problem the Law Can’t Fix In a Wall Street Journal op-ed this week, Senator Mike Rounds argued the United States urgently needs “a clear and concise definition of when an attack in cyberspace constitutes an act of war.” To produce this definition, Rounds introduced the “Cyber Act of War Act” to remove “dangerous ambiguity” in U.S. policy and better prepare the United States “to respond to cyberattacks and better deter bad actors from attempting an attack on the U.S. in the first place.” Unfortunately for Rounds, his proposal would neither produce the definition he believes is critical nor advance policy from where it presently stands. Although Senator Rounds stresses the need for a clear and concise definition of a cyber act of war, the bill does not mandate the government produce such a definition. The proposed legislation would require the president to “develop a policy for determining when an action carried out in cyberspace constitutes an act of war against the United States.” This obligation is procedural—establish a process for deciding when a cyber incident crosses into warfare. Developing this process would not necessarily produce a clear and concise definition of a cyber act of war. In developing a policy process, the bill instructs the president to consider how “a cyberattack may be equivalent to the effects of an attack using conventional weapons, including with respect to physical destruction or casualties” and “intangible effects of significant scope, intensity, or duration.” Application of these criteria would not produce a clear and concise definition. What the bill proposes is a process that evaluates cyber incidents on a case-by-case basis using relevant considerations. [..] <http://blogs.cfr.org/cyber/2016/05/12/the-cyber-act-of-war-act-a-proposal-f…>

June 5, 2016