December 2017 - nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

104° Mercoledì di Nexa - 10 gennaio 2018
by Nexa Media Jan. 8, 2018

Jan. 8, 2018

Nexa Center for Internet and Society Newsletter Se non visualizzi correttamente questo messaggio clicca qui <http://nexa.polito.it/mercoledi-104> NEXA 104° Mercoledì di Nexa Mercoledì 10 gennaio 2018, ore 18.00 - 20.00 Politecnico di Torino http://nexa.polito.it/mercoledi-104 I dati della ricerca e il loro utilizzo: iniziative in corso nel nostro paese Speaker Paola Galimberti (Università degli Studi di Milano) This event will be webcast live: http://nexa.polito.it/upcoming-events /“Data is the new gold.”/ (N. Kroes) /“European science must be grounded in a common culture of data stewardship, so that research data is recognised as a significant output of research and is appropriately curated throughout and after the period conducting the research.”/ (EOSC Declaration) Da parecchio tempo in Europa sentiamo parlare dei dati della ricerca e dell’importanza di una loro gestione basata su principi condivisi affinché possano essere *accessibili e riutilizzabili da tutti* (a seconda dei casi: tutti coloro che sono interessati a riprodurre un determinato risultato; tutti coloro che chiedono e sono autorizzati ad accedervi; tutti i membri del gruppo di ricerca che ha prodotti tali dati). Ciò risulta fondamentale in un’epoca in cui *la scienza ha un evidente problema nella riproducibilità dei risultati raggiunti*. Quando uno scienziato pubblica una ricerca molte riviste gli richiedono di pubblicare (o per lo meno di rendere disponibili su richiesta) anche i dati su cui la sua ricerca è stata costruita e la descrizione della metodologia e degli strumenti con cui i dati sono stati prodotti. Che riflessi hanno le politiche dell’Europa nel nostro Paese? Quali sono le richieste del Ministero alle istituzioni e ai ricercatori che finanzia? *Il nostro Paese ha recepito* (come ad esempio la Gran Bretagna o l’Olanda) *l’importanza che ai dati viene attribuita a livello europeo? *Quali politiche (anche di incentivazione) sono state messe in atto? Quali infrastrutture e competenze sono state messe a disposizione di istituzioni e ricercatori? BIOGRAFIE - e informazioni supplementari [GALIMBERTI] *Paola GALIMBERTI* lavora presso l’Università degli Studi di Milano. Si occupa da anni di Open Access alle pubblicazioni scientifiche e ai dati della ricerca. Fa parte di IOSSG <https://sites.google.com/view/iossg/home>, del direttivo di AISA <http://aisa.sp.unipi.it/organi_soci/>, è editor per l’Italia della DOAJ, ed è uno dei redattori di ROARS <https://www.roars.it/online/>. *Letture consigliate e link utili:* * /EOSC Declaration <https://ec.europa.eu/research/openscience/pdf/eosc_declaration.pdf#view=fit…>/. * /The fair data principles <https://www.force11.org/group/fairgroup/fairprinciples>/, Force 11. * /LERU Roadmap for Research Data <https://www.leru.org/publications/leru-roadmap-for-research-data>/, Leru. * /Big Data <http://www.istruzione.it/allegati/2016/bigdata.pdf>/, Miur. Che cosa sono il Centro Nexa e i cicli di incontri “Mercoledì di Nexa” e “Nexa Lunch Seminar” Il Centro Nexa su Internet & Società del Politecnico di Torino (Dipartimento di Automatica e Informatica) è un centro di ricerca indipendente e interdisciplinare che studia Internet e il suo effetto sulla società. Maggiori informazioni all'indirizzo: http://nexa.polito.it/about. Durante i “*Mercoledì di Nexa*”, che si tengono *ogni 2° mercoledì del mese* alle *ore 18 in punto*, il Centro Nexa su Internet e Società apre le sue porte non solo agli esperti e a tutti coloro i quali lavorano con Internet, ma anche a semplici appassionati e cittadini. Il ciclo di incontri intende approfondire, con un linguaggio preciso ma divulgativo, i temi legati alla Rete: motori di ricerca, Creative Commons, social networks, open source/software libero, neutralità della rete, libertà di espressione, privacy, file sharing, big e open data, smart cities e molto altro. Al centro di quasi tutti gli incontri un ospite pronto a dialogare con i direttori del Centro Nexa, il Prof. Juan Carlos De Martin del Politecnico di Torino e il Prof. Marco Ricolfi dell'Università di Torino, nonché lo staff e i Fellows del Centro Nexa. Maggiori informazioni sui Mercoledì di Nexa, incluso un elenco di tutti i “Mercoledì” passati, sono disponibili all'indirizzo: http://nexa.polito.it/mercoledi. Si segnala inoltre che dal maggio 2012 *ogni 4° mercoledì* del mese *dalle ore 13 alle ore 14* il Centro Nexa organizza anche i "*Nexa Lunch Seminar*". Una lista di tutti i “Lunch Seminar” passati è disponibile all'indirizzo: http://nexa.polito.it/lunch-seminars. See our events calendar <http://nexa.polito.it/events> if you're curious about future luncheons, discussions, lectures, and conferences not listed in this email. Our events are free and open to the public, unless otherwise noted. Maggiori informazioni sui Mercoledì di Nexa e i Nexa Lunch Seminar, sono disponibili all'indirizzo: http://nexa.polito.it/events. Weekly Events Newsletter. Sign up <http://nexa.polito.it/mailing-lists> to receive this newsletter if this email was forwarded to you. To manage your subscription preferences, please click here <https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa>. Connect & get involved: Jobs, internships, and more <http://nexa.polito.it/get-involved>

1 1

"Ten years in, nobody has come up with a use for blockchain"
by J.C. DE MARTIN Dec. 31, 2017

Dec. 31, 2017

Sarei curioso di leggere una risposta bene argomentata a questo articolo... jc *Ten years in, nobody has come up with a use for blockchain* Kai Stinchcombe 22 dicembre 2017 /Everyone says the blockchain, the technology underpinning cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin, is going to change EVERYTHING. And yet, after years of tireless effort and billions of dollars invested, nobody has actually come up with a use for the blockchain—besides currency speculation and illegal transactions.// // //Each purported use case — from payments to legal documents, from escrow to voting systems—amounts to a set of contortions to add a distributed, encrypted, anonymous ledger where none was needed. What if there isn’t actually any use for a distributed ledger at all? What if, ten years after it was invented, the reason nobody has adopted a distributed ledger at scale is because nobody wants it?// / […] Continua qui: https://hackernoon.com/ten-years-in-nobody-has-come-up-with-a-use-case-for-…

8 10

Re: [nexa] "Ten years in, nobody has come up with a use for blockchain"
by Giuseppe Attardi Dec. 30, 2017

Dec. 30, 2017

> On 27 Dec 2017, at 18:16, nexa-request(a)server-nexa.polito.it wrote: > > Blockchain e' usata per portare questi dati e consentire la vendita del pescato direttamente alla GDO, mentre tutti gli altri attori vedono i dati (data, peso, tipo pesce, etc.) e quindi possono sincronizzarsi e contemporaneamente contrattare con GDO i propri servizi (filettatura, congelamento, immagazzinamento e trasporto) senza nulla toccare del rapporto pescatore-GDO sul prezzo del pesce. > In precedenza sia la GDO, sia consorzo pescatori, sia entita' statali avevano provato a creare dei sistemi centralizzati dove tutti gli attori contribuissero per quanto di competenza. Non ha mai funzionato, specialmente, per il problema trust/conflitto tra le parti. Anch’io come Enrico non mi spiego come questa cosa non si potesse fare con mezzi tradizionali: ciascuno pubblica i propri dati in modo che tutti li possano vedere. Sembra una funzionalità abbastanza tipica di un database transazionale. Si fanno transazioni finanziarie di ben maggiore porta e frequenza nei mercati finanziari con queste tecnologie. Perché debbono essere in tanti a certificare la transazione avvenuta anziché uno solo deputato a farlo? Basta che i dati siano pubblicati e resi accessibili a tutti e si ha lo stesso effetto della blockchain, senza le complicazioni associate. Ci vedo solo complicazioni e pochi vantaggi: ognuno si deve attrezzare con mezzi, software, ecc. Nel caso della blockchain, l’incentivo a farlo è la remunerazione che gli altri fanno del suo lavoro. Ma in un sistema chiuso questo e solo un costo aggiuntivo. — Beppe

1 0

Security Planner (by Citizen Lab)
by J.C. DE MARTIN Dec. 30, 2017

Dec. 30, 2017

*Security Planner* by Citizen Lab Improve your online safety with advice from experts /Answer a few simple questions to get personalized online safety recommendations. It's confidential - no personal information is stored and we won't access any of your online accounts./ https://securityplanner.org

1 0

Matt Stoller: “Monopoly is a Form of Lawlessness”
by J.C. DE MARTIN Dec. 29, 2017

Dec. 29, 2017

Intervento nel contesto del Harvard Law Forum, durata circa 43': https://youtu.be/xM9GMGDsKUU Matt Stoller is a fellow at the Open Markets program, where he researches the history of the relationship between concentrated financial power and the Democratic Party in the 20th century. Prior to joining the Open Markets program, he was senior policy advisory to the Senate Budget. juan carlos

1 0

Who’s doing Google and Facebook’s dirty work? | John Naughton
by Alberto Cammozzo Dec. 29, 2017

Dec. 29, 2017

<https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/24/facebook-google-youtu…> The basic deal offered by social media companies to their users runs like this: “We give you tools to publish whatever you want, and then we take the revenues that result from that. You get the personal satisfaction and the warm glow that comes from seeing your holiday pictures, your home movies or your cute cats online, and we bank the cash we earn from selling your data-trails and profiles to advertisers.” It’s the digital world’s equivalent of the old American south’s practice of sharecropping – a form of agriculture in which a landowner allows a tenant to use the land in return for a share of the crops produced on their plot. In the digital version, however, the virtual “landowners” differ in their degrees of generosity. Facebook gives its sharecroppers a zero share of the harvest. YouTube, in contrast, invites them to become amateur broadcasters by uploading films to its site. If it runs ads alongside these epic productions, then it shares some of the proceeds with the sharecroppers. And if said productions attract large numbers of viewers then this can be a nice little earner. The sharecropping business model has been a roaring success since 2006 (when Google bought YouTube and Facebook opened its doors to the great unwashed). But in recent times, some difficulties have emerged. First of all, the old adage that nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the general public was proved right. Sharecroppers discovered that fake news – ie tasteless, misleading or sensational content – stood a better chance of “going viral” (and earning more) than truthful stuff. And second, it turned out that there are an awful lot of violent, hateful, racist, misogynistic, fundamentalist sharecroppers out there. The internet, it seems, holds up a mirror to human nature, and much that we see reflected in it isn’t pretty. For a long time, the landowners of cyberspace tried to ignore this problem by inviting users to “flag” inappropriate content, which would then be reviewed at a leisurely pace. But as Isis began to master social media and the political temperature in the west hotted up, the inappropriate content problem changed from being an irritating cost centre into an existential threat. Major advertisers decided that they didn’t want their ads running alongside beheading videos, for example. And social media executives found themselves being hauled up before Congress, castigated by European politicians and threatened with dire consequences unless they cleaned up their act. [...] A few days ago, the first conference to discuss these questions was held in Los Angeles. It was convened by Sarah Roberts, a UCLA professor who has been studying online content-moderation for some years, and included speakers who had done this kind of work, and revealed interesting details like the rates of pay that contractors get: $0.02 for each image reviewed. What was more alarming, though, was testimony on the psychological impact that this kind of work can have on those who do it. “When I left MySpace,” one reported, “I didn’t shake hands for, like, three years because I figured out that people were disgusting. I just could not touch people. I was disgusted by humanity when I left there. So many of my peers, same thing. We all left with horrible views of humanity.” Welcome to the dark underbelly of our networked world. There’s no such thing as a free lunch: online “safety” comes at a price.

2 3

New York City’s Bold, Flawed Attempt to Make Algorithms Accountable
by J.C. DE MARTIN Dec. 27, 2017

Dec. 27, 2017

https://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/new-york-citys-bold-flawed-attempt-… (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

1 0

Articolo lungo: "Big Tech: The New Predatory Capitalism"
by J.C. DE MARTIN Dec. 27, 2017

Dec. 27, 2017

*Big Tech: The New Predatory Capitalism* /The tech giants are menacing democracy, privacy, and competition. Can they be housebroken?/ David Dayen December 26, 2017 /This article appears in the Winter 2018 issue of The American Prospect magazine. Subscribe here. // / “We’re making the world a better place.” The phrase is thrown around so often in the tech world that it became a punch line on the HBO satire Silicon Valley. Executives controlling the largest tech titans—Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple, and Microsoft—might even believe it. But in a searing presentation at Business Insider’s IGNITION conference in November, New York University professor Scott Galloway explained that technology and progress have stopped traveling together since the days of the Apollo Project, even as scientists and engineers developed the most sophisticated tools known to mankind. “What has the greatest collection of humanity and IQ and financial capital been brought together to accomplish?” Galloway asked the crowd. “To save world hunger? To create greater comity of man? I don’t think so. … Their singular mission, simply put, it’s to sell another fucking Nissan.” Today’s technologists work at for-profit businesses, doing what for-profit businesses do in America—maximizing shareholder profits by acquiring functional control of markets, as well as intimate details of our lives. Big Tech makes aspects of daily life more convenient (if more fraught), but that’s not the same as making the world a better place. Mainly, the goal has become making more money, via more monopoly. And their success over the past decade has been so unprecedented and damaging that Galloway—a self-described “full-throated capitalist”—sees no choice but to break these companies up. […] Continua qui: http://prospect.org/article/big-tech-new-predatory-capitalism

1 0

[SUSPECTED SPAM] EU Court of Justice rules that Uber provides a transport service and is not a mere electronic intermediary
by oreste.pollicino Dec. 26, 2017

Dec. 26, 2017

A first, preliminary, analysis (co-authored by Enzo Marasà) http://www.medialaws.eu/eu-court-of-justice-rules-that-uber-provides-a-tran… tantissimi auguri a tutti o.

1 0

Happy Holidays Card
by Nexa Media Dec. 23, 2017

Dec. 23, 2017

[image: Immagine incorporata 1]

1 0