August 2017 - nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

EFF's Jillian York on censorship: "What we need is for companies to choose openness, transparency, and due process"
by gianluca quaglia Aug. 24, 2017

Aug. 24, 2017

EFF's Jillian York on censorship: "What we need is for companies to choose openness, transparency, and due process" Continua qui https://www.facebook.com/eff/posts/10154674401606946 -- Sent from my smartphone Excuse any typos due to small screen (also...)

2 1

Sonos says users must accept new privacy policy
by gianluca quaglia Aug. 24, 2017

Aug. 24, 2017

Sonos says users must accept new privacy policy or devices may "cease to function" Continue here http://www.zdnet.com/article/sonos-accept-new-privacy-policy-speakers-cease… -- Sent from my smartphone Excuse any typos due to small screen (also...)

1 0

Elon Musk leads 116 experts calling for outright ban of killer robots
by Alberto Cammozzo Aug. 21, 2017

Aug. 21, 2017

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/aug/20/elon-musk-killer-robots-… Some of the world’s leading robotics and artificial intelligence pioneers are calling on the United Nations to ban the development and use of killer robots. Tesla’s Elon Musk and Google’s Mustafa Suleyman are leading a group of 116 specialists from across 26 countries who are calling for the ban on autonomous weapons. The UN recently voted to begin formal discussions on such weapons which include drones, tanks and automated machine guns. Ahead of this, the group of founders of AI and robotics companies have sent an open letter to the UN calling for it to prevent the arms race that is currently under way for killer robots. ...

4 3

Fwd: China’s dystopian push to revolutionize surveillance
by Alberto Cammozzo Aug. 21, 2017

Aug. 21, 2017

-------- Original Message -------- From: Greg Walton <greg.secure(a)GMAIL.COM> Sent: August 20, 2017 2:24:34 PM GMT+02:00 To: SURVEILLANCE(a)JISCMAIL.AC.UK Subject: China’s dystopian push to revolutionize surveillance China’s dystopian push to revolutionize surveillance By Maya Wang | August 18 at 10:09 AM Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/democracy-post/wp/ 2017/08/18/chinas-dystopian-push-to-revolutionize-surveillance /?tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.df73d813863e As part of a new multimillion-dollar project in Xinjiang, the Chinese government is attempting to “build a fortress city with technologies <http://stock.jrj.com.cn/2017/07/03210922691114.shtml>.” If this sounds Orwellian, that’s because it is. According to the Sina online news portal, the project is supposed to strengthen the authorities’ hands against unexpected social unrest. Using “big data” from various sources, including the railway system and visitors’ systems in private residential compounds, its ultimate aim is to “predict … individuals and vehicles posing heightened risks <https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:IcPjLZTnMjwJ:news.sin…>” to public safety. And this isn’t the only project in China that aims to expand surveillancewhile denying people privacy rights. Across the country, local governments are spending billions of dollars <http://homelandsecurityresearch.com/2013/09/china-safe-cities-technologies-…> implementing sophisticated technological systems for mass surveillance. The consequences for human rights are ominous. [image: subscribe] The story must be told. Your subscription supports journalism that matters. Try 1 month for 99¢ <https://subscribe.washingtonpost.com/acquisition/?promo=display_hp_subsbnr_…> Beijing’s impulse to surveil is certainly not new. But mass migration and privatization during the transition to a market economy have undermined the power of older practices that allowed the state to keep tabs on people, such as the “hukou” residency registration system. To bolster and broaden surveillance, the Ministry of Public Security turned to new technologies, launching the Golden Shield Project <https://books.google.com/books?id=S9rP0A2q14UC&printsec=frontcover&dq=inaut…> in 2000 <https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs181/projects/2010-11/FreedomOfInf…>. The project aims to build a nationwide, intelligent digital surveillance network capable of identifying and locating individuals, as well as offering the state immediate access to personal records <https://archive.org/stream/230159-china-golden-shield/230159-china-golden-s…> at the push of a button. This dystopian project is bearing fruit. China’s pervasive Internet censorship and its use of countless security cameras <https://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2014/06/05/one-legacy-of-tiananmen-chin…> in public spaces are well known. Recent reporting reveals authorities’ aspirations to enable facial recognition <https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-all-seeing-surveillance-state-feared-in-th…> through upgraded cameras, to calculate citizens’ “social credit” scores based on economic and social status and to establish a national DNA database <https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/05/15/china-police-dna-database-threatens-pri…> that logs genetic code irrespective of anyone’s connection to a crime. But we still know little of China’s full range of efforts to revolutionize surveillance. We have few details about China’s use of voice and speech recognition. There has not been any investigation into China’s nationwide “safe city” projects that vow to promote public safety using technology. We know even less about how China plans to use big data for crime prediction. What we do know is that China has no effective privacy protections and that it often treats peaceful speech as a crime. It is also worrying that some of these systems are designed to identify “focus personnel <https://www.hrw.org/video-photos/interactive/2017/06/20/tibet-glossary-repr…>” — a catchall term for both those with a criminal record and those whom authorities deem threatening or antisocial, including peaceful critics, political activists, minorities or people with a drug use record. The story of Wu Bing <http://news.sina.com.cn/c/zg/jpm/2015-06-26/12541179.html> may offer a taste of what is to come. Wu is one of nearly 3 million individuals whose name is logged into a police database known as the “Online Dynamic Control and Early Warning System for Drug Addicts.” Wu kicked the habit in 2005, but whenever he uses his ID — when he checks into a hotel, for example — the police are alerted and sometimes force him to take a drug test. What’s worse, the Chinese government is promoting its surveillance model abroad. It has pushed the concept of “Internet sovereignty <https://www.wsj.com/articles/china-pushes-to-rewrite-rules-of-global-intern…>” — the idea that, instead of a free World Wide Web, a country’s rulers should determine what netizens can say and read. And its efforts are aided by Chinese companies eager to peddle their wares. In 2014, a Human Rights Watch report <https://www.hrw.org/news/2014/03/25/ethiopia-telecom-surveillance-chills-ri…> found that Chinese telecom giant ZTE sold technology and provided training to monitor mobile phones and Internet activity to Ethiopia’s repressive government. Meanwhile, closed-circuit television cameras and monitoring systems made by Chinese companies — some high-definition and equipped with facial and movement recognition powers — have been sold to countries around the world, including Brazil <http://news.xinhuanet.com/fortune/2016-08/18/c_129239008.htm>, Ecuador <http://news.xinhuanet.com/fortune/2016-08/18/c_129239008.htm>, Kenya <http://europe.chinadaily.com.cn/epaper/2016-11/04/content_27269942.htm> and Britain <https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/communist-state-funded-cctv-company-that…> . But we are beginning to see a backlash against Chinese companies with strong ties to the Chinese government, prompted by security concerns. In July 2017, Germany <http://www.news.com.au/finance/business/breaking-news/germany-curbs-foreign…> became the first European Union nation to tighten rules on foreign corporate acquisitions; this ensures that Germany retains control over critical technologies, including artificial intelligence applications. Others, including the United States <https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-artificialintelligence-idUSKBN…> and Britain <https://www.ft.com/content/9cb95e84-6bc2-11e7-b9c7-15af748b60d0> are mulling similar restrictions. Yet foreign governments need to take stronger and more systematic action. They should first understand and review the ways in which the transfer of technologies used for abusive purposes is taking place. The United States needs to review and enhance a long-standing ban on exporting policing and “crime control” equipment to China. The sanctions, passed in the aftermath of the 1989 Tiananmen Massacre, have been largely ineffective in preventing U.S.-based companies <https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/01/selling-china-surveillance> from selling software and hardware for surveillance purposes. That review should ensure that the list of equipment barred is regularly updated or supplemented to cover the latest technologies and that the sanctions are vigorously enforced. If the Chinese government’s Orwellian drive at home does not alarm the international community, its willingness to export that approach should. It’s not just the liberty of people in China at stake — it is the liberty of people across the globe. **************************************************** This is a message from the SURVEILLANCE listserv for research and teaching in surveillance studies. To unsubscribe, please send the following message to <LISTSERV(a)jiscmail.ac.uk>: UNSUBSCRIBE SURVEILLANCE For further help, please visit: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help ****************************************************

1 0

Re: [nexa] DiDIY
by elio.pennisi Aug. 21, 2017

Aug. 21, 2017

Nella pagina indicata manca (o non sono stato bravo a trovare) l'icona per accedere alla sottoscrizione. Elio. Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2017 09:37:41 +0200 From: "M. Fioretti" <mfioretti(a)nexaima.net> To: Nexa <nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it> Subject: [nexa] Digital DIY Manifesto Message-ID: <680cefc9961c4b14ca7e2964cc9f8dfa(a)nexaima.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Dal DiDIY Project: Come e perché il fai-da-te digitale è importante per la società: un Manifesto che verrà inviato alla Commissione Europea, e siete tutti invitati a firmare, e ovviamente a far girare: http://www.didiy.eu/blogs/please-sign-digital-diy-manifesto Grazie e buone ferie, Marco -- http://mfioretti.com ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ nexa mailing list nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa ------------------------------ End of nexa Digest, Vol 99, Issue 30 ************************************ Elio PENNISI

2 2

FastCompany: "You Are Being Exploited By The Opaque, Algorithm-Driven Economy"
by J.C. DE MARTIN Aug. 20, 2017

Aug. 20, 2017

*You Are Being Exploited By The Opaque, Algorithm-Driven Economy* / //Online shoppers are like Jim Carrey’s character in the Truman Show, // //totally oblivious to the actual forces controlling their reality. / By Ben Schiller 4 August 2017 5 minute Read Is internet shopping like The Truman Show–a movie about a man who thinks himself free, but whose life is actually controlled by a TV producer? Are we online consumers like Truman Burbank, hopelessly and blissfully naive while titanic companies control our fate? Are the prices we pay online a function of a competitive market, or are our choices framed in ways we don’t quite fathom? These provocative questions are posed in a fascinating book about how platform internet companies (Amazon, Facebook, and so on) are changing the norms of economic competition. Virtual Competition: The Promise and Perils of the Algorithm-Driven Economy argues that these companies, with their immense data advantage, are effectively making their own rules in the marketplace, beating back new market entrants, and disadvantaging customers. […] Continua qui: https://www.fastcompany.com/40447841/you-are-being-exploited-by-the-opaque-…

1 0

London cops urged to scrap use of 'biased' facial recognition at Notting Hill Carnival
by Alberto Cammozzo Aug. 19, 2017

Aug. 19, 2017

Year-on-year deployment isn’t really a trial, say privacy groups <https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/08/17/concerns_over_facial_recognition_a…> London's Metropolitan Police have been urged to back down on plans to once again use facial recognition software at next weekend's Notting Hill Carnival. Privacy groups including Big Brother Watch, Liberty and Privacy International have written to police commissioner Cressida Dick <https://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/sites/default/files/Joint%20letter%…> (PDF) calling for a U-turn on the use of the tech. Automated facial recognition technology will snap the party-goers' faces, and run them against a database. The aim is to alert cops to people who are banned from the festival or are wanted by the police, presumably so they can take immediate action. The tech was first tested at the festival – where relations between police and revellers are often strained – last year <https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/08/26/notting_hill_carnival_police_surve…>, but it failed to identify anyone. Despite this, the Met said at the time <http://news.met.police.uk/news/statement-from-police-commander-for-notting-…> that it had "resulted in positive learning" and is describing this year's use as a continuation of the trial. It also said in a statement sent to /The Register/ that there would be a public consultation after the trial is complete. But the privacy groups' letter said that they "reject the notion that year-on-year deployment constitutes a 'trial' – for which, by the Force's own admission, there are 'no timescales'". The letter also points to reports of inherent biases in the system – research has previously shown <http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6327355/> that matching accuracies are lower on certain cohorts of people: women, black people, and those aged 18-30. "Notting Hill Carnival is an event that specifically celebrates the British African Caribbean community," the letter states. "We reject the proposition that it is appropriate to test biometric surveillance on this community." [...]

2 1

FT: "Digital platforms force a rethink in competition theory"
by J.C. DE MARTIN Aug. 19, 2017

Aug. 19, 2017

*Digital platforms force a rethink in competition theory* /Economists need to provide regulators with tools to deal with market concentration// / Diane Coyle /professor of economics at the University of Manchester /August 17, 2017 Anxiety about the health of competition in the US economy — and elsewhere — is growing. The concern may be well founded but taking forceful action will require economists to provide some practical ways of proving and measuring the harm caused by increasing market power in the digital economy. The forces driving concentration do not affect the US alone. In all digital markets, the cost structure of high upfront costs and low additional or marginal costs means there are large economies of scale. The broad impact of digital technology has been to increase the scope of the markets many businesses can hope to reach. / /[…] Continua qui: https://www.ft.com/content/9dc80408-81e1-11e7-94e2-c5b903247afd / /

1 0

Fwd: [netsociety] How significant is algorithmic personalization in searches for political parties and candidates?
by Alberto Cammozzo Aug. 17, 2017

Aug. 17, 2017

1 0

"Social media intelligence and profiling in the insurance industry…"
by J.C. DE MARTIN Aug. 16, 2017

Aug. 16, 2017

*Social media intelligence and profiling in the insurance industry…* *…it’s not only the price you pay that will be affected* /This piece was written by PI research officer Dr. Tom Fisher./ The financial services industry is eager to gather more and more data about our lives. Apart from mining the data they have historically collected such as credit history, they are looking to use our social media profiles to reach into our friendships and social interactions. They are using these data in new and unexpected ways, including personality profiling to determine the risk of lending to you, and thus the price you will pay. Firstcarquote, a product from the car insurance company Admiral Insurance, is a leading example of such unexpected data exploitation. In a semi-aborted product launch in November 2016, the company proposed to use young drivers’ Facebook posts to determine their personality and use this information to offer discounts on car insurance. Not limited to causing damage to its own reputation, Admiral’s move raises serious questions about the future of the insurance industry. […] Continua qui: https://medium.com/privacy-international/social-media-intelligence-and-prof…

2 1