July 2018 - nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

Harvard Business Review: A Study of Thousands of Dropbox Projects Reveals How Successful Teams Collaborate .

by Antonio Vetrò

Un collega al Politecnico di Torino mi ha segnalato un articolo della Harvard Business Review, con il titolo in oggetto. Gli autori scrivono: Dropbox gave us access to project-folder-related data, which Dropbox had aggregated and anonymized, for all the scientists using its platform over the period from May 2015 to May 2017 — a group that represented 1,000 universities. This included information on a user’s total number of folders, folder structure, and shared folder access, but we and Dropbox employees could view no personally identifiable information. What we did see was every Dropbox folder associated with a given researcher, along with whom they’d shared the folder with, how often the folder was accessed by anyone associated with it, the duration of collaboration on a project, and how users split their time among different projects represented by the folders—a wide variety of specific touchpoints. We also had reliable data on seniority levels of users, such as whether they were senior or junior faculty. Overall, we analyzed data for roughly 400,000 unique users working on about 500,000 separate projects. Il resto dell’articolo e i risultati sono disponibili su: https://hbr.org/2018/07/a-study-of-thousands-of-dropbox-projects-reveals-ho… <https://hbr.org/2018/07/a-study-of-thousands-of-dropbox-projects-reveals-ho…> Ora è chiaro perché Dropbox offrisse a tutti gli universitari Giga extra di spazio. Nulla di cui stupirsi, certo; ma è indicativo che uno studio del genere venga fatto da colleghi universitari che non si sono posti il problema etico nell’accaparrarsi quei dati ed analizzarli senza esplicito consenso. antonio v.

July 24, 2018

Guardian: "The cashless society is a con – and big finance is behind it"

by J.C. DE MARTIN

*The cashless society is a con – and big finance is behind it** * Brett Scott /Banks are closing ATMs and branches in an attempt to ‘nudge’ users towards digital services – and it’s all for their own benefit/ Thu 19 Jul 2018 06.00 BST [...] continua qui: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/19/cashless-society-con-…

July 23, 2018

Re: [nexa] 62° Nexa Lunch Seminar | 25 luglio 2018

by Nexa Media

*REMINDER*: vi ricordiamo che mercoledì 25 luglio 2018, dalle ore 13 alle ore 14, si svolgerà il 62° Nexa Lunch Seminar, con un incontro dal titolo: *Una costituzione per i social networks?* Ospite dell’incontro:* Edoardo Celeste *(University College Dublin). Ingresso libero, webcast live all'indirizzo: http://nexa.polito.it/upcoming-events. Maggiori informazioni sono disponibili all'indirizzo: https://nexa.polito.it/lunch-62 Cordiali saluti, Francesco Il giorno 16 luglio 2018 10:46, Nexa Media <media(a)nexa.polito.it> ha scritto: > Se non visualizzi correttamente questo messaggio clicca qui > <http://nexa.polito.it/lunch-62> > [image: NEXA] > > 62° Nexa Lunch Seminar > Mercoledi 25 luglio 2018, ore 13.00 - 14.00 > > Politecnico di Torino > > http://nexa.polito.it/lunch-62 > Una costituzione per i social networks? > > Speaker > Edoardo Celeste (University College Dublin) > > This event will be webcast live: http://nexa.polito.it/upcoming-events > Negli scorsi mesi, nello tsunami di e-mail che abbiamo ricevuto in vista > dell’entrata in vigore del nuovo regolamento privacy, abbiamo > sistematicamente cancellato anche le informative inviate dai social > networks cui siamo iscritti. Un click distratto, sull’autobus, durante una > noiosa riunione di lavoro o guardando la tivù, tuttavia emblematico di quel > misto di rassegnazione e noncuranza che riserviamo al *rapporto tra i > nostri diritti e le nuove tecnologie*. > Oggi, senza i social networks, non saremmo capaci di svolgere tutta una > serie di azioni, dal cercare un lavoro al professare la nostra fede, che > sono essenziali per lo sviluppo della nostra personalità all’interno di una > società democratica. Ebbene, con quel click, *abbiamo implicitamente > accettato una serie di nuove regole * che, forgiando gli spazi virtuali > in cui interagiamo con la società, inevitabilmente influenzano il nostro > modo di agire. Regole che non abbiamo stabilito, ma che ci sono state *unilateralmente > imposte da multinazionali* verso cui oggi, dopo ripetuti scandali di > scala mondiale, non nutriamo più fiducia. Eppure, nonostante ciò, > continuiamo a *pensare che non ci sia altra scelta* dinnanzi alla temuta > alternativa di essere banditi dalla società virtuale. > Se le norme che regolano le piattaforme sociali incidono anche > sull’esercizio dei nostri diritti fondamentali, *perché non possono > essere stabilite tramite processi democratici?* Perché continuare ad > accettare ciecamente le regole imposte dai giganti del web? Non dovremmo > forse fissare una serie di garanzie minime da far rispettare? Abbiamo > bisogno di una costituzione per i social networks? > > *Ingresso libero - Sarà disponibile un leggero rinfresco per coloro che si > saranno registrati su http://lunch62.eventbrite.com > <http://lunch62.eventbrite.com> entro il 23 luglio.* > > BIOGRAFIE - e informazioni supplementari > > [image: [CELESTE]] > > *Edoardo CELESTE* è dottorando in giurisprudenza presso lo University > College Dublin. Nella sua ricerca esplora il concetto di costituzionalismo > digitale e analizza nuovi meccanismi normativi per proteggere i diritti > fondamentali nel contesto delle nuove tecnologie. > > Letture consigliate e link utili: > > - Celeste E. (2018), Terms of service and bills of rights: new > mechanisms of constitutionalisation in the social media environment? > <https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/hPnFfyVuHNnMKdxtixm6/full>, *International > Review of Law, Computers & Technology*. > - Celeste E. (2018), A constitution for social media? > <https://www.hiig.de/en/a-constitution-for-social-media/>, *HIIG > Science Blog*. > - Celeste E. (2018), Packingham v North Carolina: A Constitutional > Right to Social Media? > <https://www.corkonlinelawreview.com/single-post/2018/02/08/Packingham-v-Nor…>, > *Cork Online Law Review*, vol. 17, p. 116. > - Venturini J., Louzada L., Maciel M., Zingales N., Stylianou K., > Belli L. (2016), Terms of Service and Human Rights: an Analysis of > Online Platform Contracts > <http://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/dspace/handle/10438/18231>, Rio de > Janeiro: Revan. > - Korff D. and I. Brown (2012), Social media and human rights, Issue > discussion paper <https://rm.coe.int/16806da579>, Council of Europe – > Commissioner for Human Rights. CommDH (2012)8. > - Zittrain J. (2009), A Bill of Rights for the Facebook Nation > <https://www.chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/jonathan-zittrain-a-bill-of-rig…>, > *The Chronicle of Higher Education*. > > > > > 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. > > Responsabile Comunicazione Centro Nexa su Internet & Società: *Francesco > Ruggiero*, tel: +39 011 090 7219, Mob: +39 349 1335082, > francesco.ruggiero(a)polito.it. > > 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>. > > > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa > > -- Francesco Ruggiero Communication Manager Nexa Center for Internet & Society Politecnico di Torino - DAUIN Corso Duca degli Abruzzi, 24 - 10129 Torino web: http://nexa.polito.it mail: francesco.ruggiero(a)polito.it tel: 011 090 7219

July 23, 2018

DRM, CPU e... sicurezza nazionale

by Giacomo Tesio

Una lettura interessante sugli effetti tecnologici dei vincoli contrattuali per Intel e AMD https://www.devever.net/~hl/intelme The ME firmware includes functionality relating to the system boot process, > but also things like DRM functionality. It also supports *remote > management functionality* (including an HTTP server, even) targeted at > enterprise IT; this functionality allows IT departments to manage client > machines remotely. *It can access system memory without restriction.* > *It can access the network.* > Non si tratta di nulla di nuovo in realtà: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/08/trusted_computi.html https://www.cnet.com/news/whatever-happened-to-microsofts-drm-plan/ https://blogs.intel.com/technology/2011/01/intel_insider_-_what_is_it_no/ Uno dei tanti cavalli di troia tranquillamente distribuiti sul territorio italiano ed europeo, senza alcuna contromisura o obbiezione. Come spesso accade, sarebbe persino divertente, se solo fosse fantascienza. Giacomo

July 23, 2018

Grant strategic litigation per digital rights

by Fabio Pietrosanti (naif) - lists

Ciao a tutti, il Digital Freedom Fund ha finalmente aperto a Grants per strategic litigation in ambito Digital Rights: "The Digital Freedom Fund supports strategic litigation on digital rights in Europe that contributes to advancing human rights in the digital sphere. " I temi sono: (1) advance individuals' ability to exercise their right to privacy; (2) protect and promote the free flow of information online; (3) ensure accountability, transparency and the adherence to human rights standards in the use and design of technology. Sarebbe molto bello che ci fossero progetti Italiani, sia di litigation legali vere e proprie, che di ricerca per la valutazione di fattibilità e/o di preparazione delle litigation. https://digitalfreedomfund.org/support/ Se ci sono idee interessanti (dalla data retention all'export control a particolari azioni basate sul GDPR) che qualcuno vuole portare avanti, come Centro Hermes saremmo interessati a supportare e coadiuvare queste iniziative nell'ambito Italiano. Fabio

July 22, 2018

Re: [nexa] data transfert project

by Giacomo Tesio

Slide molto interessanti. If algorithms decide your priorities, you deserve to run your own algorithm. > Io direi, più in generale If you depend on software, you deserve to run your own software. Anzitutto un "algoritmo" è un costrutto matematico, mentre quello che viene eseguito è la sua espressione da parte di un essere umano. Un software, appunto. E poi, al di là dei social network, è fondamentale che la società Europea cominci a prendere possesso di internet, in senso fisico. Abbiamo bisogno di server a basso consumo in ogni famiglia. E di persone capaci a usarli. Basarsi per tutto su servizi remoti, installati in data center "extracomunitari", costituisce un enorme rischio strategico per le comunicazioni. Giacomo Il giorno 21 luglio 2018 15:04, Claudio Agosti < claudio.agosti(a)logioshermes.org> ha scritto: > questo progetto, di Google: https://datatransferproject.dev/ è un passo > verso un'apparente distribuzione del mercato? > > hanno rilasciando un whitepaper, sembra un adempimento alla GDRP per > implementare la data-portability, e definisce, secondo me, il loro limite > di interoperabilità. > > nel senso che gli esempi fatti parlano di "su uploado una foto posso anche > portare su un'altra rete senza doverla riuploadare", e idealmente, può > servire a creare parallelamente altre reti (es: devi stare su facebook come > compromesso sociale, ma puoi uploadare lo stesso materiale anche su altri > social network). > > questo caso d'uso, secondo me, dovrebbe essere *gentilmente preteso* ad > ogni figura che usa i social network e porta con se una massa di utenti a > stare sul social network perchè ci sono loro (istituzione, carica pubblica, > influencer, giornali online...) duplichi i propri contenuti su tutte le > piattaforme possibili, per non avvantaggiarne nessuna. parafrasanto "*per > non vendere la tua audience ad una piattaforma spiecifica che profitterà su > di loro, con te abilitatore dell'abuso*" > > ma: > > 1) I 4 attuali partecipanti hanno il medesimo business model, esempi come > mastodon più indipendenti dalle logiche di data mining a scopo > profilatorio, sono ancora immaturi. Quindi pretendere la ridondanza della > comunicazione è utile perchè inizi ad essere parte del dibattito, ma non > risolverà i problemi di libertà che ne possono derivare, almeno non nei > primi anni. > > 2) trasportare i tuoi dati su un altro proiver non è interoperabilità. non > c'è la possibiltà di fare un altro social netowrk che si integri con > facebook, se non usando API che facebook da a disposizione che vengono > limitate appositamente per renderlo impossibile. nel mercato telefonico, > per fare un esempio, non è solo la number portability ad aver permesso > l'esistenza di competizione, ma il fatto che dovessero parlarsi tra di > loro. > > un buon weekend, > > Claudio che oggi parla a HOPE di analisi dell'algoritmo, e adesso aggiorno > le ultime slide con questo progetto, che in qualche modo si connette alla > grande lotta sui dati =) https://github.com/tracking- > exposed/presentation/blob/master/HOPE-2018.pdf > > -- > @_vecna - https://facebook.tracking.exposed > PGP: https://keybase.io/vecna > > > > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa > >

July 21, 2018

Re: [nexa] Science Fiction Is Not Social Reality -- The tech industry is inspired to create our world from linear, scripted science fiction stories.

by Giacomo Tesio

Uno degli aspetti che ho trovato più tristi nel libro bianco sulla IA pubblicato qualche mese fa dal AgID è stato l'utilizzo strumentale della fantascienza. Segnalai la cosa a suo tempo, ma senza esito. Chi promuove l'adozione delle tecnologie di intelligenza artificiale (e l'accaparramento dei dati per svilupparle), usa la fantascienza distopica come un comodo rivale preconfezionato: deridendo chi pensa che ci troveremo presto a fronteggiare terminator, si tenta di zittire qualsiasi analisi di medio e lungo periodo delle esternalità. Nel libro bianco, per esempio, si faceva più volte riferimento alla fantascienza distopica come un rischio di profezia auto-avverante da contrastare con varie forme di propaganda pro-AI. Stamattina, su Radio1 ( https://www.raiplayradio.it/audio/2018/07/ETA-BETA-2b8d1aaf-41fa-4711-911f-… ), Paolo Benanti segnalava alcune serie televisive pop Sci-Fi che incoraggiano il desiderio di "aumentare l'uomo". Il problema è che questi messaggi non sono destinati a persone competenti che possono inquadrarli per le manipolazioni che sono. Arrivano a persone incompetenti che ne sono manipolate a livello inconscio. Giacomo 2018-07-21 13:45 GMT+02:00 Alberto Cammozzo <ac+nexa(a)zeromx.net>: > <https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/43pxjd/science-f > iction-is-not-social-reality> > > Science Fiction is great. It is inspirational, it is fun to read, and it > gives humans incredible ideas. However, Science Fiction is not a manual for > making real things in the world without oversight, accountability, and > knowledge of how its outcomes will affect society. > > Facial Recognition technology is already with us. Amazon’s Rekognition < > https://aws.amazon.com/rekognition/> makes a fairly easy toolkit > developers can use, and Microsoft’s Azure can identify emotions as well as > who is experiencing them <https://azure.microsoft.com/e > n-us/services/cognitive-services/face/?v=18.05>. Apple “uses advanced > face recognition technology to group photos by person < > https://www.apple.com/ios/photos/>" in iPhoto and on phones, and offers > FaceID for unlocking phones <https://www.computerworld.com > /article/3235140/apple-ios/apples-face-id-the-iphone-xs-faci > al-recognition-tech-explained.html> with a picture. > > Other companies use the technology as well. Even Adobe offers Facial > Recognition as part of its Photoshop Lightroom Classic CC < > https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/help/face-recognition.html>. We’ve > started to see the technology creep a bit at a time into various parts of > our lives. So far, in the US, we might not have noticed Facial Recognition > much, except as a novelty on our devices, but it is being deployed in ways > that are beginning to give us pause and concern, as we learn about them, > such as being deployed in K-12 schools <https://www.wired.com/story/r > ealnetworks-facial-recognition-technology-schools/>, or aiding police > departments <https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/3k4dq5/amazon-re > kognition-facial-recognition-cops-body-cameras> on the back-end, or being > considered to augment the cameras police officers are already wearing < > https://www.npr.org/2018/05/12/610632088/what-artificial-in > telligence-can-do-for-local-cops> > > One central issue for Facial Recognition and other new unproven > technologies is that when big companies, with access to reach millions of > people decide to “road test” this type of big surveillance, its > implications become very real, very fast. Last year I wrote thathumans are > becoming “algorithm chow,” <https://medium.com/itp-musing > s/they-sow-they-reap-how-humans-are-becoming-algorithm-chow-f6aa8e0e1b44> > in that the data that we generate feeds the algorithms in companies such as > Amazon, that in turn use our ‘data food’ to track and profile us, and use > our footprint for surveillance. Last week, in an op-ed at /The Guardian/ < > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/06/amazo > n-rekognition-facial-recognition-government>, Peter Asaro, Kelly Gates, > and other academic researchers wrote that Amazon is not only building a > “facial recognition infrastructure,” it is also collecting “a huge amount > of personal information about people, including … what they watch and read” > and via Echo and Alexa, “what people say in their homes.” They describe > this data practice threat as a “massive, automated surveillance apparatus” > that requires an “equally vast system for oversight,” which has “not been > developed.” > > It likely won’t be. To understand why, it is important to understand who > the people that are developing these devices are, and why they are building > what they are building. Their wealth, <https://money.cnn.com/2017/05 > /02/investing/apple-cash-quarter-trillion/index.html?iid=EL> resources, > and reach surpass that of governments. Additionally, regulations take time > to form when new technology is introduced. This is why there have been so > many calls to action from scholars, ethicists, and some tech employees. > We’re worried, and rightly so. > > My research examines human agency and choice in the context of automation, > and my doctoral dissertation studied Silicon Valley makers and producers > over a period of 8 years. I understand innovation, and in particular > “disruptive innovators.” There are two possible reasons these people and > the productions that they are making are dangerous: the literal > interpretation of Science Fiction as an influence, and the misapplication > of the Pareto Principle. > > *Science Fiction is not social reality* > > Tech creators and tech billionaires are influenced by Science Fiction for > different reasons. Some of these have to do with the narrative of the ‘hero > outsider’ who uses their knowledge and skill to fix a problem through > engineering a solution or through adapting tools and technology in new ways > to solve some type of problem. Other reasons have to do with creating a > Utopian society that is “bettered” through time-saving devices that are > automated. The doors in /Star Trek/, the just-in-time data knowledge and > data access in any number of films: /Bladerunner/, /Star Wars/, /Minority > Report/, etc. and books all are delivered seamlessly in Science Fiction. > When things do break, there is often an engineering solution. Even when > Science Fiction turns against mankind, as it did in /2001: A Space > Odyssey/, the gadgets and gear are shown as sufficiently technologically > inspiring, so much so that even though it was a warning film of sorts, that > element becomes minimized in favor of recreating “cool technology.” > > Thus, one myth is that in Science Fiction, a problem is solved because the > human engineers were there to apply engineering and tech solutions to solve > the problem, and another myth is that automation is seamless and knowledge > is easily delivered in relevant contexts to appropriate parties. The > reality is that in Science Fiction, problems are solved because the writers > wrote a solution; physical objects worked in perfect just-in-time > automation; and data and knowledge was delivered accurately in real time > because all of those solutions were described to work in ways that are not > fully formed, or real. > > Additionally, those tech creators and tech billionaires who are influenced > by Science Fiction seem to assume that because things in Science Fiction > work in the society and culture of those created future-set universes, > there is an expectation bias that they will work in our real life and > present, without much testing or oversight. > > Gadgets, services, and technologies work in Science Fiction because it is > fiction. They work because it is a narrative, and as such, their authors or > filmmakers showed them working. They work because in fiction, it is very > easy to make things work, because they aren’t real and don’t need to > actually work. > > Realizing the unreal from fiction will not make that realization work in > the same way in real life. It can’t. The context, timeframe, and people are > different. Most importantly, Science Fiction is fiction. > > > [...] > > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >

July 21, 2018

data transfert project

by Claudio Agosti

questo progetto, di Google: https://datatransferproject.dev/ è un passo verso un'apparente distribuzione del mercato? hanno rilasciando un whitepaper, sembra un adempimento alla GDRP per implementare la data-portability, e definisce, secondo me, il loro limite di interoperabilità. nel senso che gli esempi fatti parlano di "su uploado una foto posso anche portare su un'altra rete senza doverla riuploadare", e idealmente, può servire a creare parallelamente altre reti (es: devi stare su facebook come compromesso sociale, ma puoi uploadare lo stesso materiale anche su altri social network). questo caso d'uso, secondo me, dovrebbe essere *gentilmente preteso* ad ogni figura che usa i social network e porta con se una massa di utenti a stare sul social network perchè ci sono loro (istituzione, carica pubblica, influencer, giornali online...) duplichi i propri contenuti su tutte le piattaforme possibili, per non avvantaggiarne nessuna. parafrasanto "*per non vendere la tua audience ad una piattaforma spiecifica che profitterà su di loro, con te abilitatore dell'abuso*" ma: 1) I 4 attuali partecipanti hanno il medesimo business model, esempi come mastodon più indipendenti dalle logiche di data mining a scopo profilatorio, sono ancora immaturi. Quindi pretendere la ridondanza della comunicazione è utile perchè inizi ad essere parte del dibattito, ma non risolverà i problemi di libertà che ne possono derivare, almeno non nei primi anni. 2) trasportare i tuoi dati su un altro proiver non è interoperabilità. non c'è la possibiltà di fare un altro social netowrk che si integri con facebook, se non usando API che facebook da a disposizione che vengono limitate appositamente per renderlo impossibile. nel mercato telefonico, per fare un esempio, non è solo la number portability ad aver permesso l'esistenza di competizione, ma il fatto che dovessero parlarsi tra di loro. un buon weekend, Claudio che oggi parla a HOPE di analisi dell'algoritmo, e adesso aggiorno le ultime slide con questo progetto, che in qualche modo si connette alla grande lotta sui dati =) https://github.com/tracking-exposed/presentation/blob/master/HOPE-2018.pdf -- @_vecna - https://facebook.tracking.exposed PGP: https://keybase.io/vecna

July 21, 2018

Introducing Data Transfer Project: an open source platform promoting universal data portability | Google Open Source Blog

by J.C. DE MARTIN

https://opensource.googleblog.com/2018/07/introducing-data-transfer-project… Introducing Data Transfer Project: an open source platform promoting universal data portability In 2007, a small group of engineers in our Chicago office formed the Data Liberation Front, a team that believed consumers should have better tools to put their data where they want, when they want, and even move it to a different service. This idea, called “data portability,” gives people greater control of their information, and pushes us to develop great products because we know they can pack up and leave at any time. In 2011, we launched Takeout, a new way for Google users to download or transfer a copy of the data they store or create in a variety of industry-standard formats. Since then, we've continued to invest in Takeout—we now call it Download Your Data—and today, our users can download a machine-readable copy of the data they have stored in 50+ Google products, with more on the way. Now, we’re taking our commitment to portability a step further. In tandem with Microsoft, Twitter, and Facebook we’re announcing the Data Transfer Project, an open source initiative dedicated to developing tools that will enable consumers to transfer their data directly from one service to another, without needing to download and re-upload it. Download Your Data users can already do this; they can transfer their information directly to their Dropbox, Box, MS OneDrive, and Google Drive accounts today. With this project, the development of which we mentioned in our blog post about preparations for the GDPR, we’re looking forward to working with companies across the industry to bring this type of functionality to individuals across the web. [...] (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

July 21, 2018

Science Fiction Is Not Social Reality -- The tech industry is inspired to create our world from linear, scripted science fiction stories.

by Alberto Cammozzo

<https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/43pxjd/science-fiction-is-not-so…> Science Fiction is great. It is inspirational, it is fun to read, and it gives humans incredible ideas. However, Science Fiction is not a manual for making real things in the world without oversight, accountability, and knowledge of how its outcomes will affect society. Facial Recognition technology is already with us. Amazon’s Rekognition <https://aws.amazon.com/rekognition/> makes a fairly easy toolkit developers can use, and Microsoft’s Azure can identify emotions as well as who is experiencing them <https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/cognitive-services/face/?v=18.05>. Apple “uses advanced face recognition technology to group photos by person <https://www.apple.com/ios/photos/>" in iPhoto and on phones, and offers FaceID for unlocking phones <https://www.computerworld.com/article/3235140/apple-ios/apples-face-id-the-…> with a picture. Other companies use the technology as well. Even Adobe offers Facial Recognition as part of its Photoshop Lightroom Classic CC <https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/help/face-recognition.html>. We’ve started to see the technology creep a bit at a time into various parts of our lives. So far, in the US, we might not have noticed Facial Recognition much, except as a novelty on our devices, but it is being deployed in ways that are beginning to give us pause and concern, as we learn about them, such as being deployed in K-12 schools <https://www.wired.com/story/realnetworks-facial-recognition-technology-scho…>, or aiding police departments <https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/3k4dq5/amazon-rekognition-facial…> on the back-end, or being considered to augment the cameras police officers are already wearing <https://www.npr.org/2018/05/12/610632088/what-artificial-intelligence-can-d…> One central issue for Facial Recognition and other new unproven technologies is that when big companies, with access to reach millions of people decide to “road test” this type of big surveillance, its implications become very real, very fast. Last year I wrote thathumans are becoming “algorithm chow,” <https://medium.com/itp-musings/they-sow-they-reap-how-humans-are-becoming-a…> in that the data that we generate feeds the algorithms in companies such as Amazon, that in turn use our ‘data food’ to track and profile us, and use our footprint for surveillance. Last week, in an op-ed at /The Guardian/ <https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/06/amazon-rekognition-fa…>, Peter Asaro, Kelly Gates, and other academic researchers wrote that Amazon is not only building a “facial recognition infrastructure,” it is also collecting “a huge amount of personal information about people, including … what they watch and read” and via Echo and Alexa, “what people say in their homes.” They describe this data practice threat as a “massive, automated surveillance apparatus” that requires an “equally vast system for oversight,” which has “not been developed.” It likely won’t be. To understand why, it is important to understand who the people that are developing these devices are, and why they are building what they are building. Their wealth, <https://money.cnn.com/2017/05/02/investing/apple-cash-quarter-trillion/inde…> resources, and reach surpass that of governments. Additionally, regulations take time to form when new technology is introduced. This is why there have been so many calls to action from scholars, ethicists, and some tech employees. We’re worried, and rightly so. My research examines human agency and choice in the context of automation, and my doctoral dissertation studied Silicon Valley makers and producers over a period of 8 years. I understand innovation, and in particular “disruptive innovators.” There are two possible reasons these people and the productions that they are making are dangerous: the literal interpretation of Science Fiction as an influence, and the misapplication of the Pareto Principle. *Science Fiction is not social reality* Tech creators and tech billionaires are influenced by Science Fiction for different reasons. Some of these have to do with the narrative of the ‘hero outsider’ who uses their knowledge and skill to fix a problem through engineering a solution or through adapting tools and technology in new ways to solve some type of problem. Other reasons have to do with creating a Utopian society that is “bettered” through time-saving devices that are automated. The doors in /Star Trek/, the just-in-time data knowledge and data access in any number of films: /Bladerunner/, /Star Wars/, /Minority Report/, etc. and books all are delivered seamlessly in Science Fiction. When things do break, there is often an engineering solution. Even when Science Fiction turns against mankind, as it did in /2001: A Space Odyssey/, the gadgets and gear are shown as sufficiently technologically inspiring, so much so that even though it was a warning film of sorts, that element becomes minimized in favor of recreating “cool technology.” Thus, one myth is that in Science Fiction, a problem is solved because the human engineers were there to apply engineering and tech solutions to solve the problem, and another myth is that automation is seamless and knowledge is easily delivered in relevant contexts to appropriate parties. The reality is that in Science Fiction, problems are solved because the writers wrote a solution; physical objects worked in perfect just-in-time automation; and data and knowledge was delivered accurately in real time because all of those solutions were described to work in ways that are not fully formed, or real. Additionally, those tech creators and tech billionaires who are influenced by Science Fiction seem to assume that because things in Science Fiction work in the society and culture of those created future-set universes, there is an expectation bias that they will work in our real life and present, without much testing or oversight. Gadgets, services, and technologies work in Science Fiction because it is fiction. They work because it is a narrative, and as such, their authors or filmmakers showed them working. They work because in fiction, it is very easy to make things work, because they aren’t real and don’t need to actually work. Realizing the unreal from fiction will not make that realization work in the same way in real life. It can’t. The context, timeframe, and people are different. Most importantly, Science Fiction is fiction. [...]

July 21, 2018