November 2019 - nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

Turkey adds autonomous facial recognition kamikaze drones to military portfolio | Biometric Update
by Alberto Cammozzo Nov. 23, 2019

Nov. 23, 2019

<https://www.biometricupdate.com/201911/turkey-adds-autonomous-facial-recogn…> A major player in the engineering and defense industries, Turkish defense contractor Defense Technologies Engineering and Trade Inc. (STM) is providing 30 KARGU (Autonomous Tactical Multi-Rotor Attack UAV) kamikaze drones with biometric facial recognition that will be part of the Turkish Armed Forces portfolio as of 2020, writes Daily Sabah. Deployed in military operations at the Syrian border and equipped with higher ammo capacity and accuracy, the drones can easily destroy an entire brigade and warship. They have artificial intelligence systems and can carry a variety of explosives. The drones use facial recognition to detect human targets and can “autonomously fire-and-forget through the entry of target coordinates,” according to a new PAX report. Although the report warns about the negative effects AI-driven military weapons could have if weapons are allowed “autonomously select and attack targets,” thus losing human control over them, there are a number of lethal autonomous weapons either already in use or in development. Similar to the Turkish drones, Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) has developed the Mini Harpy that “loiters in the air waiting for the target to appear and then attacks and destroys the hostile threat within seconds.” “These companies are on a slippery slope to an all-out AI arms race,” said Frank Slijper, author of the report surveying 50 arms producers. “Publicly, arms companies claim they will never develop weapons that can operate without human control on lethal action, but they are developing that very technology with no safeguards that require a human in the loop.” STM first presented the drones at DSEI (Defense & Security Equipment International) 2019 in London in September. The drone family consists of three platforms ALPAGU (Fixed Wing, Portable Smart Munition System), KARGU (Rotary Wing, Portable Smart Munition System), and TOGAN (Multi-Rotor Surveillance UAS). “Technologies we develop and produce with local and national capabilities undertake important tasks for the security of Turkey while we continue to strengthen our position in the international defense market with foreign demands for our products and services,” explained Omer Korkut, STM Chief Technology Officer. “We have export and business development activities in more than 20 countries from the Far East to South America. On the international stage provided by DSEI 2019, we aim to develop new business partnerships, especially for our target markets while taking our existing partnerships to the next level. We are confidently moving towards becoming a global player by continuing our investments with the goal of export-oriented growth.” According to the Dutch peace organization, in the past ten years, the number of autonomous weapons manufacturers has skyrocketed, with China, Russia, Poland and Turkey stepping up as top investors, over ranking the US and Israel. After examining 50 companies, PAX is not only pushing for human control, but also for a government-backed international treaty to outlaw lethal autonomous weapons.

1 0

Project **Nightmare** - raccolta segreta dati sanitari in USA
by Giovanni Biscuolo Nov. 23, 2019

Nov. 23, 2019

Buon giorno! vi inoltro sotto un articolo appena letto su Il Fatto Quotidiano l'articolo originale del Wall Street Journal è (via Wayback Machine :-D ) https://web.archive.org/web/20191112002342/www.wsj.com/articles/google-s-se… Mi "diverte" il fatto che Ascension [1] sia una no-profit cattolica Ci sarà pure un giudice in Illinois?!? :-D Non sono sicuro che in Europa gli addetti ai lavori abbiamo adeguata sensibilità per evitare che certi giochini vengano perpetrati anche in salsa "continental welfare", d'altronte lo farebbero per il nostro bene: “improve outcomes, reducing costs, and saving lives” saluti, Giovanni. https://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2019/11/12/%e2%80%8egoogle-avrebbe-raccolt… --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- Google avrebbe raccolto in segreto i dati sanitari di milioni di pazienti statunitensi, scrive il Wall Street Journal Milioni di dati sanitari personali di pazienti statunitensi sarebbero finiti nelle mani di Google senza alcuna autorizzazione esplicita, nell’ambito di quello che viene chiamato Project Nighingale. A rivelarlo è il Wall Street Journal. Secondo il prestigioso quotidiano, ‎Google sta lavorando a fianco di uno dei più grandi sistemi sanitari della nazione, Ascension, per raccogliere e analizzare i risultati di laboratorio dei pazienti, le diagnosi dei medici e i registri di ospedalizzazione dei pazienti di ben 21 stati, creando così una storia sanitaria completa per ciascuno di loro, includendo anche dati come nome e data di nascita. L’obiettivo è di mettere a punto un nuovo software che usa Intelligenza Artificiale e deep learning per fornire suggerimenti sulle cure, ma per farlo Google non ha ricevuto il consenso esplicito dei pazienti o dei loro medici.‎ I dati raccolti riguardano decine di milioni di pazienti e sembrerebbe che siano accessibili ad almeno 150 dipendenti Google. Una situazione che suscita forti perplessità ma che a quanto pare non è esattamente illegale. Secondo alcuni esperti statunitensi in materia di privacy, infatti, questo tipo di raccolta dati sarebbe ammissibile ai sensi dell’Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, una legge del 1996 che consente agli ospedali di condividere i dati con le imprese senza avvisare i pazienti.‎ Al di là della legalità formale di certe azioni restano però molti dubbi sulla facilità con cui gli attuali colossi del Web possono collezionare e usare i dati di milioni di utenti inconsapevoli al fine di sviluppare nuove soluzioni commerciali, come in questo caso, per non parlare delle numerose situazioni in cui sono i dati stessi a rappresentare il prodotto da cui ricavare nuovi introiti. Non scopriamo infatti oggi che assai spesso i nostri dati, benché aggregati e non riconducibili ai singoli, siano ceduti a terze parti al fine di effettuare profilature per campagne pubblicitarie e, purtroppo, sempre più spesso anche politiche. Negli Stati Uniti le associazioni per i diritti civili come le ACLU (American Civili Liberties Union), sono da tempo sul piede di guerra e in generale il dibattito sulla possibilità di utilizzare o meno database formati da dati sensibili di cittadini inconsapevoli è assai caldo, soprattutto per quanto riguarda il riconoscimento facciale. Di recente ad esempio nell’Illinois una class action intentata nei confronti di Facebook potrebbe costare al colosso una stangata da ben 35 miliardi di dollari, proprio a causa dell’utilizzo dei dati biometrici senza previa autorizzazione esplicita, operazione che analogamente a quella di Google sui dati sanitari, è legale, ma non nello Stato dell’Illinois. --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ascension_(company) -- Giovanni Biscuolo Xelera IT Infrastructures

8 12

Raccolta di dati "for Common Good"... sounds good? :-)
by Agata Lo Tauro Nov. 23, 2019

Nov. 23, 2019

https://www.norden.org/en/news/data-common-good-nordic-approach-artificial-… cari saluti a tutti & have a great week-end, :-) agata https://it.linkedin.com › agata-lo-tauro-6723257b <https://it.linkedin.com/in/agata-lo-tauro-6723257b> <https://www.google.com/search?q=agata+lo+tauro&oq=agata&aqs=chrome.0.69i59l…> 1. <https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=ACYBGNTTl9voROIq2ErRXzXqIGaXNfCyIQ:1574…>

1 0

Amnesty International: Facebook and Google’s pervasive surveillance poses an unprecedented danger to human rights
by Alberto Cammozzo Nov. 23, 2019

Nov. 23, 2019

<https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2019/11/google-facebook-surveillance…> Facebook and Google’s omnipresent surveillance of billions of people poses a systemic threat to human rights, Amnesty International warned in a new report as it called for a radical transformation of the tech giants’ core business model. Surveillance Giants lays out how the surveillance-based business model of Facebook and Google is inherently incompatible with the right to privacy and poses a systemic threat to a range of other rights including freedom of opinion and expression, freedom of thought, and the right to equality and non-discrimination. “Google and Facebook dominate our modern lives – amassing unparalleled power over the digital world by harvesting and monetizing the personal data of billions of people. Their insidious control of our digital lives undermines the very essence of privacy and is one of the defining human rights challenges of our era,” said Kumi Naidoo, Secretary General of Amnesty International. [...]

1 0

Facebook built internal facial-recognition camera app, sources say - Business Insider
by Alberto Cammozzo Nov. 23, 2019

Nov. 23, 2019

FB continua a usare i propri utenti cone cavie inconsapevoli per esperimenti... Alberto <https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-built-internal-facial-recognition-…> Facebook once built an internal app that let employees identify people using facial recognition and their phone cameras. The app, which was developed between 2015 and 2016, utilized Facebook's vast collection of user identities to automatically recognize the person at whom the phone's camera was pointed. The app was not released publicly, and Facebook told Business Insider that it worked only on company employees and any of their friends who opted in to the social network's facial-recognition system. "As a way to learn about new technologies, our teams regularly build apps to use internally. The apps described here were only available to Facebook employees, and could only recognize employees and their friends who had face recognition enabled," a Facebook spokesperson said. The existence of the app illustrates how Facebook has been quick to experiment with technology that could have significant societal implications. Facebook once built an internal facial-recognition app that allowed employees to identify people by pointing their phone cameras at them. The app, which was developed by Facebook employees between 2015 and 2016 and tested internally, relied on information from the social network's vast collection of user-uploaded photos and facial-recognition data to identify people in real life within seconds, sources told Business Insider. It was shown off at an internal all-hands meeting in 2015, one source said, and was presented as an "example of future innovations" that Facebooks' technology and data could enable. A second source said that in 2016 a beta version of the app was made available for download to Facebook employees that used a smartphone camera to identify anyone for whom the social network had enough data — regardless of whether or not they were a Facebook employee. It was subsequently restricted to identify only people recognized as Facebook friends of the app user (still regardless of whether or not they were an employee), and they used the app on their friends only after that change was made, they said. A Facebook spokesperson denied that the app could ever identify strangers who didn't work at Facebook, saying that it was able to recognize only the faces of Facebook employees and of Facebook friends of the user who had enabled the social network's facial-recognition system on their accounts. The app was clearly in its early stages and had a basic camera interface, a source said. When pointed at someone, it would take about three to five seconds to recognize them, and then displayed their Facebook name and profile picture. For years, Facebook has used facial-recognition technology to identify the subjects of photos uploaded to its core social network and recommend "tagging" them — but the version available to consumers has been applied only to photos and never for real-time real-world face recognition. In September, Facebook said it would change to make facial recognition an opt-in feature, rather than assuming by default that users consent to having their faces scanned. The existence of the experimental app, which has not been previously reported, highlights Facebook's willingness to experiment with technologies with major societal implications. And it raises questions about the $564 billion company's historic approach to privacy and consent, and its handling of users' data. A Facebook spokesperson said the company routinely builds experimental apps internally, and that the facial-recognition app has since been discontinued. "As a way to learn about new technologies, our teams regularly build apps to use internally. The apps described here were only available to Facebook employees, and could only recognize employees and their friends who had face recognition enabled," said the Facebook spokesperson in a prepared statement.

1 0

Google Hires Firm Known for Anti-Union Efforts - The New York Times
by Alberto Cammozzo Nov. 22, 2019

Nov. 22, 2019

After nearly two years of unrest, the company appears to be cracking down on employee activism. <https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/20/technology/Google-union-consultant.html> Google has hired an anti-union consulting firm to advise management as it deals with widespread worker unrest, including accusations that it has retaliated against organizers of a global walkout and cracked down on dissent inside the company. The firm, IRI Consultants, appears to work frequently for hospitals and other health care organizations. Its website advertises “union vulnerability assessments” and boasts about IRI’s success in helping a large national health care company persuade employees to avoid a union election despite the unions’ “dedicating millions of dollars to their organizing campaigns.” Google’s work with IRI is the latest evidence of escalation in a feud between a group of activist workers at Google and management that has tested the limits of the company’s traditionally transparent, worker-friendly culture. Since Google was founded two decades ago, employees had been able to ask management tough questions at weekly meetings, and anyone who worked there could look through documents related to almost any company activity. That Google hired a consulting firm known for its anti-union work is a surprising turn in Silicon Valley. Union organization — even labor unrest — has traditionally been rare among big tech companies because their employees have usually been treated and paid well. Google, in particular, has been known for its perks, like free meals and shuttle buses to the office. Interested in All Things Tech? The Bits newsletter will keep you updated on the latest from Silicon Valley and the technology industry. There does not appear to be any serious effort underway at Google to create a formally certified union, but employers sometimes bring in firms like IRI to pre-empt unionization amid widespread discontent among workers. Last fall, Google employees around the world walked out to protest the company’s handling of sexual harassment complaints. And discussions on the company’s internal message boards have at times turned into contentious debates about politics or company policies that have become public embarrassments. Unlock more free articles. Create an account or log in Google recently cracked down on some of those discussions and limited how much employees can peer into the work of others. Last week, Sundar Pichai, Google’s chief executive, announced that Google was making its free-flowing weekly all-hands meetings — a hallmark of its open culture — into monthly affairs with restrictions on what can be discussed. Google employees stumbled upon the company’s relationship with IRI in October, according to two employees familiar with the discovery, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the fear of retaliation. They unearthed internal calendar entries indicating that Google had hired IRI, according to screenshots shared with The New York Times. Chloe Cooper, a Google spokeswoman, said the company engaged “dozens of outside firms to provide us with their advice on a wide range of topics.” IRI did not respond to repeated requests for comment. Editors’ Picks Typing These Two Letters Will Scare Your Young Co-Workers What If Porn Had No Pictures? Werner G. Doehner, Last Survivor of the Hindenburg, Dies at 90 At the time of the discovery, Google had recently installed a tool on employees’ web browsers that would flag internal calendar events requiring more than 10 meeting rooms or 100 participants. Many employees believed that the so-called browser extension, which was first reported by Bloomberg, was a surveillance tool designed to crack down on organizing among workers. The company said at the time that it simply wanted to reduce internal spam and that the tool did not collect personally identifiable information. To learn more about the extension and a calendar policy change that the tool would reinforce, employees began to search the calendar of the Google human resources official who had requested the policy change, according to the two employees knowledgeable about the situation. While searching that official’s calendar, which was open to other Google employees at the time, these employees discovered that she had been part of a group of Google human resources, legal and communications officials who for months had been invited to meetings with officials from IRI, according to the two employees. They noticed that the group had a meeting scheduled only a few hours before the human resources official requested the change in calendar policy. The Times obtained screenshots of portions of the official’s calendar and two posts on an internal ticketing system discussing the change. Asked whether IRI advised the company on these matters, Ms. Cooper, the Google spokeswoman, said that “to suggest this particular firm had anything whatsoever to do with the recent calendar extension — or any internal policies whatsoever — is absolutely false.” Google employees have chafed for months at what they said was a series of moves by management designed to make it harder for them to confront the company, whether it was over government contracts they objected to, or policies like its handling of sexual harassment, the issue that triggered last year’s walkout. In August, the company handed down new “community guidelines” that prohibited employees from insulting one another on internal forums and “disrupting the workday to have a raging debate over politics or the latest news story.” Many employees saw it as a way to stifle the internal debate that had long defined the company. Then, this month, two Google employees were placed on administrative leave over possible violations of company rules. According to a memo circulated internally and obtained by CNBC, some employees believed the administrative leave was a form of retaliation because the two suspended workers had engaged in activism at the company. Google said one of the employees had searched for, gained access to and shared sensitive documents, though other employees have questioned the documents’ sensitivity. The company said the second suspended employee had set up email alerts to track the calendars of several Google officials, which made them feel unsafe, but did not say that setting up such alerts broke company rules. Mr. Pichai’s announcement about the staff meetings came on the heels of a particularly contentious meeting last month when employees challenged management about the browser extension and the hiring of a former Department of Homeland Security official, who had defended a version of the White House’s ban on travel from several mostly Muslim countries. In leaked audio of the meeting, reported earlier by The Washington Post, Mr. Pichai said that Google was struggling with how to adapt the principles of openness to a global behemoth with more than 100,000 employees and a roughly equivalent number of contractors. Last month, Google management in Zurich caused an uproar when it tried to cancel an employee discussion about unionization and proposed its own discussion about labor laws and employee rights. In September, a small group of contractors that work for Google voted to unionize with the United Steelworkers. Some Google employees oppose their colleagues’ organizing efforts and believe that Mr. Pichai hasn’t gone far enough in reining in the chaos that they say the organizers have created. And most Google employees, even those active in efforts to organize co-workers, appear to be skeptical of trying to create a formally certified union. Still, many appear to favor creating some kind of worker organization, and thousands continue to engage in collective action, like signing a petition in August urging the company not to enter a forthcoming competition for a contract with the Customs and Border Protection agency, which it had indicated an interest in pursuing. Meredith Whittaker, a walkout organizer who left the company in July after 13 years, said the hiring of IRI showed that Google had “begun to do what most large companies and bosses do, which is figure out how to fight worker power using a fairly routine bag of union-busting tricks.” Ms. Whittaker added that all the recent policy changes and actions that affected workers’ ability to organize “need to be read through the light of hiring a firm that specializes in busting worker organizations and discrediting organizers.” Google said IRI did not participate in any of the recent high-profile policy changes, but would not elaborate on the work it did. A detailed public account of IRI’s involvement in a past union campaign, at the Yale New Haven Hospital in Connecticut in 2006, shows that the firm prepared a training manual more than 30 pages long for managers at the hospital, on such topics as how to cast the union in a negative light. In one passage of the manual, which was obtained by the Yale Daily News and whose authenticity was confirmed by a hospital spokesman at the time, the document instructed managers to speak to employees about the history of Mafia influence and corruption in organized labor. According to an arbitrator’s report on the case from October 2007, IRI and the hospital created six teams, a number of which included both consultants and hospital officials and met biweekly or weekly. John Logan, an expert on anti-union consultants at San Francisco State University, said it was difficult to determine the effectiveness of firms like IRI because employers often kept these relationships secret and could deploy the same tactics even without hiring consultants. But, he said, the tactics tend to work. “There are so many things an employer can do that have devastating impact on the likely success of an organizing campaign,” Mr. Logan said. “In that sense, there’s no question they’re effective.”

1 0

How to recognize AI snake oil
by Giacomo Tesio Nov. 22, 2019

Nov. 22, 2019

https://www.cs.princeton.edu/~arvindn/talks/MIT-STS-AI-snakeoil.pdf Companies advertising AI as the solution to all problems have been helped along by credulous media. As a result, the US public believes that the automation of all jobs is only 10 years away! https://governanceai.github.io/US-Public-Opinion-Report-Jan-2019/us_public_… policy makers believe that such a radical transformation is imminent, imagine how it would warp our priorities. I believe that that’s actually happeningtoday. [...] For predicting social outcomes, AI is not substantially better than manual scoring using just a few features. [...] Compared to manual scoring rules, the use of AI for prediction has many drawbacks. Perhaps the most significant is the lack of explainability. Instead of points on a driver’s license, imagine a system in which every time you get pulled over, the police officer enters your data into a computer. Most times you get to go free, but at some point the black box system tells you you’re no longer allowed to drive. Unfortunately we actually have this kind of system today in many domains. [...] AI excels at some tasks, but can’t predict social outcomes.We must resist the enormous commercial interests that aim to obfuscate this fact.In most cases, manual scoring rules are just as accurate, far more transparent, and worth considering. ____ Ottima lettura, accurata e comprensibile anche per chi non si occupa professionalmente di informatica. Giacomo

1 0

Devuan cannot exist without the help of Debian.
by Giacomo Tesio Nov. 22, 2019

Nov. 22, 2019

https://www.dyne.org/devuan-cannot-exist-without-the-help-of-debian/ dear readers, I write this post to comment on the current Init System GR vote in Debian. I’ll be brief and express my personal opinion on the matter. Devuan cannot exist without the help of Debian. When me and Franco Lanza started this project in 2014 it was because of the most painful Init System GR in Debian. Back then, we chose Ian Jackson as the best Debian developer to represent the interest of Debian’s users and to defend the true mission of the Debian project as a universal operating system. While supporting Ian’s proposal we also promised to the world that, if that wouldn’t be the route taken by Debian, we would have not gone gently into that good night. So we did, and Devuan was born. Together with a small group of volunteers we dedicated huge amounts of time and resources to Devuan, putting our skills at the service of a very large community of people in need of Init Freedom; a whole chapter of my doctoral thesis is dedicated to this project; our history is well explained here and our community well represented by the first Devuan conference we organised in Amsterdam For many of us Devuan has been a source of pride, joy and professional relief. It brought together some of the best people, developers and system administrators I could ever hope to meet in my life. We also managed to contribute back solutions and software useful to the Debian project. Now please let this success be an account of how important is Init Freedom for the large amount of Debian users out there. Today I write you because there is a reason to be worried that many Debian users will be betrayed once more by its leadership. And today once again I support the vote proposition nr.4 by Ian Jackson and urge the elite who has the privilege to steer the future of Debian to pay good attention to this choice, considering Ian’s competent and well informed formulation. At last, please, do not consider Devuan as an alternative solution which will survive any outcome of this vote. Because I’m sure Devuan will not survive without Debian’s help. Devuan is much, much smaller than Debian in resources, people and infrastructure, and despite our efforts were useful to both, the Debian project has done very little to help us so far. If Debian drops the support for any other init system but systemd, I believe we won’t be able to keep up with the legwork needed to support all other init systems. I say this because we do not have a comparable amount of people and resources to face the huge amount of work Debian will cease to do. Of course quality matters, but not that far. If the resolution nr.4 proposed by Ian Jackson will not pass, Devuan will die. ____ Giusto per avere un'idea delle implicazioni tecno-politiche di cui stiamo parlando può essere utile dare un'occhiata al dibattito pubblico in corso https://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2019/11/ Nel 2014, quando fu discussa l'adozione di systemd come sistema di inizializzazione PREDEFINITO vi fu una forte opposizione a causa della sua enorme complessità (che implica inevitabile insicurezza in uno dei punti più delicati del sistema operativo) e della impossibilità di portarlo nei diversi kernel supportati da Debian https://wiki.debian.org/Debate/initsystem In quel periodo fu anche abbandonato Debian GNU/kfreeBSD per cui Debian GNU/Hurd rimaneva l'unica alternativa a Linux in grado di resistere alla monocultura Linux in Debian. Se dall'essere predefinito systemd diventasse l'UNICO sistema di inizializzazione supportato, anche Debian GNU/Hurd (che a luglio ha effettuato un nuovo rilascio, vedi https://web.archive.org/web/20190927143943/https://www.debian.org/ports/hur… ) non potrebbe più esistere. La monocultura avanza anche nel sistema operativo "universale". Giacomo

1 0

CONTRIBUTI NELLA FORMA DI CREDITO DI IMPOSTA A FAVORE DELLE IMPRESE OPERANTI SUL TERRITORIO REGIONALE
by Agata Lo Tauro Nov. 22, 2019

Nov. 22, 2019

Vi inoltro il seguente link sperando di fare cosa gradita http://www.regione.fvg.it/rafvg/cms/RAFVG/economia-imprese/industria/FOGLIA… CONTRIBUTI NELLA FORMA DI CREDITO DI IMPOSTA A FAVORE DELLE IMPRESE OPERANTI SUL TERRITORIO REGIONALE Contributi per attività di ricerca e sviluppo, cyber security, big data e sviluppo competenze digitali e per attività di fusione e acquisizione aziendale nella forma del credito di imposta a compensazione di imposte e contributi previdenziali e assistenziali e di premi assicurativi. Cari saluti a tutti, agata https://it.linkedin.com › agata-lo-tauro-6723257b <https://it.linkedin.com/in/agata-lo-tauro-6723257b> *"Architectural Signage and Graphics... not just.. words... correct?*

1 0

11° Conferenza Nexa | 6 Dicembre 2019
by Nexa Media Nov. 22, 2019

Nov. 22, 2019

Gentilissimi, vi ricordiamo l'appuntamento con l'11° Conferenza Annuale del Centro Nexa, una giornata dedicata al tema della /Trasformazione del lavoro nell'era digitale. / Tanti ospiti per un'occasione di riflessione e dialogo sull'impatto delle nuove tecnologie digitali sul mondo del lavoro, con uno sguardo rivolto al modo di operare delle più ricche aziende del mondo. Quale interpretazione critica è possibile articolare intorno ad espressioni quali "Capitalismo digitale" o "Capitalismo immateriale"? Quali sono i pareri degli esperti sulle conseguenze di questi cambiamenti sul buon funzionamento del mercato e sulle condizioni dei lavoratori? Questi e molti altri saranno i punti affrontati durante la discussione che avrà luogo nella Sala Agorà <https://www.polito.it/ateneo/sedi/index.php?bl_id=TO_CIT07&fl_id=XP02&rm_id…> del Politecnico di Torino, dalle ore 9.00 alle ore 17.30 di Venerdì, 6 dicembre 2019. Si ricorda che la conferenza è accreditata dal Consiglio dell'Ordine degli Avvocati di Torino. La partecipazione è titolo per l'attribuzione di 3 crediti formativi. Per partecipare alla conferenza è obbligatoria l'iscrizione a questo link <https://nexa2019.eventbrite.com>. Per maggiori informazioni riguardanti il programma e gli ospiti dell'incontro è possibile consultare questa pagina <https://nexa.polito.it/conf2019>. Cordialmente, -- Anita Botta Communication Manager Nexa Center for Internet & Society Politecnico di Torino – DAUIN Corso Duca degli Abruzzi, 24 - 10129 Torino _web:_ https://nexa.polito.it/ _mail:_anita.botta@polito.it <mailto:anita.botta@polito.it> tel: 011 090 7219

1 0