April 2019 - nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

Re: [nexa] Nuovi diritti lavoratori gig economy

by Andrea Glorioso

Riprendo questo scambio per segnalare un’analisi breve ma abbastanza completa della Direttiva UE in oggetto (purtroppo solo in inglese): http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2019/04/workers-rights-in-gig-economy-is-… Andrea On Sat, Apr 20, 2019 at 7:24 PM Andrea Glorioso <andrea(a)digitalpolicy.it> wrote: > In realtà la Direttiva “on transparent and predictable working conditions” > non si applica solamente ai cosiddetti “lavoratori della gig economy” né è > stata pensata per quel particolare scopo. È una revisione di regole > pre-esistenti (ma molto più deboli) che mira a creare una base minima di > diritti per i lavoratori in tutta l’Unione Europea. Non entra nel merito di > cosa sia un “lavoratore della gig economy” (concetto che a me fa sanguinare > le orecchie, ma tant’è). > > Ulteriori informazioni: > > https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=1313&langId=en > > http://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document.html?reference=EPRS_BRI… > > A presto, > > Andrea > > On Sat, Apr 20, 2019 at 6:25 PM Luigi Scorca <luigi.scorca(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >> A mio parere questo approccio è dannoso. >> >> La sentenza ECJ Elite Taxi vs UBER ha mostrato come quello che svolge la >> società americana è un servizio di trasporto e non può essere inteso come >> una mera intermediazione. >> >> Quindi, quelli sono tassisti/tassinari/autisti, e non fantomatici >> lavoratori della gig-economy. >> >> E lo stesso vale per tutti gli altri mestieri intermediari virtualmente >> da una piattaforma. >> >> Luigi >> >> >> >> >> >> Il sab 20 apr 2019, 14:12 Mauro Alovisio <mauro.alovisio(a)gmail.com> ha >> scritto: >> >>> >>> Gent.me/mi >>> >>> segnalo news di interesse: >>> >>> >>> http://www.ansa.it/europa/notizie/rubriche/altrenews/2019/04/16/parlamento-… >>> >>> Un caro saluto >>> >>> Mauro Alovisio >>> _______________________________________________ >>> nexa mailing list >>> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >>> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> nexa mailing list >> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >> > -- > > -- > Andrea Glorioso > Twitter: @andreaglorioso > Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro > -- -- Andrea Glorioso Twitter: @andreaglorioso Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro

April 25, 2019

Britain lets Huawei into part of its 5G networks - Cyber-security

by J.C. DE MARTIN

https://www.economist.com/britain/2019/04/24/britain-lets-huawei-into-part-… (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

April 25, 2019

Put the internet back under your control with the FreedomBox

by Giacomo Tesio

https://www.zdnet.com/article/put-the-internet-back-under-your-control-with… In an interview, Moglen told me this: "Concentration of technology is a surprising outcome of cheap hardware and free software. We could have had a world of peers. Instead, the net we built is the net we didn't want. We're in an age of surveillance with centralized control. We're in a world, which encourages swiping, clicking, and flame throwing." With FreedomBox, "We can undo this. We can make it possible for ordinary people to provide internet services. You can have your own private messaging, services without a man in the middle watching your every move." We can, in short, rebuild the internet so that we, and not multi-billion dollar companies, are in charge. I like this plan.

April 24, 2019

Facebook just hired the co-author of the Patriot Act.

by J.C. DE MARTIN

https://slate.com/technology/2019/04/facebook-new-general-counsel-patriot-a… (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

April 24, 2019

Paper: "New Frontiers of Philanthro-capitalism: Digital Technologies and Humanitarianism"

by J.C. DE MARTIN

*New Frontiers of Philanthro‐capitalism: Digital Technologies and Humanitarianism* Ryan Burns First published: 15 April 2019 https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12534 Abstract Digital technologies that allow large numbers of laypeople to contribute to humanitarian action facilitate the deepening adoption and adaptation of private‐sector logics and rationalities in humanitarianism. This is increasingly taking place through philanthro‐capitalism, a process in which philanthropy and humanitarianism are made central to business models. Key to this transformation is the way private businesses find supporting “digital humanitarian” organisations such as Standby Task Force to be amenable to their capital accumulation imperatives. Private‐sector institutions channel feelings of closeness to aid recipients that digital humanitarian technologies enable, in order to legitimise their claims to “help” the recipients. This has ultimately led to humanitarian and state institutions re‐articulating capitalist logics in ways that reflect the new digital humanitarian avenues of entry. In this article, I characterise this process by drawing out three capitalist logics that humanitarian and state institutions re‐articulate in the context of digital humanitarianism, in an emergent form of philanthro‐capitalism. Specifically, I argue that branding, efficiency, and bottom lines take altered forms in this context, in part being de‐politicised as a necessary condition for their adoption. This de‐politicisation involves normalising these logics by framing social and political problems as technical in nature and thus both beyond critique and amenable to digital humanitarian “solutions”. I take this line of argumentation to then re‐politicise each of these logics and the capitalist relations that they entail.

April 24, 2019

"Who needs democracy when you have data?" (del 2018)

by J.C. DE MARTIN

*Who needs democracy when you have data?** * /Here’s how China rules using data, AI, and internet surveillance.// / by Christina Larson Aug 20, 2018 In 1955, science fiction writer Isaac Asimov published a short story about an experiment in “electronic democracy,” in which a single citizen, selected to represent an entire population, responded to questions generated by a computer named Multivac. The machine took this data and calculated the results of an election that therefore never needed to happen. Asimov’s story was set in Bloomington, Indiana, but today an approximation of Multivac is being built in China. For any authoritarian regime, “there is a basic problem for the center of figuring out what’s going on at lower levels and across society,” says Deborah Seligsohn, a political scientist and China expert at Villanova University in Philadelphia. How do you effectively govern a country that’s home to one in five people on the planet, with an increasingly complex economy and society, if you don’t allow public debate, civil activism, and electoral feedback? How do you gather enough information to actually make decisions? And how does a government that doesn’t invite its citizens to participate still engender trust and bend public behavior without putting police on every doorstep? Hu Jintao, China’s leader from 2002 to 2012, had attempted to solve these problems by permitting a modest democratic thaw, allowing avenues for grievances to reach the ruling class. His successor, Xi Jinping, has reversed that trend. Instead, his strategy for understanding and responding to what is going on in a nation of 1.4 billion relies on a combination of surveillance, AI, and big data to monitor people’s lives and behavior in minute detail. [...] continua qui: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/611815/who-needs-democracy-when-you-have…

April 24, 2019

"What Would More Democratic A.I. Look Like?"

by J.C. DE MARTIN

What Would More Democratic A.I. Look Like? /A new movement is pushing for A.I.’s future to be in the hands of the people/ Andrew Burgess <https://medium.com/@ajburgess> Something curious is happening in Finland. Though much of the global debate around artificial intelligence (A.I.) has become concerned with unaccountable, proprietary systems that could control our lives, the Finnish government has instead decided to embrace the opportunity by rolling out a nationwide educational campaign. Conceived in 2017, shortly after Finland’s A.I. strategy <http://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/160391/TEMrap_47_…> was announced, the government wants to rebuild the country’s economy around the high-end opportunities of artificial intelligence, and has launched a national program <https://www.politico.eu/article/finland-one-percent-ai-artificial-intellige…> to train 1 percent of the population — that’s 55,000 people — in the basics of A.I. “We’ll never have so much money that we will be the leader of artificial intelligence,” said economic minister Mika Lintilä at the launch. “But how we use it — that’s something different.” Artificial intelligence can have many positive applications, from being trained to identify cancerous cells in biopsy screenings, predict weather patterns that can help farmers increase their crop yields, and improve traffic efficiency. But some believe that A.I. expertise is currently too concentrated in the hands of just a few companies with opaque business models, meaning resources are being diverted away <https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-01-07/tech-giants-gorging-o…> from projects that could be more socially, rather than commercially, beneficial. Finland’s approach of making A.I. accessible and understandable to its citizens is part of a broader movement of people who want to democratize the technology, putting utility and opportunity ahead of profit. [...] continua qui: https://medium.com/s/story/what-would-more-democratic-a-i-look-like-ea729f5…

April 24, 2019

10% of Americans don’t use the internet. Who are they?

by Giacomo Tesio

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/04/22/some-americans-dont-use-th… For instance, seniors are much more likely than younger adults to say they never go online. Although the share of non-internet users ages 65 and older has decreased by 7 percentage points since 2018, 27% still do not use the internet, compared with fewer than 10% of adults under the age of 65. Household income and education are also indicators of a person’s likelihood to be offline. Roughly three-in-ten adults with less than a high school education (29%) do not use the internet in 2019, compared with 35% in 2018. But that share falls as the level of educational attainment increases. Adults from households earning less than $30,000 a year are far more likely than the most affluent adults to not use the internet (18% vs. 2%). ____ Analisi interessante. Da affiancare a https://www.educationnews.org/technology/silicon-valley-tech-execs-sending-… Giacomo

April 24, 2019

Re: [nexa] The Spurious Justifications for Eliminating Price Caps on .org and Other Legacy Domains

by Giacomo Tesio

Per completezza, qui la Proposta di ICANN (a cui ancora per 5 giorni è possibile inviare commenti): https://www.icann.org/public-comments/org-renewal-2019-03-18-en Qui i commenti esistenti: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-org-renewal-18mar19/ Giacomo On 24/04/2019, Giacomo Tesio <giacomo(a)tesio.it> wrote: > https://www.circleid.com/posts/20190423_spurious_justifications_for_elimina… > > ICANN is about to do serious damage to its reputation by making a > precipitous, ill-considered leap into the unknown should it follow > through on removing price constraints on several legacy extensions, > most notably .org. Doing so would expose a global community of > non-profits to the risk of quickly-escalating exploitative pricing. > The rationale for eliminating price caps relies on three points, all > of which are incorrect — > > 1) that the registries for the legacy gTLDs should be treated > the same as the new gTLD registries, that is as owners > entitled to capture the entire value of the name spaces, > 2) that price competition will restrain prices, and > 3) that it is not ICANN's role to set and to regulate prices. >

April 24, 2019

The Spurious Justifications for Eliminating Price Caps on .org and Other Legacy Domains

by Giacomo Tesio

https://www.circleid.com/posts/20190423_spurious_justifications_for_elimina… ICANN is about to do serious damage to its reputation by making a precipitous, ill-considered leap into the unknown should it follow through on removing price constraints on several legacy extensions, most notably .org. Doing so would expose a global community of non-profits to the risk of quickly-escalating exploitative pricing. The rationale for eliminating price caps relies on three points, all of which are incorrect — 1) that the registries for the legacy gTLDs should be treated the same as the new gTLD registries, that is as owners entitled to capture the entire value of the name spaces, 2) that price competition will restrain prices, and 3) that it is not ICANN's role to set and to regulate prices.

April 24, 2019