- nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

We Sell Your Data
by J.C. DE MARTIN Jan. 23, 2020

Jan. 23, 2020

WE SELL YOUR DATA Our company doesn't attempt to provide you a service in exchange for your data. Instead, you voluntarily give us your data, and you receive nothing in return. https://www.wesellyourdata.com/ (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

4 3

Introducing The Radiohead Public Library: Radiohead Makes Their Full Catalogue Available via a Free Online Web Site | Open Culture
by J.C. DE MARTIN Jan. 23, 2020

Jan. 23, 2020

http://www.openculture.com/2020/01/the-radiohead-public-library.html (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

3 4

Austrian government’s hacking law ruled unconstitutional - about:intel
by Alberto Cammozzo Jan. 23, 2020

Jan. 23, 2020

<https://aboutintel.eu/austria-hacking-law/> Austrian government’s hacking law ruled unconstitutional The Constitutional Court of Austria recently struck down the government’s spyware & licence plate recognition law. Alina Hanel & Thomas Lohninger of Austrian digital rights NGO epicenter.works, which had campaigned against the law for years, explain the ruling’s context and significance. The Austrian Constitutional Court decided on 11 December 2019 that the surveillance law that permits both the use of spying software to read encrypted messages and the indiscriminate recording of vehicle licence plates violates the fundamental right to respect for private life (Art 8 ECHR), the fundamental right to data protection (§ 1 Austrian data protection law), and the constitutionally granted right that prohibits unreasonable searches (Art 9 Austrian bill of rights — “Staatsgrundgesetz”). This judgement comes after the legalisation of government spyware in Austria had been prevented two times already. In 2016, a draft bill was withdrawn by the justice minister after heavy criticism from civil society, technical experts, and academics. On a second attempt in 2017, the legalisation of government spyware was included in a broader surveillance package. The draft bill had already reached committee stage in the parliament but was withdrawn after a record number of consultation responses from individuals and high-profile institutions, like the Economic Chamber, the Supreme Court of Justice, and the Data Protection Board. In 2018, the far-right government adopted the now-contested surveillance package, including government spyware and indiscriminate licence plate recognition on Austria’s streets. The constitutionality of this law was subsequently challenged by a third of the Members of Parliament. [...]

1 0

Fwd: It is time to end the DMCA anti-circumvention exemptions process and put a stop to DRM
by Giovanni Biscuolo Jan. 23, 2020

Jan. 23, 2020

Buon giorno, vi giro un articolo che difficilmente troveremmo su una grande testata, perché non ha mai fatto notizia spiega bene perché non c'è altra soluzione che far sparire la tutela legale dei DRM sembra una battaglia persa ma anche io sono tra quelli che non si arrenderà mai :-) Saluti, Giovanni -- Giovanni Biscuolo Xelera IT Infrastructures

1 0

The Secret History of Facial Recognition | WIRED
by J.C. DE MARTIN Jan. 22, 2020

Jan. 22, 2020

https://www.wired.com/story/secret-history-facial-recognition/ (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

1 0

Chinese City Uses Facial Recognition to Shame Pajama Wearers
by Luigi Scorca Jan. 22, 2020

Jan. 22, 2020

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/21/business/china-pajamas-facial-recognitio… <https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/21/business/china-pajamas-facial-recognitio…> Luigi -- Luigi Scorca Mob: +39 347 85 22 221 Mail: luigi.scorca(a)gmail.com

2 1

Il giornalista statunitense Glenn Greenwald è stato incriminato in Brasile per reati informatici - Il Post
by Giovanni Biscuolo Jan. 22, 2020

Jan. 22, 2020

Buongiorno, scusate se forse questo potrebbe suonarvi un po' off-topic, a me no; segnalato da un amico ovviamente il furfante è sempre chi indica la luna e gli altri gli fanno notare che ha le unghie sporche > https://www.ilpost.it/2020/01/21/glenn-greenwald-incriminato-brasile-inchie… sapevo delle indagini a suo carico, ora è arrivata l'incriminazione --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- per reati informatici, dopo che nei mesi scorsi il sito The Intercept, da lui fondato, aveva pubblicato un’inchiesta in cui aveva rivelato una grande quantità di documenti riservati che mostravano come magistrati e giudici brasiliani si fossero messi d’accordo per escludere l’ex presidente Lula dalle elezioni poi vinte da Bolsonaro. --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- qualche parola di *timido* dettaglio sul NYT https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/21/world/americas/glenn-greenwald-brazil-cy… --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- Citing intercepted messages between Mr. Greenwald and the hackers, prosecutors say the journalist played a “clear role in facilitating the commission of a crime.” [...] Prosecutors also say that Mr. Greenwald was communicating with the hackers while they were activel--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- y monitoring private chats on Telegram, a messaging app. The complaint charged six other individuals, including four who were detained last year in connection with the cellphone hacking. --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- se non si fosse capito: gli investigatori lo accusano *anche* perché lui comunicava via Telegram con chi gli ha passato le informazioni (per ribadire che non esiste anonimato in rete, manco con le chat segrete) ...e quattro di loro sono già finiti in carcere per "hacking" (interessante il perenne parallelo "hacking"->crimine :-S ) in questo contesto (nexa) vale la pena notare come certi "reati informatici" puzzano molto di persecuzione; noto la netta differenza con come vengono trattati altri attacchi alla sicurezza/riservatezza informatica di tutti noi, che spesso non sono manco previsti come reati tra il Datagate e questa sua nuova inchiesta s'è fatto un sacco di amici vedo, non è il primo e non sarà l'ultimo ad avere seri problemi per aver osato rivelare informazioni segrete imbarazzanti ...e alla fine un quesito parafilosofico: davvero quelle informazioni sottratte e successivamente rivelate hanno diritto di essere considerate private o in qualto di valenza pubblica essere al contrario considerate notizie? --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- saluti, Giovanni -- Giovanni Biscuolo Xelera IT Infrastructures

1 0

REMINDER/Deadline 9 Feb. - CfP GIG-ARTS 2020: "Online Information Governance – More Expression, Less Freedom? " 7-8 May 2020, Vienna
by Mauro SANTANIELLO Jan. 21, 2020

Jan. 21, 2020

Care/i tutte/i, As the deadline for abstracts submission is approaching, please find hereafter and attached the updated CFP for the GIG-ARTS 2020 conference: after Paris in 2017, Cardiff in 2018, and Salerno in 2019, we hope to welcome you in Vienna for the 4th edition of the conference in 2020! ======== *GIG-ARTS 2020 - The Fourth European Multidisciplinary Conference on Global Internet Governance Actors, Regulations, Transactions and Strategies7-8 May 2020, Vienna* *Online Information Governance – More Expression, Less Freedom?* *Organised by:* - Media Governance and Industries Research Lab & Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence FreuDE / Universität Wien - LIP6 Computer Science Research Lab / Sorbonne Université & Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique *Call for Abstracts - Deadline: 9 February 2020 * It is now 30 years since the invention of the World Wide Web, and over fifteen years since the development of the interactive Web or also known as Web2.0. Online information and communication have never seemed easier and more accessible to everyone, thanks to the mediation of social networks, search engines, and other kinds of platforms and technologies. With such capabilities “to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers”, freedom of speech and freedom of the press should have grown to such an extent that some of the utopian visions of full participatory democracy would have appeared to be within our reach. At the very least, some of the long-standing informational imbalances concerning information flow globally, diversity of content and authors, and the accessibility of accurate information would have been taken as a given framework against which societies would have been called to solve problems and to look after citizens’ well-being. Paradoxically, the levels of freedom and freedom of expression, as captured in global measuring instruments by a variety of institutions and organisations, do not show the expected or desired advancement. Rather there is evidence that freedom in societies and freedom of the press deteriorate. Ambitious goals of freedom to express one’s own identity and opinion at the global public sphere on an equal basis and free from fear of retaliation or misuse evaporate for many, such as those subjected to hate speech, those persecuted by autocratic authorities and the great majority of citizens whose personal data become de facto ownership of private companies. Misinformation, spread not only by politically extreme groups but also by “normal”, mainstream parties in the (desperate or calculated) attempt to influence voters, can undermine the quality and freedom of global debate. Information conflict thus becomes even more an object of state rivalry and diplomacy, but also the tool for the erosion of citizenship as the utmost form of participation in the commons. These phenomena are coupled with the fact that even values once considered unquestionable, such as the value of independent journalism, the value of human rights such as privacy and dignity, are being challenged. The technological capabilities allowed the world over to express and share information and opinions, to connect and form alliances. However, they have also enabled the spread of misinformation, have been undermining the human right to privacy on digital communication channels, subjected vulnerable groups to more vulnerability, and provided for economic models putting at stake the fundamental pillars of democracy. Within this context, policies governing the fate of users’ data, citizens’ freedoms and the integrity of content have fallen short of helping pave the path to the desired communication environment. Regulatory responses capturing communication and information have oscillated between forms of a ‘knee-jerk’ reaction to resist any attempt to provide for the normative standards of content and a tendency to securitise communication as a matter of national security. Importantly, critics argue that even where governance has allowed for more democratic processes in raising concerns and suggesting solutions, the gaps in connecting the dots are glaring. If governance refers to the role of ideas and principles, the role of actors and the processes of negotiation and solution, it is urgent to return, on the one hand, to the basic and fundamental rights questions and take stock of the achievements of hitherto frameworks. On the other hand, it seems crucial to interrogate what futures exactly are current policy frameworks shaping, especially in relation to a politics of care for young citizens and hence the future generations? After having addressed global internet governance as a diplomacy issue at its first edition held in Paris in 2017, how to overcome inequalities in internet governance at the second edition held in Cardiff in 2018, and the role of Europe in the global governance of the internet at its third edition held in Salerno in 2019, this year’s GIG-ARTS conference turns its attention to the governance of online information, to address the relation of citizens to the quality of content online as an often neglected area of regulation and governance of the internet. In that respect, the conference continues the conversation on internet governance turning its attention from institutions and structural factors to the role of content and misinformation as an object of governance, and to internet users as forces of change. GIG-ARTS is inviting you to this conversation to help shape the debate of what kinds of futures might be desirable and envisioned in the process of internet governance, who and which actors might be most suitable to help shape such governance goals and under which conditions might these be achieved. Hence, in addition to general internet governance issues and topics, submissions are particularly welcome on the following possible areas of investigation: - The governance of fundamental freedoms online between global platforms, conflicts of jurisdictions and extraterritorial legislation - The role of European and global institutions in shaping the conditions of free expression online - Responsibility and liability of platforms and other intermediaries in content regulation - Restrictive regulation and the securitization of content - Privacy, misinformation, democracy: challenges to internet governance - Structural role of individual targeting, behavioural advertising and other economic models of online platforms on the reshaping of fundamental freedoms and democracy - From nudging to manipulation: consequences on autonomy and human dignity - Successive copyright reforms and their impact on freedom of expression, freedom of the press and democracy - Changes in and challenges to journalism practice through intentional misinformation - Governance from below: how practices and principles by civil society aim to shape the conditions of technology for the advancement of democracies and human well-being - Youth and access to information; news and misinformation in the online world; the purpose of thinking towards the future *Submission Information and Publication Opportunities*Authors are invited to submit their extended abstracts (no longer than 500 words), describing their research question(s), theoretical framework, approach and methodology, expected findings or empirical outcome. Submitted abstracts will be evaluated through a peer-review process. Abstracts and authors’ information should be submitted through the Easychair conference management system at: *https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=gigarts2020 <https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=gigarts2020>*Authors of selected submissions will have the opportunity to submit their full manuscript for publication. *Key dates* Deadline for abstract submissions: 9 February 2020 Notification to authors: 19 March 2020 Programme publication: 9 April 2020 Conference dates: 7 & 8 May 2020 *GIG-ARTS 2020 Co-Chairs*- Meryem Marzouki (LIP6, CNRS & Sorbonne Université, France) - Katharine Sarikakis (Media Governance and Industries Research Lab & Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence FreuDE, University of Vienna, Austria) *GIG-ARTS 2020 Scientific Programme Committee*- Francesco Amoretti (University of Salerno, Italy) - Wolfgang Benedek (University of Graz, Austria) - Eric Brousseau (Université Paris Dauphine, France) - Andrea Calderaro (Cardiff University, United Kingdom) - Jean-Marie Chenou (Universidad de los Andes, Colombia) - Loreto Corredoira y Alfonso (Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain) - Wolfgang Hofkirchner (The Institute for a Global Sustainable Information Society, Austria) - Matthias C. Kettemann (Leibniz Institute for Media Research | Hans-Bredow-Institut, Germany) - Joanna Kulesza (University of Lodz, Poland) - Nanette S. Levinson (American University Washington DC, USA) - Ursula Maier-Rabler (University of Salzburg, Austria) - Robin E. Mansell (London School of Economics, United Kingdom) - Meryem Marzouki (CNRS and Sorbonne Université, France) - Trisha Meyer (Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium) - Michèle Rioux (Université du Québec à Montréal, Canada) - Mauro Santaniello (University of Salerno, Italy) - Katharine Sarikakis (University of Vienna, Austria) - Yves Schemeil (Sciences Po Grenoble, France) - Ingrid Schneider, University of Hamburg, Germany - Jan Aart Scholte (University of Gothenburg, Sweden) *Venue*The conference will be held at the Concordia Press Club, in the heart of Vienna (https://concordia.at/) *Conference Registration and Fees* Registration fees are 100€ for regular participants and 50€ for students showing proof of status. The conference fees include a participant kit as well as coffee breaks and meals. *GIG-ARTS 2020 Communication Details* - Website: events.gig-arts.eu - Email for information: events(a)gig-arts.eu - Submissions: https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=gigarts2020 - Twitter: @GigArtsEU - Hashtag: #GIGARTS20 - Mailing list for updates: http://tinyurl.com/yc7rvxm4 Mauro Santaniello (PhD) *Internet & Communication Policy Centre * *Department of Political and Social Studies * *Università degli Studi di Salerno * *Via Giovanni Paolo II, 132 84084 Fisciano (SA) - Italy * *E. msantaniello(a)unisa.it <msantaniello(a)unisa.it> * *Skype: internetpolicy * *T. twitter.com/webvoodoo <http://twitter.com/webvoodoo>*

1 0

How Confucius loses face in China’s new surveillance regime | Aeon
by J.C. DE MARTIN Jan. 21, 2020

Jan. 21, 2020

https://aeon.co/ideas/how-confucius-loses-face-in-chinas-new-surveillance-r… (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

1 0

Algoritmi in ambito amministrativo, il Consiglio di Stato delinea i limiti (sentenza n. 8472/2019)
by Antonio Vetro' Jan. 21, 2020

Jan. 21, 2020

Consiglio di Stato, sentenza n. 8472/2019 Commento: https://www.altalex.com/documents/news/2020/01/20/algoritmi-in-ambito-ammin… Se ho capito bene, la sentenza del CS parte dal caso dei trasferimenti e assegnazione di sedi di insegnamento scolastico, già discusso in questa lista. I 3 principi menzionati sono: - conoscibilità dei processi decisionali - non esclusività della decisione - non discriminazione algoritmica Questo paragrafo mi lascia un po’ perplesso riguardo alla maggior garanzia di imparzialità della decisione automatizzata (cosa che lo stato dell’arte scientifico sembrerebbe smentire): "In linea di principio, quindi, secondo il Consiglio di Stato l’utilizzo di una procedura informatica nell’ambito di un’attività di assegnazione di sedi in base a criteri oggettivi, che conduca direttamente alla decisione finale non deve essere stigmatizzata, ma anzi, in linea di massima, incoraggiata. Difatti comporta numerosi vantaggi quali, ad esempio, la notevole riduzione della tempistica procedimentale per operazioni meramente ripetitive e prive di discrezionalità, l’esclusione di interferenze dovute a negligenza (o peggio dolo) del funzionario (essere umano) e la conseguente maggior garanzia di imparzialità della decisione automatizzata" Un caro saluto, antonio

3 2