- nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

Software e responsabilità da prodotto: il caso del Boeing 737 MAX 8
by don Luca Peyron May 3, 2019

May 3, 2019

Buona lettura per chi vorrà e buona giornata! dl Non sembra assurdo parlare, quasi in termini fantascientifici con sfumature apocalittiche, di una sfida uomo-macchina. Che disgraziatamente è stata vinta dai calcolatori in entrambe le occasioni. https://www.cyberlaws.it/2019/software-responsabilita-prodotto-caso-boeing/ _________________________ www.universitari.to.it via XX settembre 83, Torino tel. 011 5156239

2 1

Police in Washington are running sketches through Amazon's facial recognition software | Daily Mail Online
by Alberto Cammozzo May 3, 2019

May 3, 2019

Esempio lampante di estensione impropria dell'impiego di una tecnologia con esiti potenzialmente gravssimi (o perfino letali). Mentre l'ingenuo pensa che il riconoscimento automatico funzioni come quello della mente umana, in realtà nessuno può prevedere come si comporti un algoritmo addestrato su delle foto quando gli si propone un identikit segnaletico. <https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-6986553/Police-Washington-r…> In a previously undocumented use of facial recognition software, police in Washington state are using Amazon's 'Rekognition' to track down criminals with as little as an artist's sketch. According to a report from The Washington Post, police in Washington County are able to compare pictures of suspects harvested from security cameras and eye-witness' cell phone pictures against databases containing 300,000 mugshots of known criminals. In just Washington County Police Department alone, the report states more than 1,000 facial scans were logged last year which have helped identify subjects, sometimes leading officers to home arrests. [...]

1 0

Data, dispossession, and Facebook: techno-imperialism and toponymy in gentrifying San Francisco
by Antonio Vetro' May 3, 2019

May 3, 2019

Studio segnalato da un collega urbanista; un fenomeno made in USA, ma mi sembra degno di segnalazione https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02723638.2019.1591143 <https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02723638.2019.1591143> ABSTRACT This article situates the 2015 rebranding of Zuckerberg San Francisco General within San Francisco’s technopolitical landscape. After Facebook’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg donated to the hospital, thereby acquiring naming rights, local toponymical tension percolated. This was in part due to Facebook’s gentrifying role in the city and the racial violence such processes constitute, as well as ongoing practices data colonialism. The latter includes Facebook’s attempt at pairing hospital data with user data in order to augment its scope into intimate and bodily geographies. In exploring the intertwining of gentrification and data colonialism, here I forge the concept of techno-imperialism as an analytic and as a point of departure in understanding Facebook’s multi-scalar impacts. As I suggest, the transformation of “The General” to “The Zuckerberg” indexes the company's techno-imperiality, as well as its efforts to mask its dispossessive impacts. PDF: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331983645_Data_dispossession_and_F…

1 0

"European cooperative Fairbnb wants to make the short-term rental market more just"
by J.C. DE MARTIN May 3, 2019

May 3, 2019

04.29.19 *European cooperative Fairbnb wants to make the short-term rental market more just** * /The new platform is raising funds to help create a community-oriented alternative to big home-sharing platforms. /https://www.fastcompany.com/90339528/european-cooperative-fairbnb-wants-to-change-the-short-term-rental-market

1 0

Don’t let industry write the rules for AI
by Giacomo Tesio May 2, 2019

May 2, 2019

Technology companies are running a campaign to bend research and regulation for their benefit; society must fight back, says Yochai Benkler. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01413-1 Industry has mobilized to shape the science, morality and laws of artificial intelligence. On 10 May, letters of intent are due to the US National Science Foundation (NSF) for a new funding programme for projects on Fairness in Artificial Intelligence, in collaboration with Amazon. In April, after the European Commission released the Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI, an academic member of the expert group that produced them described their creation as industry-dominated “ethics washing”. In March, Google formed an AI ethics board, which was dissolved a week later amid controversy. In January, Facebook invested US$7.5 million in a centre on ethics and AI at the Technical University of Munich, Germany. [...] Inside an algorithmic black box, societal biases are rendered invisible and unaccountable. When designed for profit-making alone, algorithms necessarily diverge from the public interest — information asymmetries, bargaining power and externalities pervade these markets. For example, Facebook and YouTube profit from people staying on their sites and by offering advertisers technology to deliver precisely targeted messages. That could turn out to be illegal or dangerous. The US Department of Housing and Urban Development has charged Facebook with enabling discrimination in housing adverts (correlates of race and religion could be used to affect who sees a listing). YouTube’s recommendation algorithm has been implicated in stoking anti-vaccine conspiracies. I see these sorts of service as the emissions of high-tech industry: they bring profits, but the costs are borne by society. (The companies have stated that they work to ensure their products are socially responsible.) [...] When the NSF lends Amazon the legitimacy of its process for a $7.6-million programme (0.03% of Amazon’s 2018 research and development spending), it undermines the role of public research as a counterweight to industry-funded research. A university abdicates its central role when it accepts funding from a firm to study the moral, political and legal implications of practices that are core to the business model of that firm. So too do governments that delegate policy frameworks to industry-dominated panels. [...] Governments should use that leverage to demand that companies share data in properly-protected databases with access granted to appropriately insulated, publicly-funded researchers. Industry participation in policy panels should be strictly limited. Industry has the data and expertise necessary to design fairness into AI systems. It cannot be excluded from the processes by which we investigate which worries are real and which safeguards work, but it must not be allowed to direct them. Organizations working to ensure that AI is fair and beneficial must be publicly funded, subject to peer review and transparent to civil society. And society must demand increased public investment in independent research rather than hoping that industry funding will fill the gap without corrupting the process. _____ Non credo che si possa limitare l'influenza dell'industria senza escluderla completamente dal processo decisionale. Se partecipa, non può che imporre la propria forza economica e culturale per assicurarsi la massimizzazione dei profitti. Di conseguenza, le Università e gli enti di ricerca che ricevono fondi da privati andrebbero esclusi dal processo. Un'idea interessante potrebbe ispirarsi alla legge 266 del 1991: stabilire per legge che una certa quota dei proventi delle società che si occupano di Informatica vada devoluta a un ente completamente indipendente dalle aziende stesse che li usa per finanziare la ricerca delle Università e degli enti di ricerca non compromessi. Lo stesso, in realtà, si potrebbe fare con la medicina e in generale laddove la ricerca abbia rilevanza economica. Giacomo

1 0

The Do-Not-Track Act of 2019
by Giacomo Tesio May 2, 2019

May 2, 2019

Scusate... aggiungo l'oggetto... :-( On 02/05/2019, Giacomo Tesio <giacomo(a)tesio.it> wrote: > Bell'esempio di proposta di legge dalle buone intenzioni ma > controproducente. > > Potrebbe spingere gli utenti a fidarsi maggiormente del Web, ma senza > appropriato supporto tecnico, il tracciamento rimane possibile e non > osservabile: non c'è modo di scoprire e punire i trasgressori (a meno > che non facciano diversi passi falsi facilmente evitabili). > > L'header "Do Not Track" non può funzionare perché affida la protezione > della privacy al lato sbagliato della connessione TCP: il server non > ha nessun interesse a scartare le informazioni che il browser gli > manda comunque visto che può salvarle dove nessuno le troverà mai. > > Per impedire il tracciamento bisogna intervenire sui browser. > A questi la legge dovrebbe imporre specifiche minime a garanzia degli > utenti. > La sicurezza non può essere Opt-In. > > > > https://spreadprivacy.com/do-not-track-act-2019/ > > When you turn on the setting in your browser that says “Do Not Track”, > you probably expect to no longer be tracked on most websites you > visit. Right? Well, you would be wrong. But don’t worry, you’re not > alone. > > Our recent study on the Do Not Track (DNT) browser setting indicated > that about a quarter of people have turned on this setting, and most > were unaware big sites do not respect it. That means approximately 75 > million Americans, 115 million citizens of the European Union, and > many more people worldwide are, right now, broadcasting a DNT signal. > [...] > > While DuckDuckGo actively supports the passing of strong, > comprehensive privacy laws, we also recognize that it will take time > for them to take effect worldwide. In the meantime, governments can > provide immediate relief by enacting separate, simpler Do Not Track > legislation. [...] > > That’s why we're announcing draft legislation that can serve as a > starting point for legislators in America and beyond. It’s entitled > the "Do-Not-Track Act of 2019" and, if it were to be enacted, would > require sites to respect the Do Not Track browser setting in this > manner: > > - No third-party tracking by default. [...] > - No first-party tracking outside what the user expects. [...] > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >

1 0

(no subject)
by Giacomo Tesio May 2, 2019

May 2, 2019

Bell'esempio di proposta di legge dalle buone intenzioni ma controproducente. Potrebbe spingere gli utenti a fidarsi maggiormente del Web, ma senza appropriato supporto tecnico, il tracciamento rimane possibile e non osservabile: non c'è modo di scoprire e punire i trasgressori (a meno che non facciano diversi passi falsi facilmente evitabili). L'header "Do Not Track" non può funzionare perché affida la protezione della privacy al lato sbagliato della connessione TCP: il server non ha nessun interesse a scartare le informazioni che il browser gli manda comunque visto che può salvarle dove nessuno le troverà mai. Per impedire il tracciamento bisogna intervenire sui browser. A questi la legge dovrebbe imporre specifiche minime a garanzia degli utenti. La sicurezza non può essere Opt-In. https://spreadprivacy.com/do-not-track-act-2019/ When you turn on the setting in your browser that says “Do Not Track”, you probably expect to no longer be tracked on most websites you visit. Right? Well, you would be wrong. But don’t worry, you’re not alone. Our recent study on the Do Not Track (DNT) browser setting indicated that about a quarter of people have turned on this setting, and most were unaware big sites do not respect it. That means approximately 75 million Americans, 115 million citizens of the European Union, and many more people worldwide are, right now, broadcasting a DNT signal. [...] While DuckDuckGo actively supports the passing of strong, comprehensive privacy laws, we also recognize that it will take time for them to take effect worldwide. In the meantime, governments can provide immediate relief by enacting separate, simpler Do Not Track legislation. [...] That’s why we're announcing draft legislation that can serve as a starting point for legislators in America and beyond. It’s entitled the "Do-Not-Track Act of 2019" and, if it were to be enacted, would require sites to respect the Do Not Track browser setting in this manner: - No third-party tracking by default. [...] - No first-party tracking outside what the user expects. [...]

1 0

UK To Introduce New Law For IoT Device Security
by J.C. DE MARTIN May 2, 2019

May 2, 2019

https://www.forbes.com/sites/charlestowersclark/2019/05/02/uk-to-introduce-… (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

1 0

Sabino Cassese: «La democrazia non è soltanto potere del popolo»
by don Luca Peyron May 2, 2019

May 2, 2019

I saggi vanno ascoltati... Buona lettura dl [...] Il secondo problema evoca la disponibilità di una grande quantità di dati. Ma non va ingigantito. Uno dei modi di occultare un dato è quello di fornirne troppi. C’è, invece, la questione dell’offerta di servizi da parte delle grandi imprese che governano il mondo digitale, offerta che consente loro di captare e capitalizzare informazioni sugli utenti. Qui c’è un difetto di disciplina, che deriva dalla estensione globale di quell’offerta. [...] https://www.sicilianpost.it/sabino-cassese-la-democrazia-non-e-soltanto-pot… _________________________ www.universitari.to.it via XX settembre 83, Torino tel. 011 5156239

1 0

Le elezioni ai tempi dei social media
by Niccolò Caranti May 2, 2019

May 2, 2019

Segnalo il policy workshop “Le elezioni ai tempi dei social media. Elezioni europee, disinformazione e micro-targeting: che fare?”, che si terrà il prossimo 14 maggio a Roma, dalle ore 14:00 alle ore 18:00, in Corso Vittorio Emanuele II, 349 (presso la Federazione Nazionale Stampa Italiana). In vista delle elezioni europee, ad un anno dalla Dichiarazione di Perugia <https://globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/p…> - che chiedeva nuove regole e maggiore trasparenza nella propaganda politica sui social network in particolare durante le campagne elettorali, ci interroghiamo sui passi compiuti sino ad ora, e su cosa c’è ancora da fare per salvaguardare la trasparenza del discorso pubblico e l'integrità dei processi democratici nel rispetto dei diritti fondamentali. Questo il programma: SALUTI ISTITUZIONALI Mario Raffaelli, Presidente Centro per la Cooperazione Internazionale Rappresentante della Federazione Nazionale Stampa Italiana *PRIMA SESSIONE, La disinformazione all'opera* INTRODUCE E MODERA: Fazila Mat, OBC Transeuropa / Centro per la cooperazione internazionale Fabiana Zollo, Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia Walter Quattrociocchi, Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia Nicola Bruno, Dataninja Giorgio Comai, OBC Transeuropa / Centro per la cooperazione internazionale SECONDA SESSIONE, Ripensare le regole del gioco MODERA: Tommaso Scannicchio, CILD, Coalizione Italiana Libertà e Diritti Civili Fabio Chiusi, Valigia Blu / Nexa Center for Internet & Society Riccardo Acciai, Garante per la protezione dei dati personali Daniele De Bernardin, Openpolis Antonella Napolitano, Privacy International *Conclusioni.* *L'evento è organizzato nell'ambito del progetto ESVEI, Exploring systemic vulnerabilities for external influence in Italy <https://www.balcanicaucaso.org/Progetti/ESVEI>, promosso da Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa / Centro per la Cooperazione Internazionale.* L'incontro è libero, previa registrazione online tramite questo modulo <https://www.eventbrite.it/e/biglietti-le-elezioni-ai-tempi-dei-social-media…> . A presto, Niccolò Caranti OBC Transeuropa *Centro per la Cooperazione Internazionale* vicolo San Marco 1 <https://maps.google.com/?q=vicolo+San+Marco+1+38122+Trento+(TN)+-+Italia&en…> 38122 Trento (TN) - Italia <https://maps.google.com/?q=vicolo+San+Marco+1+38122+Trento+(TN)+-+Italia&en…> www.balcanicaucaso.org www.balcanicaucaso.org/eng Tel: +39 0461 1828617

1 0