- nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

2 Books for IGF: Platform Regulations + Community Networks
by Luca Belli Jan. 4, 2018

Jan. 4, 2018

Buongiorno a tutti, Segnalo che i due volumi su Platform Regulations e su Community Networks, presentati all'IGF, sono disponibili in open access seguendo i link qui di seguito. Platform Regulations: How Platforms Are Regulated and How They Regulate Us http://tinyurl.com/PlatformRegulations Community Networks: the Internet by the People, for the People http://tinyurl.com/CommunityNetworks I miei migliori auguri di buon anno Luca ________________________________ De : nexa <nexa-bounces(a)server-nexa.polito.it> de la part de Luca Belli <lucabelli(a)hotmail.it> Envoyé : jeudi 14 décembre 2017 18:00 À : nexa Cc : luca.belli(a)fgv.br Objet : [nexa] 2 Books for IGF: Platform Regulations + Community Networks Buongiorno a tutti, Credo che le pubblicazioni qui di seguito possano interessare ai membri della lista Buon lavoro e un caro saluto da Rio Luca Dear all (apologies for cross posting) I would like to draw your attention on two books, including contributions from several members of this mailing list, that will be released next week at the United Nations Internet Governance Forum (IGF). 1) Platform Regulations: How Platforms are Regulated and How They Regulate Us.This book is the Official 2017 Outcome of the UN IGF Dynamic Coalition on Platform Responsibility (DCPR), which is a multistakeholder group fostering a cooperative analysis of online platforms’ responsibility to respect human rights, while putting forward solutions to protect platform-users’ rights. The book offers some responses to the diverse and raising challenges generated by the platformisation of our economy and, more generally, our society. The analyses featured in this book are drafted by 18 authors (see table of content 1, at the end of this email) and the volume includes prefaces by David Kaye, UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, and Julia Reda, Member of the European Parliament. The volume critically explores the human rights dimension of the digital platform debate, subsequently focusing on personal data protection and use, and finally suggesting innovative solutions for the new roles played by online platforms. It also includes the Recommendations on Terms of Service and Human Rights, which were elaborated through a multistakeholder participatory process, facilitated by the DCPR. The book’s flyer is available here<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.c…>. Free copies of the volume will be available on the 19th at 9 o’clock<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fsched.co%2…> and the ebook will be released in open access, under Creative Commons License. 2) Community Networks: the Internet by the People for the People.This volume explores the benefits of community networks, analysing case studies, focusing on the challenges and opportunities for these networks and putting forward concrete recommendations for their development.It features analyses by 16 authors (see table of content 2, at the end of this email), and prefaces by Kathy Brown, President and CEO of the Internet Society, and Jan Dröge, Director of the EU Commission Broadband Competence Offices Support Facility. The book is the official outcome of the IGF Dynamic Coalition on Community Connectivity (DC3), a multistakeholder group, fostering a cooperative analysis of the community network model, exploring how such networks may be used to improve connectivity while empowering Internet users. The volume also includes the updated version of the Declaration on Community Connectivity, which was elaborated through a multistakeholder participatory process, facilitated by the DC3. It will be presented and debated with the authors, on the 19th at 17:20<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Figf2017.s…>. Free hard copies will be available, and the ebook will be released in open access, under Creative Commons License. The book’s flyer is available here<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.c…>. While expressing my sincerest gratitude to all those who contribute to these books, I would like to invite you all to the books’ presentations, so that you can have your hard copies of the publications. For those who will not be able to be at the presentations, I will share the links to the books, right after the IGF. Lastly, should you be in Geneva next week, you might be interested in attending these sessions<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Figf2017.s…> promoted by the Center for Technology and Society at FGV, dealing with topics such as intermediary liability<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Figf2017.s…>, net neutrality<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Figf2017.s…>, submarine interconnections<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Figf2017.s…>, CyberBRICS<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Figf2017.s…>, platform economy<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Figf2017.s…> and terrorism online<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Figf2017.s…>. Looking forward to seeing you at the IGF and, please, feel free to circulate this email through your networks. Best regards Luca [cid:5a31230161f4d] [cid:image001.jpg@01D374D5.4538E910] [FGV Direito Rio] Luca Belli, PhD Senior Researcher Head of Internet Governance @ FGV<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Finternet-g…> luca.belli(a)fgv.br<mailto:luca.belli@fgv.br> +55 21 3799 5763 @1lucabelli<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.c…> [http://www.fgv.br/mailing/Direito_Rio/assinatura_email/Ondas.png]

1 0

"The web is dying, but mesh networks could save it"
by J.C. DE MARTIN Jan. 2, 2018

Jan. 2, 2018

*The web is dying, but mesh networks could save it* by André Staltz My previous article, "The web began dying in 2014, here’s how", raised much more awareness than I thought it would. Many people found it to be an insightful analysis of the web under the control of tech giants, but the article ended without providing anything positive to hold on to. I actually have hope for the web. There are legitimately viable ways of preserving freedom on the web while taking the platform forward and keeping it competitive against proprietary alternatives from tech giants. But it can only happen if the web takes a courageous step towards its next level. If it stays in its current form, the web has little chance of being relevant while America’s FCC kills Net Neutrality rules, the W3C favors DRM, and tech giants build their web-less vision of the future. The community of peer-to-peer technologists has brought to the world several revolutionary technologies: USENET, Napster, BitTorrent, Kazaa, Skype, Bitcoin, Ethereum, and actually even the web itself. Once again, we can turn to this community to seek digital solutions that defend freedom. Many months ago I quit my job in order to join a group of peer-to-peer programmers and help build technology that can rescue our digital freedoms. I want to share with you our plan, which in short is: Build the mobile mesh web that works with or without internet access, to reach four billion people currently offline. To explain this plan, we need to realize that the web can be independent from the internet. The core weaknesses of the internet have to be recognized, and how exactly they were exploited by middlemen businesses. The problem we are solving is both social and technical, so the solution must be a harmony of these two. Finally, all the tools and opportunities we need to supersede them are already in our hands: smartphones, peer-to-peer protocols, and mesh networks. […] Continua qui: https://thenextweb.com/syndication/2018/01/02/web-dying-mesh-networks-will-…

2 1

MERGE-it 23-24 Marzo a Torino: cultura e libertà digitali
by Fabio Pietrosanti - Lists Jan. 2, 2018

Jan. 2, 2018

Le community si incontrano. In Italia esistono tante realtà che si occupano di cultura e libertà digitali, sotto molti aspetti ed in molti modi. Scopo di MERGE-it è riunirle insieme, per conoscersi e farsi conoscere, discutere e dibattere, confrontarsi e misurarsi. https://merge-it.net/index.html#section-intro Fabio

3 2

Blockchain and GDPR – Many Open Questions
by elio.pennisi Jan. 2, 2018

Jan. 2, 2018

Vi sottopongo questo interessante articolo di Squire Patton Boggs: Blockchain Elio Pennisi

1 0

"Ten years in, nobody has come up with a use for blockchain"
by J.C. DE MARTIN Dec. 31, 2017

Dec. 31, 2017

Sarei curioso di leggere una risposta bene argomentata a questo articolo... jc *Ten years in, nobody has come up with a use for blockchain* Kai Stinchcombe 22 dicembre 2017 /Everyone says the blockchain, the technology underpinning cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin, is going to change EVERYTHING. And yet, after years of tireless effort and billions of dollars invested, nobody has actually come up with a use for the blockchain—besides currency speculation and illegal transactions.// // //Each purported use case — from payments to legal documents, from escrow to voting systems—amounts to a set of contortions to add a distributed, encrypted, anonymous ledger where none was needed. What if there isn’t actually any use for a distributed ledger at all? What if, ten years after it was invented, the reason nobody has adopted a distributed ledger at scale is because nobody wants it?// / […] Continua qui: https://hackernoon.com/ten-years-in-nobody-has-come-up-with-a-use-case-for-…

8 10

Re: [nexa] "Ten years in, nobody has come up with a use for blockchain"
by Giuseppe Attardi Dec. 30, 2017

Dec. 30, 2017

> On 27 Dec 2017, at 18:16, nexa-request(a)server-nexa.polito.it wrote: > > Blockchain e' usata per portare questi dati e consentire la vendita del pescato direttamente alla GDO, mentre tutti gli altri attori vedono i dati (data, peso, tipo pesce, etc.) e quindi possono sincronizzarsi e contemporaneamente contrattare con GDO i propri servizi (filettatura, congelamento, immagazzinamento e trasporto) senza nulla toccare del rapporto pescatore-GDO sul prezzo del pesce. > In precedenza sia la GDO, sia consorzo pescatori, sia entita' statali avevano provato a creare dei sistemi centralizzati dove tutti gli attori contribuissero per quanto di competenza. Non ha mai funzionato, specialmente, per il problema trust/conflitto tra le parti. Anch’io come Enrico non mi spiego come questa cosa non si potesse fare con mezzi tradizionali: ciascuno pubblica i propri dati in modo che tutti li possano vedere. Sembra una funzionalità abbastanza tipica di un database transazionale. Si fanno transazioni finanziarie di ben maggiore porta e frequenza nei mercati finanziari con queste tecnologie. Perché debbono essere in tanti a certificare la transazione avvenuta anziché uno solo deputato a farlo? Basta che i dati siano pubblicati e resi accessibili a tutti e si ha lo stesso effetto della blockchain, senza le complicazioni associate. Ci vedo solo complicazioni e pochi vantaggi: ognuno si deve attrezzare con mezzi, software, ecc. Nel caso della blockchain, l’incentivo a farlo è la remunerazione che gli altri fanno del suo lavoro. Ma in un sistema chiuso questo e solo un costo aggiuntivo. — Beppe

1 0

Security Planner (by Citizen Lab)
by J.C. DE MARTIN Dec. 30, 2017

Dec. 30, 2017

*Security Planner* by Citizen Lab Improve your online safety with advice from experts /Answer a few simple questions to get personalized online safety recommendations. It's confidential - no personal information is stored and we won't access any of your online accounts./ https://securityplanner.org

1 0

Matt Stoller: “Monopoly is a Form of Lawlessness”
by J.C. DE MARTIN Dec. 29, 2017

Dec. 29, 2017

Intervento nel contesto del Harvard Law Forum, durata circa 43': https://youtu.be/xM9GMGDsKUU Matt Stoller is a fellow at the Open Markets program, where he researches the history of the relationship between concentrated financial power and the Democratic Party in the 20th century. Prior to joining the Open Markets program, he was senior policy advisory to the Senate Budget. juan carlos

1 0

Who’s doing Google and Facebook’s dirty work? | John Naughton
by Alberto Cammozzo Dec. 29, 2017

Dec. 29, 2017

<https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/24/facebook-google-youtu…> The basic deal offered by social media companies to their users runs like this: “We give you tools to publish whatever you want, and then we take the revenues that result from that. You get the personal satisfaction and the warm glow that comes from seeing your holiday pictures, your home movies or your cute cats online, and we bank the cash we earn from selling your data-trails and profiles to advertisers.” It’s the digital world’s equivalent of the old American south’s practice of sharecropping – a form of agriculture in which a landowner allows a tenant to use the land in return for a share of the crops produced on their plot. In the digital version, however, the virtual “landowners” differ in their degrees of generosity. Facebook gives its sharecroppers a zero share of the harvest. YouTube, in contrast, invites them to become amateur broadcasters by uploading films to its site. If it runs ads alongside these epic productions, then it shares some of the proceeds with the sharecroppers. And if said productions attract large numbers of viewers then this can be a nice little earner. The sharecropping business model has been a roaring success since 2006 (when Google bought YouTube and Facebook opened its doors to the great unwashed). But in recent times, some difficulties have emerged. First of all, the old adage that nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the general public was proved right. Sharecroppers discovered that fake news – ie tasteless, misleading or sensational content – stood a better chance of “going viral” (and earning more) than truthful stuff. And second, it turned out that there are an awful lot of violent, hateful, racist, misogynistic, fundamentalist sharecroppers out there. The internet, it seems, holds up a mirror to human nature, and much that we see reflected in it isn’t pretty. For a long time, the landowners of cyberspace tried to ignore this problem by inviting users to “flag” inappropriate content, which would then be reviewed at a leisurely pace. But as Isis began to master social media and the political temperature in the west hotted up, the inappropriate content problem changed from being an irritating cost centre into an existential threat. Major advertisers decided that they didn’t want their ads running alongside beheading videos, for example. And social media executives found themselves being hauled up before Congress, castigated by European politicians and threatened with dire consequences unless they cleaned up their act. [...] A few days ago, the first conference to discuss these questions was held in Los Angeles. It was convened by Sarah Roberts, a UCLA professor who has been studying online content-moderation for some years, and included speakers who had done this kind of work, and revealed interesting details like the rates of pay that contractors get: $0.02 for each image reviewed. What was more alarming, though, was testimony on the psychological impact that this kind of work can have on those who do it. “When I left MySpace,” one reported, “I didn’t shake hands for, like, three years because I figured out that people were disgusting. I just could not touch people. I was disgusted by humanity when I left there. So many of my peers, same thing. We all left with horrible views of humanity.” Welcome to the dark underbelly of our networked world. There’s no such thing as a free lunch: online “safety” comes at a price.

2 3

New York City’s Bold, Flawed Attempt to Make Algorithms Accountable
by J.C. DE MARTIN Dec. 27, 2017

Dec. 27, 2017

https://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/new-york-citys-bold-flawed-attempt-… (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

1 0