- nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

Traditional books on paper open a new chapter of success | Books | The Guardian
by J.C. DE MARTIN April 11, 2015

April 11, 2015

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/apr/11/traditional-books-new-chapter-… (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

1 0

The FTC is worried about algorithmic transparency, and you should be too | ITworld
by J.C. DE MARTIN April 9, 2015

April 9, 2015

http://www.itworld.com/article/2908375/the-ftc-is-worried-about-algorithmic… (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

1 0

Ebook Gratuito. Un anno di Regolamento AGCOM sul diritto D'autore. Numeri e costi.
by Fulvio Sarzana April 9, 2015

April 9, 2015

<http://www.fulviosarzana.it/blog/ebook-gratuito-un-anno-di-regolamento-agco m-sul-diritto-dautore-al-festival-internazionale-del-giornalismo/> EBOOK GRATUITO. UN ANNO DI REGOLAMENTO AGCOM SUL DIRITTO DAUTORE,. AL FESTIVAL INTERNAZIONALE DEL GIORNALISMO. <http://www.fulviosarzana.it/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Immaginesaettasarzan a.jpg> ImmaginesaettasarzanaI numeri e i costi di un anno di Regolamento AGCOM sul diritto dAutore. Quant è costato alle imprese italiane di telecomunicazione ed agli Internet Service Providers il Regolamento AGCOM sul diritto dautore Ed ai consumatori? Quali sono i costi Amministrativi del Regolamento? Le Associazioni di tutela del diritto dautore contribuiscono ai costi dellAttività dellAGCOM? Chi beneficia del Regolamento e chi ne è escluso. Che impatto, se di impatto può parlarsi, ha determinato sulla cd pirateria il Regolamento AGCOM sul diritto dautore? Il Regolamento ha riguardato anche lattività Giornalistica? Quali sono gli impatti del Blocco attraverso i DNS sui contenuti leciti degli Utenti? Ci si può difendere e come? Sono i temi che Bruno Saetta e il sottoscritto hanno trattato nellEBOOK gratuito che verrà distribuito il giorno 16 aprile alle ore 14 e 30, nellambito del Seminario su Copyright e libertà despressione, che si terrà a Perugia nellambito del Festival Internazionale del Giornalismo. Il Seminario, come lebook, è gratuito. 1 4:00 15:00 giovedì 16/04/2015 Hotel Brufani Sala Priori http://www.festivaldelgiornalismo.com/programme/2015/copyright-and-freedom-o f-expression-online.-in-remembrance-of-lost-liberty --- Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast antivirus. http://www.avast.com

1 0

USA Executive Order -- "Blocking the Property of Certain Persons Engaging in Significant Malicious Cyber-Enabled Activities"
by J.C. DE MARTIN April 9, 2015

April 9, 2015

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/04/01/executive-order-bloc… The White House Office of the Press Secretary For Immediate Release April 01, 2015 Executive Order -- "Blocking the Property of Certain Persons Engaging in Significant Malicious Cyber-Enabled Activities" EXECUTIVE ORDER - - - - - - - BLOCKING THE PROPERTY OF CERTAIN PERSONS ENGAGING IN SIGNIFICANT MALICIOUS CYBER-ENABLED ACTIVITIES By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) (NEA), section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (8 U.S.C. 1182(f)), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, find that the increasing prevalence and severity of malicious cyber-enabled activities originating from, or directed by persons located, in whole or in substantial part, outside the United States constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States. I hereby declare a national emergency to deal with this threat. Accordingly, I hereby order: _Section 1_. (a) All property and interests in property that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of any United States person of the following persons are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in: (i) any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of State, to be responsible for or complicit in, or to have engaged in, directly or indirectly, cyber-enabled activities originating from, or directed by persons located, in whole or in substantial part, outside the United States that are reasonably likely to result in, or have materially contributed to, a significant threat to the national security, foreign policy, or economic health or financial stability of the United States and that have the purpose or effect of: (A) harming, or otherwise significantly compromising the provision of services by, a computer or network of computers that support one or more entities in a critical infrastructure sector; (B) significantly compromising the provision of services by one or more entities in a critical infrastructure sector; (C) causing a significant disruption to the availability of a computer or network of computers; or (D) causing a significant misappropriation of funds or economic resources, trade secrets, personal identifiers, or financial information for commercial or competitive advantage or private financial gain; or (ii) any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of State: (A) to be responsible for or complicit in, or to have engaged in, the receipt or use for commercial or competitive advantage or private financial gain, or by a commercial entity, outside the United States of trade secrets misappropriated through cyber-enabled means, knowing they have been misappropriated, where the misappropriation of such trade secrets is reasonably likely to result in, or has materially contributed to, a significant threat to the national security, foreign policy, or economic health or financial stability of the United States; (B) to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services in support of, any activity described in subsections (a)(i) or (a)(ii)(A) of this section or any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; (C) to be owned or controlled by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; or (D) to have attempted to engage in any of the activities described in subsections (a)(i) and (a)(ii)(A)-(C) of this section. (b) The prohibitions in subsection (a) of this section apply except to the extent provided by statutes, or in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this order, and notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to the effective date of this order. _Sec. 2_. I hereby determine that the making of donations of the type of articles specified in section 203(b)(2) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1702(b)(2)) by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to section 1 of this order would seriously impair my ability to deal with the national emergency declared in this order, and I hereby prohibit such donations as provided by section 1 of this order. _Sec. 3_. The prohibitions in section 1 of this order include but are not limited to: (a) the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; and (b) the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person. _Sec. 4_. I hereby find that the unrestricted immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens determined to meet one or more of the criteria in section 1(a) of this order would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants or nonimmigrants, of such persons. Such persons shall be treated as persons covered by section 1 of Proclamation 8693 of July 24, 2011 (Suspension of Entry of Aliens Subject to United Nations Security Council Travel Bans and International Emergency Economic Powers Act Sanctions). _Sec. 5_. (a) Any transaction that evades or avoids, has the purpose of evading or avoiding, causes a violation of, or attempts to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited. (b) Any conspiracy formed to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited. _Sec. 6_. For the purposes of this order: (a) the term "person" means an individual or entity; (b) the term "entity" means a partnership, association, trust, joint venture, corporation, group, subgroup, or other organization; (c) the term "United States person" means any United States citizen, permanent resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States (including foreign branches), or any person in the United States; (d) the term "critical infrastructure sector" means any of the designated critical infrastructure sectors identified in Presidential Policy Directive 21; and (e) the term "misappropriation" includes any taking or obtaining by improper means, without permission or consent, or under false pretenses. _Sec. 7_. For those persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States, I find that because of the ability to transfer funds or other assets instantaneously, prior notice to such persons of measures to be taken pursuant to this order would render those measures ineffectual. I therefore determine that for these measures to be effective in addressing the national emergency declared in this order, there need be no prior notice of a listing or determination made pursuant to section 1 of this order. _Sec. 8_. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of State, is hereby authorized to take such actions, including the promulgation of rules and regulations, and to employ all powers granted to the President by IEEPA as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this order. The Secretary of the Treasury may redelegate any of these functions to other officers and agencies of the United States Government consistent with applicable law. All agencies of the United States Government are hereby directed to take all appropriate measures within their authority to carry out the provisions of this order. _Sec. 9_. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of State, is hereby authorized to submit the recurring and final reports to the Congress on the national emergency declared in this order, consistent with section 401(c) of the NEA (50 U.S.C. 1641(c)) and section 204(c) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1703(c)). _Sec. 10_. This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person. BARACK OBAMA THE WHITE HOUSE, April 1, 2015.

3 7

Re: [nexa] Voce.info: "Ma la scuola 2.0 è buona scuola?"
by Giuseppe Attardi April 9, 2015

April 9, 2015

On 4/8/2015 15:40, nexa-request(a)server-nexa.polito.it wrote: > Ciò si manifesta - nonostante i molti tentativi svolti e l'importante > ruolo svolto dal GARR - di avere tutte le scuole dotate di una buona > connessione alla rete, affidabile e sicura, in grado di accedere ai > servizi offerti dal GARR stesso e condizione necessaria per poter > realizzare tutto ciò possa andare nella direzione di formare persone più > preparate, consapevoli, curiose e desiderose di conoscenza (siano essere > le flipped classroom o l'introduzione del coding dalle primarie o - la > mia preferita - il superamento dell'apprendimento per silos verticali). Il GARR cerca di intervenire in tutti i modi possibili, ma bisogna tenere conto che il GARR è un consorzio tra Università ed enti di ricerca, i quali condividono tra loro i costi di infrastruttura e servizi. Per il collegamento delle scuole il GARR non riceve alcun contributo dal MIUR, pertanto i costi ricadono attualmente sulle scuole stesse. Il GARR offre accessi alle scuole da un minimo di 100Mbps simmetrici, a seconda del tipo di collegamento fisico disponibile. In alcuni casi il GARR cerca di sfruttare finanziamenti da altre fonti, es. fondi europei infrastrutturali, per realizzare i collegamanenti, come sta avvenendo col progetto GARR-X Progress in 4 regioni del sud. La regione Emilia Romagna sta intervenendo tramite Lepida, anche se le scuole non sarebbero di competenza della regione. In altri casi, come si sta facendo a Pisa, il cablaggio sta venendo realizzato attraverso una collaborazione tra Università, Comune e Provincia. In sostanza, per il momento bisogna ingegnarsi, in attesa di un vero piano generale. Aggiungo poi la solita considerazione che la rete è solo un fattore abilitante, ma non è la soluzione. BTW, vi racconto un episodio indicativo della situazione. Pochi giorni dopo che avevamo realizzato il collegamento in fibra con uno dei licei di Pisa, per il brutto tempo è crollato un controsoffitto, rendendo inagibile per mesi il piano dove si trovano le aule informatiche. -- Beppe

1 0

Voce.info: "Ma la scuola 2.0 è buona scuola?"
by J.C. DE MARTIN April 9, 2015

April 9, 2015

Lo so che dò un dolore ad alcuni amici, ma purtroppo sono anni che la letteratura scientifica è piuttosto concorde nel ritenere che i benefici dell'ICT a scuola si manifestano solo in alcuni, limitati scenari. In tutti gli altri casi è meglio spendere i soldi per avere insegnanti migliori e remunerati dignitosamente, classi meno affollate, locali belli e sicuri, e scuole dotate di biblioteche (sì, quegli strani posti con tanti libri sugli scaffali, con strane persone che a quanto pare di professione si occupano proprio di quei libri... strano, vero?). juan carlos *Ma la scuola 2.0 è buona scuola?* 08.04.15 Daniele Checchi e Enrico Rettore Le attrezzature informatiche migliorano gli apprendimenti degli alunni? Prima di investire nuove risorse pubbliche nell’acquisto di tablet o lavagne multimediali servirebbero risposte basate su dati e rigorosa valutazione di efficacia degli esperimenti pilota. L’esperienza del progetto Cl@ssi 2.0. INFRASTRUTTURE SCOLASTICHE: LA SITUAZIONE La dotazione infrastrutturale della scuola italiana è carente. Ne è un preoccupante indicatore la manutenzione degli edifici scolastici. Se prendiamo per esempio l’ultima indagine svolta da Legambiente, il 32,5 per cento delle scuole necessita di interventi urgenti e solo il 30,9per cento è dotato di certificati essenziali come quello della prevenzione incendi. La situazione appare particolarmente degradata nelle aree meridionali del paese, anche a causa del prosciugarsi delle risorse a disposizione degli enti locali, che dovrebbero assicurare la fruibilità degli edifici scolatici. Le circostanze non appaiono migliori dal punto di vista della dotazione di attrezzature. Se utilizziamo la banca dati de La scuola in chiaro osserviamo che meno della metà delle classi italiane dispone di una connessione a internet, e poco più di un quarto possiede una lavagna interattiva multimediale (Lim). […] Continua qui: http://www.lavoce.info/archives/34099/ma-la-scuola-2-0-e-buona-scuola/

5 8

Diritto all’oblio. Questioni aperte e scenari futuri – Milano, 13 aprile
by Valerio Lubello April 8, 2015

April 8, 2015

Cari tutte, cari tutti, abbiamo il piacere di invitarvi al seminario in materia di Diritto all'oblio. Questioni aperte e prospettive che si terrà il prossimo 13 aprile presso l'Università Bocconi. Di seguito i dettagli dell'evento in allegato, invece, l'intero ciclo di seminari da noi organizzato. http://www.medialaws.eu/diritto-alloblio-questioni-aperte-e-scenari-futuri-… A presto! Valerio

1 0

Fwd: [Creis_Terminal] CECIL Fiches pratiques pour réduire la surveillance
by Mariella Berra April 8, 2015

April 8, 2015

-------- Messaggio Inoltrato -------- Oggetto: [Creis_Terminal] CECIL Fiches pratiques pour réduire la surveillance Data: Wed, 8 Apr 2015 09:29:57 +0200 (CEST) Mittente: naulleau.daniel(a)free.fr A: creis terminal <creis_terminal(a)lecreis.org> Le CECIL propose des FICHES PRATIQUES destinées à aider l'internaute -non spécialiste- à réduire les risques liés à la surveillance. Fiche de présentation: http://www.lececil.org/node/7687 Les 6 premières fiches concernent : - Deux outils fondamentaux : le système d’exploitation et le navigateur ; - Les logiciels libres ; - Les moteurs de recherche alternatifs ; - L’historique de navigation et les cookies ; - Les protections contre le traçage ; - Les mots de passe. On attend vos remarques : contact(a)lececil.org Daniel NAULLEAU _______________________________________________ Creis_terminal mailing list Creis_terminal(a)lecreis.org https://listes.globenet.org/listinfo/creis_terminal

1 0

Grégoire Chamayou: "How Drones Turned American Wars Into Manhunts and Humans Into Prey"
by J.C. DE MARTIN April 8, 2015

April 8, 2015

*How Drones Turned American Wars Into Manhunts and Humans Into Prey* /The remote-controlled hunting of human beings has become standard practice in American warfare./ Grégoire Chamayou April 7, 2015 /This article originally appeared at TomDispatch.com. To stay on top of important articles like these, sign up to receive the latest updates from TomDispatch.com./ [The following is slightly adapted from chapters two and three of Grégoire Chamayou’s new book, A Theory of the Drone, with special thanks to his publisher, the New Press.] Initially, the English word “drone” meant both an insect and a sound. It was not until the outbreak of World War II that it began to take on another meaning. At that time, American artillery apprentices used the expression “target drones” to designate the small remotely controlled planes at which they aimed in training. The metaphor did not refer solely to the size of those machines or the brm-brm of their motors. Drones are male bees, without stingers, and eventually the other bees kill them. Classical tradition regarded them as emblems of all that is nongenuine and dispensable. That was precisely what a target drone was: just a dummy, made to be shot down. However, it was a long time before drones were to be seen cruising above battlefields. To be sure, the idea dates back quite a while: there were the Curtiss-Sperry aerial torpedo and the Kettering Bug at the end of World War I, and then the Nazi V-1s and V-2s unleashed on London in 1944. But those old flying torpedoes may be considered more as the ancestors of cruise missiles than as those of present-day drones. The essential difference lies in the fact that while the former can be used only once, the latter are reusable. The drone is not a projectile, but a projectile-carrying machine. It was during the Vietnam War that the U.S. Air Force, to counteract the Soviet surface-to-air missiles that had inflicted heavy casualties on it, invested in reconnaissance drones nicknamed “Lightning Bugs,” produced by Ryan Aeronautical. An American official explained that “these RPVs [remotely piloted vehicles] could help prevent aircrews from becoming casualties or prisoners… With RPVs, survival is not the driving factor.” […] Continua qui: http://www.thenation.com/article/203713/how-drones-turned-american-wars-man…

2 2

How the German Foreign Intelligence Agency BND tapped the Internet Exchange Point DE-CIX in Frankfurt, since 2009 | netzpolitik.org
by Luca Cicchelli April 7, 2015

April 7, 2015

https://netzpolitik.org/2015/how-the-german-foreign-intelligence-agency-bnd… In aggiunta segnalo che da poco DE-CIX ha fatto un agreement conTI Sparkle per gestire un IX nel loro Data Center di Palermo -- Luca Sent by mobile

1 0