- nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

Facebook, come Renato Pozzetto, grida "vi siete chiusi dentro!"
by Antonio Casilli May 8, 2015

May 8, 2015

Dear all, Da anni Facebook è accusato di manipolare per mezzo del suo newsfeed le scelte politiche dei suoi membri. L'effetto di bolla algoritmica denunciato da Eli Pariser ha fatto scorrere parecchio inchiostro, e messo FB in una situazione difficile. Ma ecco che i suoi ricercatori (capitanati da Lada Adamic) sono riusciti a piazzare nella rivista Science un articolo che potrebbe scagionare il gigante di Menlo Park: Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook http://www.sciencemag.org/content/early/2015/05/06/science.aaa1160.full Succo dell'articolo: "Compared to algorithmic ranking, individuals’ choices about what to consume had a stronger effect limiting exposure to cross-cutting content." Ovvero: "non siamo noi che chiudiamo i nostri utilizzatori in clusters ideologicamente ermetiche e polarizzate. Sono loro che si chiudono dentro da soli". Detto questo, ecco tre commenti ben fatti di tre ricercatori non pagati da Facebook (ma, in almeno un caso, da aziende concorrenti, quindi fate vobis...) 1) Christian Sandvig The Facebook “It’s Not Our Fault” Study http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/niftyc/archives/1062 (I risultati sono esagerati e il quadro teorico fa acqua da tutte le parti: non si possono comparare scelte individuali e processi di selezione algoritmica dei contenuti, perché si tratta di entità incommensurabili.) 2) Zeynep Tufekci How Facebook’s Algorithm Suppresses Content Diversity (Modestly) and How the Newsfeed Rules Your Clicks https://medium.com/message/how-facebook-s-algorithm-suppresses-content-dive… (Il vero risultato è che il posizionamento nel newsfeed è determinante per il fatto di cliccare un contenuto (ma questo lo sapevamo già da studi precedenti). Gli altri risultati sono pure illazioni.) 3) Nathan Jurgenson Facebook: Fair and Balanced http://thesocietypages.org/cyborgology/2015/05/07/facebook-fair-and-balance… (La metodologia è difettosa (in realtà lo studio non riguarda che un'infima percentuale di utilizzatori di FB il quali dichiarano in rete la loro appartenenza politica). In più il presupposto che un algoritmo sia moralmente neutro è une fandonia ideologica.) E Renato Pozzetto in tutto questo? E' solo una dotta citazione la mia, certo non ignota ai meno giovani di questa lista: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HL9F50Ztgqo Cheers, ---a -- Antonio A. Casilli Associate Professor, Telecom ParisTech Research Fellow Edgar-Morin Center (EHESS)

1 0

Breaking News: Federal Court Rules NSA Bulk Data Collection Illegal | WIRED
by J.C. DE MARTIN May 7, 2015

May 7, 2015

http://www.wired.com/2015/05/breaking-news-federal-court-rules-nsa-bulk-dat… (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

1 0

Lemley: "Faith Based Intellectual Property"
by J.C. DE MARTIN May 6, 2015

May 6, 2015

Faith-Based Intellectual Property Mark A. Lemley <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=32215> Stanford Law School March 30, 2015 /Stanford Public Law Working Paper No. 2587297 <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2587297##>/ *Abstract: * The traditional justification for intellectual property (IP) rights has been utilitarian. We grant exclusive rights because we think the world will be a better place as a result. But what evidence we have doesn’t fully justify IP rights in their current strong form. Rather than following the evidence and questioning strong IP rights, more and more scholars have begun to retreat from evidence toward what I call faith-based IP, justifying IP as a moral end in itself rather than on the basis of how it affects the world. I argue that these moral claims are ultimately unpersuasive and a step backward in a rational society. *Number of Pages in PDF File:* 19 Download This Paper <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID2587297_code32215.pdf?abstr…> Date posted: April 1, 2015 ; Last revised: April 21, 2015

1 0

Mancava proprio un drone hacker
by Diego Giorio May 6, 2015

May 6, 2015

http://www.dronezine.it/14887/ci-mancava-anche-questa-arriva-il-drone-hacke… Saluti a tutti Diego

1 0

specifiche tecniche Fascicolo Sanitario elettronico
by Mauro Alovisio May 6, 2015

May 6, 2015

*segnalo news di interesse dal sito dell'Agid* *Mercoledì, 6 Maggio, 2015* Le informazioni contenute nel documento consentono alle Regioni di iniziare a sviluppare i servizi per l’effettiva interoperabilità del FSE. [image: Fascicolo sanitario Elettronico: disponibili le specifiche tecniche di interoperabilità] Il gruppo di lavoro coordinato dall’AgID ha rilasciato le Specifiche tecniche per l’interoperabilità tra i sistemi regionali del Fascicolo Sanitario Elettronico (PDF) <http://www.agid.gov.it/sites/default/files/documenti_indirizzo/specifiche_t…>, comprendente il framework e dataset dei servizi base. Il lavoro è il risultato dei test effettuati dalla Regione Emilia-Romagna, Lombardia e Veneto che, su proposta AgID, si sono offerte, con il supporto del CNR, di validare le specifiche di dettaglio per l’interoperabilità dei sistemi regionali di FSE ed in particolare i servizi di ricerca, recupero e indicizzazione dei documenti che compongono il Fascicolo. Queste specifiche tecniche integrano i documenti già pubblicati: Processi di business sovraregionali relativi ai sistemi regionali di FSE (PDF) <http://www.agid.gov.it/sites/default/files/documenti_indirizzo/processi_di_…> e Specifiche tecniche per l’interoperabilità tra i sistemi regionali di FSE (PDF) <http://www.agid.gov.it/sites/default/files/documenti_indirizzo/specifiche_t…>, andando a definire nel dettaglio la struttura del messaggio, del framework e dei dataset dei servizi base a presto Mauro

1 0

The Hague Declaration on Knowledge Discovery in the Digital Age
by J.C. DE MARTIN May 6, 2015

May 6, 2015

http://thehaguedeclaration.com/the-hague-declaration-on-knowledge-discovery… The Hague Declaration on Knowledge Discovery in the Digital Age /We believe that this Declaration has the power to shape ethical research practice, legislative reform and the development of open access policies and infrastructure. Please show your support by adding your name to the growing list of signatories <http://thehaguedeclaration.com/the-hague-declaration-on-knowledge-discovery…>./ *Vision* New technologies are revolutionising the way humans can learn about the world and about themselves. These technologies are not only a means of dealing with Big Data^1 <http://thehaguedeclaration.com/the-hague-declaration-on-knowledge-discovery…>, they are also a key to knowledge discovery in the digital age; and their power is predicated on the increasing availability of data itself. Factors such as increasing computing power, the growth of the web, and governmental commitment to open access^2 <http://thehaguedeclaration.com/the-hague-declaration-on-knowledge-discovery…> to publicly-funded research are serving to increase the availability of facts, data and ideas. However, current legislative frameworks in different legal jurisdictions may not be cast in a way which supports the introduction of new approaches to undertaking research, in particular content mining. Content mining is the process of deriving information from machine-readable material. It works by copying large quantities of material, extracting the data, and recombining it to identify patterns and trends. At the same time, intellectual property laws from a time well before the advent of the web limit the power of digital content analysis techniques such as text and data mining (for text and data) or content mining (for computer analysis of content in all formats)^3 <http://thehaguedeclaration.com/the-hague-declaration-on-knowledge-discovery…>. These factors are also creating inequalities in access to knowledge discovery in the digital age. The legislation in question might be copyright law, law governing patents or database laws – all of which may restrict the ability of the user to perform detailed content analysis. Researchers should have the freedom to analyse and pursue intellectual curiosity without fear of monitoring or repercussions. These freedoms must not be eroded in the digital environment. Likewise, ethics around the use of data and content mining continue to evolve in response to changing technology. Computer analysis of content in all formats, that is content mining, enables access to undiscovered public knowledge and provides important insights across every aspect of our economic, social and cultural life. Content mining will also have a profound impact for understanding society and societal movements (for example, predicting political uprisings, analysing demographical changes). Use of such techniques has the potential to revolutionise the way research is performed – both academic and commercial. *BENEFITS OF CONTENT MINING* The potential benefits of content mining are vast and include: * Addressing grand challenges such as climate change and global epidemics * Improving population health, wealth and development * Creating new jobs and employment * Exponentially increasing the speed and progress of science through new insights and greater efficiency of research * Increasing transparency of governments and their actions * Fostering innovation and collaboration and boosting the impact of open science * Creating tools for education and research * Providing new and richer cultural insights * Speeding economic and social development in all parts of the globe Researchers, SMEs (Small and Medium Sized Enterprises) and big technological companies have been content mining for at least 10 years, but the potential for extracting significant benefits from this work has been limited due to ongoing legal uncertainties and restrictions. However, in this age of opportunity, it is important that all members of society can benefit equally from advances in the availability of digital technology and content. This requires the creation of new principles around access to facts, data and ideas. *PRINCIPLES* Therefore we, the undersigned, in recognition of the huge potential economic and societal benefits of knowledge discovery in the digital age, endorse the following principles: *1. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY WAS NOT DESIGNED TO REGULATE THE FREE FLOW OF FACTS, DATA AND IDEAS, BUT HAS AS A KEY OBJECTIVE THE PROMOTION OF RESEARCH ACTIVITY* The free flow of information and ideas is an essential human right^4 <http://thehaguedeclaration.com/the-hague-declaration-on-knowledge-discovery…>. It is a catalyst for the production of human knowledge, which underpins welfare and prosperity. Societies around the world have chosen to protect certain limited rights in intellectual property as incentives both to innovation and the dissemination of knowledge. Intellectual property law was never intended to cover facts, ideas and pure data. However the modern application of intellectual property law is increasingly becoming an obstacle to knowledge creation and dissemination that use even these most simple building blocks of knowledge. In some countries, copyright law^5 <http://thehaguedeclaration.com/the-hague-declaration-on-knowledge-discovery…> in particular has been interpreted to restrict the ability to apply computer reading and analysis to otherwise legally-available content. Other legislative frameworks such as patent law and database law may have a similar impact. When intellectual property law allows content to be read and analysed manually by humans but not by their machines, it has failed its original purposes. *2. PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE THE FREEDOM TO ANALYSE AND PURSUE INTELLECTUAL CURIOSITY WITHOUT FEAR OF MONITORING OR REPERCUSSIONS* Providers of content should respect the intellectual privacy of individual readers and should take measures to protect readers’ privacy from interference by any external body. Any exception, which for example would result in an encroachment of individual privacy, will need to be necessary and proportionate and provided for by law. The use of facts, data and ideas must not prejudice the legitimate rights of individuals to privacy and a private life. *3. LICENSES AND CONTRACT TERMS SHOULD NOT RESTRICT INDIVIDUALS FROM USING FACTS, DATA AND IDEAS* Generally, licences and contract terms that regulate and restrict how individuals may analyse and use facts, data and ideas are unacceptable and inhibit innovation and the creation of new knowledge and, therefore, should not be adopted. Similarly, it is unacceptable that technical measures in digital rights management systems should inhibit the lawful right to perform content mining. *4. ETHICS AROUND THE USE OF CONTENT MINING TECHNIQUES WILL NEED TO CONTINUE TO EVOLVE IN RESPONSE TO CHANGING TECHNOLOGY* The observation of well-established ethical norms in research and business, as well as the continued development of such standards and laws, must be supported and encouraged in order to ensure that content mining technologies are deployed for the benefit of society. *5. INNOVATION AND COMMERCIAL RESEARCH BASED ON THE USE OF FACTS, DATA, AND IDEAS SHOULD NOT BE RESTRICTED BY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW* As facts, data, and ideas are not copyrightable it does not make sense to restrict ethical commercial use of those facts, data, and ideas extracted from content which has been obtained legally. It is recognised that while patent law is designed to protect innovations and inventions, this is not meant to encompass facts and data. Restrictions on the use of facts, data and ideas can have a serious impact on innovation and on economic development globally. It can also reduce the ability to use tools and processes which can benefit citizens in the areas of health, science, employment, research, the environment and culture. *Roadmap For Action* *ACCEPTING THE VISION AND PRINCIPLES* 1. The Vision embodied in this Declaration is that intellectual property was not designed to regulate the free flow of facts, data and ideas, but has as a key objective the promotion of research activity. 2. Where copyright frameworks do not currently support such a vision, legislators should immediately work to support the introduction of changes which would allow users to undertake content mining on materials to which they have lawful access. 3. Where Exceptions or Limitations^6 <http://thehaguedeclaration.com/the-hague-declaration-on-knowledge-discovery…> are introduced into copyright law to allow content mining, these should be mandatory and may not be overridden by contracts. 4. It is unacceptable that technical measures in digital rights management systems should inhibit the legal right to perform content mining. 5. There should be no need to sign separate licences to undertake content mining activity, since the right to read is the right to mine where those performing mining activities already have lawful access to relevant content. *POLICY AND INCENTIVES* 6. Policy makers should aim to provide legal clarity by ensuring that content mining is not an infringement of copyright or related rights. We believe that the right to read includes the right to mine, but only where individuals have lawful access to that content. 7. Where research funders or other bodies require, and where authors wish, research outputs to be made available under specific licences, these should typically be CC-BY for publications and CC0 for research data^7 . <http://thehaguedeclaration.com/the-hague-declaration-on-knowledge-discovery…> 8. Every university, research organisation, research funder and commercial business should ensure that their policies advocate content mining as a research methodology which has the potential to transform the way research is performed. The growth of open access and open data has been, and will continue to be, a key enabler of content mining. 9. Researchers should recognise the right of the authors of publications to be acknowledged as such, and to be respected and acknowledged as data producers, wherever possible. 10. Policies on content mining should respect the legitimate rights of authors and publishers, and be driven by the needs of researchers and businesses in the digital age. 11. To encourage the uptake of content mining activity, universities, research organisations, research funders and businesses should consider introducing incentives to reward those who use these new techniques – for example, content mining activities should be noted and commended in appraisal/evaluation processes. *INFRASTRUCTURE AND TOOLS* 12. Research organisations, universities and businesses should ensure that they maintain and develop repository infrastructures to provide storage for, and access to, publications which can legally be made available for content mining. Independent researchers should strive to make use of such facilities where they are available. 13. Research organisations, universities and businesses should provide access to suitable infrastructures to enable research data to be made available, where it is lawful and ethically possible to do so, for content mining. Independent researchers should strive to make use of such facilities where they are available. 14. All such developments include technical infrastructures, Standards, ethical norms, and funding requirements to make research results available as open outputs. 15. Open standards such as XML and JSON for data transport, ORCID for author IDs and CC licenses for open licensing needs should be used wherever possible. 16. If material is made available under a CC BY licence, content creators should make the following available for download: the XML or other high quality file format, high resolution images, supporting data behind the images; the unformatted accepted article from the author. *ADVOCACY* 17. Bodies such as universities, research organisations, library associations, the medical community, businesses, and members of the content mining community should advocate the benefits of content mining. 18. Research libraries are well placed to take on this advocacy role as part of their activities in research support. 19. Libraries should provide training for researchers on content mining literacy, including legal advice. *DEVELOPMENT AND MONITORING OF THE HAGUE DECLARATION AND ROADMAP* 20. LIBER <http://libereurope.eu> (Association of European Research Libraries) has been instrumental in working with stakeholders to develop the Hague Declaration and Roadmap. LIBER will continue to monitor and oversee progress towards obtaining signatures for the Declaration, and will advocate the implementation of the Roadmap. ^[1] See the G8 Open Data Charter <https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/open-data-charter/g8-open-data-c…> and the RDA Data Harvest Report <http://europe.rd-alliance.org/sites/default/files/report/TheDataHarvestRepo…> (Go Back <http://thehaguedeclaration.com/the-hague-declaration-on-knowledge-discovery…>). ^[2] See the Berlin Declaration <http://openaccess.mpg.de/Berlin-Declaration> and the Budapest Open Access Initiative 10 years on <http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/boai-10-recommendations> (Go Back <http://thehaguedeclaration.com/the-hague-declaration-on-knowledge-discovery…>). ^[3] Where the term text and data mining / TDM is used in the Declaration, it is used to mean the mining of all forms of data irrespective of whether in text, images, sound recordings or film (Go Back <http://thehaguedeclaration.com/the-hague-declaration-on-knowledge-discovery…>). ^[4] See Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights <http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml#a19> (Go Back <http://thehaguedeclaration.com/the-hague-declaration-on-knowledge-discovery…>). ^[5] And in the European Union database laws also in the form of the Database Directive (Go Back <http://thehaguedeclaration.com/the-hague-declaration-on-knowledge-discovery…>). ^[6] See, for example, WIPO on Limitations and Exceptions <http://www.wipo.int/copyright/en/limitations> (Go Back <http://thehaguedeclaration.com/the-hague-declaration-on-knowledge-discovery…>). ^[7] For example, the Open Science and Research initiative in Finland has published a Roadmap <http://openscience.fi>. This recommends a CC BY 4.0 licence for all research outputs. For metadata in repositories the national recommendation is CC0. (Go Back <http://thehaguedeclaration.com/the-hague-declaration-on-knowledge-discovery…>). cc-zero /To the extent possible under law, the creators of The Hague Declaration waive all copyright and related or neighbouring rights to the Declaration./

1 0

How 3-D Printing Is Saving the Italian Artisan - Bloomberg Business
by J.C. DE MARTIN May 6, 2015

May 6, 2015

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2015-05-05/how-3-d-printing-is-savin… (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

1 0

L'Assemblea Nazionale francese ha votato il PJLRenseignement
by Antonio Casilli May 6, 2015

May 6, 2015

[Previously: il disegno di legge sull’intelligence (PJLRenseignement) che autorizza l'intercettazione e ritenzione massiva di dati personali senza controllo giudiziario, legalizza gli imsi-catcher e i costringe Isp e fornitori di hosting a istallare le famose "scatole nere algoritmiche" per la detezione di segnali deboli di minacce terroristiche imminenti, era al voto ieri all'Assemblée Nationale francese. Risultati dello scrutinio: 438 deputati a favore, 86 contro e 42 astenuti. Ragguardevole numero di voltafaccia dell'ultimo minuto. Meanwhile, nella cosiddetta società civile: - 120000 firmatari della petizione per il ritiro della legge https://www.change.org/p/retirez-le-pjlrenseignement-le-big-brother-fran%C3… - 33 istituzioni e grandi ONG prendono posizione contro https://wiki.laquadrature.net/PJL_relatif_au_renseignement/Positionnements - 902 imprese del settore digitale e media dichiarano che lasceranno il territorio nazionale se costrette a spiare sui loro clienti http://ni-pigeons-ni-espions.fr/fr/#signatories) ------------------ Dal New York Times Lawmakers in France Move to Vastly Expand Surveillance By ALISSA J. RUBINMAY 5, 2015 PARIS — At a moment when American lawmakers are reconsidering the broad surveillance powers assumed by the government after Sept. 11, the lower house of the French Parliament took a long stride in the opposite direction Tuesday, overwhelmingly approving a bill that could give the authorities their most intrusive domestic spying abilities ever, with almost no judicial oversight. The bill, in the works since last year, now goes to the Senate, where it seems likely to pass, having been given new impetus in reaction to the terrorist attacks in and around Paris in January... http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/06/world/europe/french-legislators-approve-s…

1 0

Camera dei Deputati, Tavola rotonda su diritto di accesso ad Internet, 8 maggio
by Guido d'Ipp May 5, 2015

May 5, 2015

Buongiorno, vi segnalo la *Tavola Rotonda* sulla proposta di Art. 34-bis accesso ad Internet <http://www.art34bis.it> come diritto sociale, organizzata insieme all'*On. Paolo Coppola* che si terrà giorno *venerdì 8 maggio *alle *9:00* presso la *Sala della Regina* della *Camera dei Deputati*. Se qualcuno fosse interessato a partecipare basta registrarsi inviando una mail con Nome e Cognome a: info(a)culturademocratica.org La proposta di art. 34-bis è depositata alla Camera dei Deputati (ddl. Cost. 2816/15 <http://www.camera.it/leg17/126?tab=1&leg=17&idDocumento=2816&sede=&tipo=>) e in corso di esame presso la Prima Commissione Affari Costituzionali del Senato della Repubblica (ddl. Cost. 1561/14 <http://www.senato.it/leg/17/BGT/Schede/Ddliter/44665.htm>). Tutte le informazioni sulla tavola rotonda al sito internet: http://www.art34bis.it/chi-siamo/eventi/ o all'evento facebook: https://www.facebook.com/events/678615415601475/679719962157687/ Grazie e mi scuso per il disturbo Guido d'Ippolito <https://www.linkedin.com/in/guidodippolito> 2015-05-04 15:43 GMT+02:00 <nexa-request(a)server-nexa.polito.it>: > Send nexa mailing list submissions to > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > nexa-request(a)server-nexa.polito.it > > You can reach the person managing the list at > nexa-owner(a)server-nexa.polito.it > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of nexa digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. a proposito di agenda digitale (Mariella Berra) > 2. Unibocconi - 11 maggio - Il costo della privacy (Valerio Lubello) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 04 May 2015 14:45:01 +0200 > From: Mariella Berra <mariella.berra(a)unito.it> > To: nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > Subject: [nexa] a proposito di agenda digitale > Message-ID: <554769CD.1090401(a)unito.it> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed > > > > > -------- > > http://80.241.231.25/Ucei/PDF/2015/2015-05-04/2015050430187093.pdf > Renzi e il pasticcio Agid Repubblica 4 maggio 2015 > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Mon, 4 May 2015 15:43:55 +0200 > From: Valerio Lubello <lubolo(a)hotmail.it> > To: Nexa <nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it> > Subject: [nexa] Unibocconi - 11 maggio - Il costo della privacy > Message-ID: <DUB123-W18AA215CB8D4802944A412A4D20(a)phx.gbl> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Cari tutti, > ho il piacere di invitarvi al prossimo seminario del ciclo "Diritto > pubblico, economia e media" organizzato presso l'Università Bocconi per il > prossimo 11 maggio. > Allego la locandina dell'evento e quella dell'intero ciclo. > A presto! > Con i migliori saluti, > Valerio > >

1 0

Unibocconi - 11 maggio - Il costo della privacy
by Valerio Lubello May 4, 2015

May 4, 2015

Cari tutti, ho il piacere di invitarvi al prossimo seminario del ciclo "Diritto pubblico, economia e media" organizzato presso l'Università Bocconi per il prossimo 11 maggio. Allego la locandina dell'evento e quella dell'intero ciclo. A presto! Con i migliori saluti, Valerio

1 0