Grazie Stefano della condivisione, molto interessante. Dato che, vedendo quanto sta accadendo oltreoceano parrebbe che non sempre gli argini legali servono a impedire comportamenti impropri, o i richiami arrivano quando ormai il danno è stato fatto,sarebbe interessante forse capire se esistono soluzioni "tecniche" per impedire l'aggregazione di datiche dovrebbero restare privati e separati fra loro. Buona giornata, Federico On 28/04/2025 at 8:14 PM, "Stefano Quintarelli via nexa" wrote:quando ero a Roma qualcuno voleva fare il data lake della PA, un bacino dove infilare tutti i dati di tutti i cittadini. ci fu anche un atto normativo, la PDND che pero' si scontro sulle nostre fondamenta istituzionali e divenne un centro di autorizzazione e gestione di interoperabilita'... On 27/04/25 17:27, Federico Guerrini via nexa wrote:
Cosa succede, quando un governo "democratico" vira verso l'autoritarismo e ha a disposizione un'immensa quantità di dati sui propri cittadini? Probabilmente, nulla di buono.
Da The Atlantic american-panopticon/682616/>:
"In March, President Trump issued an executive order aiming to eliminate the data silos that keep everything separate. Historically, much of the data collected by the government had been heavily compartmentalized and secured; even for those legally authorized to see sensitive data, requesting access for use by another government agency is typically a painful process that requires justifying what you need, why you need it, and proving that it is used for those purposes only. Not so under fraud-and-abuse-by-eliminating-information-silos/> Trump."
"Advancements in artificial intelligence promise to turn this unwieldy mass of data and metadata into something easily searchable, politically weaponizable, and maybe even profitable. DOGE is reportedly attempting to build a “master database doge-building-master-database-immigration/index.html>” of immigrant data to aid in deportations; NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya has floated the possibility of an autism registry s1-5372695/autism-nih-rfk-medical-records> (though the administration quickly walked it back autism-registry-hhs-says-contradicting-nih-director-jay-bhattacharya- claim/>). America already has all the technology it needs to build a
draconian surveillance society—the conditions for such a dystopia have been falling into place slowly over time, waiting for the right authoritarian to come along and use it to crack down on American privacy and freedom."
"Trump and DOGE are not just undoing decades of privacy measures. They appear to be ignoring that they were ever written. Over and over, the federal experts we spoke with insisted that the very idea of connecting federal data is anathema."
"Musk has said that his goal with DOGE is to serve his country. He says he wants to “end the tyranny of bureaucracy.” But around Washington, people are asking one another what he /really /wants with all those data. Keys to the federal dataverse could, for example, be extremely useful to a highly ambitious man who is aggressively trying to win the AI race.
"We already know that Musk’s people have access to large swaths of
information from federal agencies—what we don’t know is what they’ve copied, exfiltrated, or otherwise taken with them. In theory, this material, whether usable together or not, could be recombined with other identifying information from private companies for all kinds of purposes. There has been speculation already that it could be fed into third-party large language models to train them or make the information more usable (Musk’s xAI has its own model, Grok); outside firms could use their own technologies to make sense of disparate sets of data, as well. Such approaches, the federal workers told us, could make it easier to turn previously obfuscated information, such as the individual elements of a tax return, into something to be mined."
"The thought that the government would centralize or even give away citizen data for private use is scandalous. But it’s also, in a way, expected. The Vietnam War and Watergate gave Americans reasons to believe that the government can’t be trusted. The Cold War issued a constant, decades-long threat of annihilation and the necessary surveillance to avoid it. The War on Terror extended the logic into the 21st century. Optical, recording, and then computer technologies arose, offering new ways to watch the public. During the 2010s, Edward Snowden’s NSA surveillance leaks took place, and the Facebook–Cambridge Analytica scandal was brewing. By then, the 20th-century assumption that U.S. intelligence agencies were running mind-control experiments, infiltrating and disrupting civil-rights groups, or carrying out surreptitious missions at home like they do abroad had been fully internalized, and fused with the suspicion that Google, Facebook, Amazon, and Walmart were—in their own ways—following suit."
Buona lettura,
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2025/04/american- panopticon/682616/ archive/2025/04/american-panopticon/682616/>
F.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/federicoguerrini/ sites/federicoguerrini/>
-- You can reach me on Signal: @quinta.01 (no Whatsapp, no Telegram) http://www.forbes.com/sites/federicoguerrini/ https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/our-research/newsroom-curators-an... My latest book: Content Curation (Italian): http://www.amazon.it/Content-Curation-Federico-Guerrini/dp/8820366126