Kalev Leetaru, Forbes; Should Open Access And Open Data Come With Open Ethics?
"In the end, the academic community must decide if “openness” and “transparency” apply only to the final outputs of our scholarly institutions, with individual researchers, many from fields without histories of ethical prereview, are exclusively empowered to decide what constitutes ethical and moral conduct and just how much privacy should be permitted in our digital society, or if we should add “open ethics” to our focus on open access and open data and open universities up to public discourse on just what the future of “big data” research should look like."
Friday, July 21, 2017
Thursday, July 20, 2017
No, President Trump, Sessions’s recusal is not ‘very unfair’ to you. This is Ethics 101.; Washington Post, July 20, 2017
Ruth Marcus, Washington Post; No, President Trump, Sessions’s recusal is not ‘very unfair’ to you. This is Ethics 101.
"So Sessions’s situation and the question of whether he could oversee the Russia investigation doesn’t present a close call. As Sessions told the Senate Intelligence Committee last month, “That regulation states, in effect, that department employees should not participate in investigations of a campaign if they have served as a campaign advisor.” In other words, it’s a no-brainer, at least if you understand basic concepts of conflict of interest. What Trump perceives as betrayal is Ethics 101."
"So Sessions’s situation and the question of whether he could oversee the Russia investigation doesn’t present a close call. As Sessions told the Senate Intelligence Committee last month, “That regulation states, in effect, that department employees should not participate in investigations of a campaign if they have served as a campaign advisor.” In other words, it’s a no-brainer, at least if you understand basic concepts of conflict of interest. What Trump perceives as betrayal is Ethics 101."
How the Cleveland Clinic grows healthier while its neighbors stay sick; Politico, July 17, 2017
Dan Diamond, Politico; How the Cleveland Clinic grows healthier while its neighbors stay sick
"There’s an uneasy relationship between the Clinic — the second-biggest employer in Ohio and one of the greatest hospitals in the world — and the community around it. Yes, the hospital is the pride of Cleveland, and its leaders readily tout reports that the Clinic delivers billions of dollars in value to the state. It’s even “attracting companies that will come and grow up around us,” said Toby Cosgrove, the longtime CEO, pointing to IBM’s decision to lease a building on the edge of campus. “That will be great [for] jobs and economic infusion in this area.”
But it’s also a tax-exempt organization that, like many hospitals, fought to preserve its not-for-profit status in the years leading up to the Affordable Care Act. As a result, it doesn’t have to pay tens of millions of dollars in taxes, but it is supposed to fulfill a loosely defined commitment to reinvest in its community.
That community is poor, unhealthy and — in the words of one national neighborhood-ranking website — “barely livable.”"
"There’s an uneasy relationship between the Clinic — the second-biggest employer in Ohio and one of the greatest hospitals in the world — and the community around it. Yes, the hospital is the pride of Cleveland, and its leaders readily tout reports that the Clinic delivers billions of dollars in value to the state. It’s even “attracting companies that will come and grow up around us,” said Toby Cosgrove, the longtime CEO, pointing to IBM’s decision to lease a building on the edge of campus. “That will be great [for] jobs and economic infusion in this area.”
But it’s also a tax-exempt organization that, like many hospitals, fought to preserve its not-for-profit status in the years leading up to the Affordable Care Act. As a result, it doesn’t have to pay tens of millions of dollars in taxes, but it is supposed to fulfill a loosely defined commitment to reinvest in its community.
That community is poor, unhealthy and — in the words of one national neighborhood-ranking website — “barely livable.”"
'We are all mutants now': the trouble with genetic testing; Guardian, July 18, 2017
Carrie Arnold, Guardian; 'We are all mutants now': the trouble with genetic testing
"To get a better handle on all the variation in humans, scientists are going to need to sequence tens of millions of people. And the only way to ever get these kinds of large numbers is by sharing data. But regardless of how good the databases get, and how many people have their genomes sequenced, uncertainty will never completely go away."
"To get a better handle on all the variation in humans, scientists are going to need to sequence tens of millions of people. And the only way to ever get these kinds of large numbers is by sharing data. But regardless of how good the databases get, and how many people have their genomes sequenced, uncertainty will never completely go away."
Israeli student admits stealing items from Auschwitz for art project; Guardian, July 19, 2017
Peter Beaumont, Guardian; Israeli student admits stealing items from Auschwitz for art project
"“I felt it was something I had to do. Millions of people were murdered based on the moral laws of a certain country, under a certain regime. And if these are the laws, I can go there and act according to my own laws. The statement I’m making here is that laws are determined by humans, and that morality is something that changes from time to time and from culture to culture.
“These are the things I want to deal with. I am a third generation to the Holocaust, but I’m not saying I’m allowed to do it because my grandfather was in Auschwitz. I’m simply asking the questions. I’m concerned that after all the survivors are gone, the Holocaust will turn into a myth, something that cannot be perceived.”
Her academic supervisor, Israel prize-winning artist Michal Na’aman, appeared to go some way towards justifying Bides’s action in the same publication."
"“I felt it was something I had to do. Millions of people were murdered based on the moral laws of a certain country, under a certain regime. And if these are the laws, I can go there and act according to my own laws. The statement I’m making here is that laws are determined by humans, and that morality is something that changes from time to time and from culture to culture.
“These are the things I want to deal with. I am a third generation to the Holocaust, but I’m not saying I’m allowed to do it because my grandfather was in Auschwitz. I’m simply asking the questions. I’m concerned that after all the survivors are gone, the Holocaust will turn into a myth, something that cannot be perceived.”
Her academic supervisor, Israel prize-winning artist Michal Na’aman, appeared to go some way towards justifying Bides’s action in the same publication."
Wednesday, July 19, 2017
How to make sure we all benefit when nonprofits patent technologies like CRISPR; The Conversation via The Associated Press via WTOP, July 19, 2017
The Conversation via The Associated Press via WTOP; How to make sure we all benefit when nonprofits patent technologies like CRISPR
"(The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.)
"(The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.)
Shobita Parthasarathy, University of Michigan
(THE CONVERSATION) Universities and other nonprofit research institutions are under increasing fire about their commitments to the public interest. In return for tax-exempt status, their work is supposed to benefit society.
But are they really operating in the public interest when they wield their patent rights in ways that constrict research? Or when potentially lifesaving inventions are priced so high that access is limited? The public partially underwrites nonprofit discoveries via tax breaks and isn’t seeing a lot of benefit in return.
Questions like these arose recently in the case of CRISPR, the promising new gene-editing technology. After patenting it, the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard sold the exclusive right to develop CRISPR-based therapies to its sister company Editas Medicine. Critics worry that this monopoly could limit important research and result in exorbitant prices on emerging treatments."
Tuesday, July 18, 2017
Walter Shaub: How to Restore Government Ethics in the Trump Era; New York Times, July 18, 2017
Walter M. Shaub Jr., New York Times; Walter Shaub: How to Restore Government Ethics in the Trump Era
"The Office of Government Ethics needs greater authority to obtain information from the executive branch, including the White House. The White House and agencies lacking inspectors general need investigative oversight, which should be coordinated with O.G.E. The ethics office needs more independence, including authority to communicate directly with Congress on budgetary and legislative matters. Because we can no longer rely on presidents to comply voluntarily with ethical norms, we need new laws to address their conflicts of interest, their receipt of compensation for the use of their names while in office, nepotism and the release of tax forms. Transparency should be increased through laws mandating creation and release of documents related to divestitures, recusals, waivers and training. Disclosure requirements can be refined and the revolving door tightened. These changes would give O.G.E. the tools it needs to address the current challenges and, perhaps more importantly, reinforce for presidents the importance of setting a strong ethical tone from the top."
"The Office of Government Ethics needs greater authority to obtain information from the executive branch, including the White House. The White House and agencies lacking inspectors general need investigative oversight, which should be coordinated with O.G.E. The ethics office needs more independence, including authority to communicate directly with Congress on budgetary and legislative matters. Because we can no longer rely on presidents to comply voluntarily with ethical norms, we need new laws to address their conflicts of interest, their receipt of compensation for the use of their names while in office, nepotism and the release of tax forms. Transparency should be increased through laws mandating creation and release of documents related to divestitures, recusals, waivers and training. Disclosure requirements can be refined and the revolving door tightened. These changes would give O.G.E. the tools it needs to address the current challenges and, perhaps more importantly, reinforce for presidents the importance of setting a strong ethical tone from the top."
California Vote on Internet Privacy Could Have Big Impact on Other States; Consumer Reports, July 17, 2017
Allen St. John, Consumer Reports; California Vote on Internet Privacy Could Have Big Impact on Other States
"What’s at stake for consumers? The bedrock question of whether the company you pay for internet service can boost revenues by selling or otherwise sharing information on what you do online.
This privacy battle is likely to affect consumers across the country, regardless of whether they live in California or one of the 20 or so other states considering expanded data privacy protections."
"What’s at stake for consumers? The bedrock question of whether the company you pay for internet service can boost revenues by selling or otherwise sharing information on what you do online.
This privacy battle is likely to affect consumers across the country, regardless of whether they live in California or one of the 20 or so other states considering expanded data privacy protections."
The moving target of ethics; Idaho State Journal, July 17, 2017
Jeff Hough, Idaho State Journal; The moving target of ethics
"An easy way to determine ethical behavior is to ask, “Who benefits?” If actions benefit an individual more than the whole, the behavior is unethical. It is unethical regardless of viewpoint because the behavior is selfish. Unselfish behavior is rarely unethical.
The essential part of ethics is to maintain your integrity and act accordingly as situations change. As a person grows and matures, perspectives can and should change. That is part of the growth process. Yet, in the end, the question of does this specific end justify this specific means holds true. That is what ethics is all about."
"An easy way to determine ethical behavior is to ask, “Who benefits?” If actions benefit an individual more than the whole, the behavior is unethical. It is unethical regardless of viewpoint because the behavior is selfish. Unselfish behavior is rarely unethical.
The essential part of ethics is to maintain your integrity and act accordingly as situations change. As a person grows and matures, perspectives can and should change. That is part of the growth process. Yet, in the end, the question of does this specific end justify this specific means holds true. That is what ethics is all about."
Major German Universities Cancel Elsevier Contracts; The Scientist, July 17, 2017
Diana Kwon, The Scientist; Major German Universities Cancel Elsevier Contracts
"In Germany, the fight for open access and favorable pricing for journals is getting heated. At the end of last month (June 30), four major academic institutions in Berlin announced that they would not renew their subscriptions with the Dutch publishing giant Elsevier once they end this December. Then on July 7, nine universities in Baden-Württemberg, another large German state, also declared their intention to cancel their contracts with the publisher at the end of 2017.
"In Germany, the fight for open access and favorable pricing for journals is getting heated. At the end of last month (June 30), four major academic institutions in Berlin announced that they would not renew their subscriptions with the Dutch publishing giant Elsevier once they end this December. Then on July 7, nine universities in Baden-Württemberg, another large German state, also declared their intention to cancel their contracts with the publisher at the end of 2017.
These institutions join around 60 others across the country that allowed their contracts to expire last year.
The decision to cancel subscriptions was made in order to put pressure on Elsevier during ongoing negotiations. “Nobody wants Elsevier to starve—they should be paid fairly for their good service,” says Ursula Flitner, the head of the medical library at Charité–Berlin University of Medicine. “The problem is, we no longer see what their good service is.”
Charité–Berlin University of Medicine is joined by Humboldt University of Berlin, Free University of Berlin, and Technical University of Berlin in letting its Elsevier subscriptions lapse.
“The general issue is that large parts of the research done is publicly funded, the type setting and quality control [peer review] is done by people who are paid by the public, [and] the purchase of the journals is also paid by the public,” says Christian Thomsen, the president of the Technical University of Berlin. “So it’s a bit too much payment.”
Project DEAL, an alliance of German institutions led by the Hochschulrektorenkonferenz (German Rectors’ Conference), has been working to establish a new nationwide licensing agreement with three major scientific publishers, Elsevier, Springer Nature, and Wiley, since 2016."
How Trump Broke the Office of Government Ethics; New Yorker, July 14, 2017
Ryan Lizza, New Yorker; How Trump Broke the Office of Government Ethics
"While many Administration officials took Shaub’s advice, Trump’s refusal to voluntarily adhere to traditional conflict-of-interest rules, and Shaub’s repeated fights with the White House over ethics agreements and transparency, convinced Shaub that Trump was trampling the norms that the last several Administrations voluntarily maintained. “With the White House appointees and other things the White House has been involved in, they stripped all the meat off those bones and it’s just the skeleton,” he said.
In Shaub’s experience, most of the time he could convince reluctant officials in the George W. Bush and Barack Obama Administrations to take actions that went beyond statutes by appealing to their sense of ethics, going to their superiors, or, in extreme circumstances, going to the press.
“It’s been a very nuanced art that is based more on persuasion than actual legal authority,” he said, “but there were so many times that I could call up the Bush or Obama White House and I could say, ‘This just isn’t working,’ or ‘These guys won’t do what I say,’ and they would intervene and break the logjam and usually come down on my side and push people to do things.”
With the Trump Administration, it has been different. “I don’t have that in this Administration. And I guess what is being exposed is the emperor has no clothes,” Shaub told me. “To have O.G.E. criticize you would have been a career-ender in the olden days—now it’s just lost in the noise.”
The depressing lesson Shaub learned is that in the Trump era, with a politically polarized electorate and media, the shaming effect of the government’s top ethics watchdog going public no longer had the same impact. Shaub used Twitter, a press conference, and an extremely transparent foia policy to shame the White House on several major issues, but he rarely convinced Trump and his top White House aides to do more than the bare minimum. And as the Administration has done on so many other occasions, it vehemently denied that it was doing anything wrong.
It didn’t break the ethics laws—it broke the ethical norms."
"While many Administration officials took Shaub’s advice, Trump’s refusal to voluntarily adhere to traditional conflict-of-interest rules, and Shaub’s repeated fights with the White House over ethics agreements and transparency, convinced Shaub that Trump was trampling the norms that the last several Administrations voluntarily maintained. “With the White House appointees and other things the White House has been involved in, they stripped all the meat off those bones and it’s just the skeleton,” he said.
In Shaub’s experience, most of the time he could convince reluctant officials in the George W. Bush and Barack Obama Administrations to take actions that went beyond statutes by appealing to their sense of ethics, going to their superiors, or, in extreme circumstances, going to the press.
“It’s been a very nuanced art that is based more on persuasion than actual legal authority,” he said, “but there were so many times that I could call up the Bush or Obama White House and I could say, ‘This just isn’t working,’ or ‘These guys won’t do what I say,’ and they would intervene and break the logjam and usually come down on my side and push people to do things.”
With the Trump Administration, it has been different. “I don’t have that in this Administration. And I guess what is being exposed is the emperor has no clothes,” Shaub told me. “To have O.G.E. criticize you would have been a career-ender in the olden days—now it’s just lost in the noise.”
The depressing lesson Shaub learned is that in the Trump era, with a politically polarized electorate and media, the shaming effect of the government’s top ethics watchdog going public no longer had the same impact. Shaub used Twitter, a press conference, and an extremely transparent foia policy to shame the White House on several major issues, but he rarely convinced Trump and his top White House aides to do more than the bare minimum. And as the Administration has done on so many other occasions, it vehemently denied that it was doing anything wrong.
It didn’t break the ethics laws—it broke the ethical norms."
The Trumps and the Truth; Wall Street Journal, July 17, 2017
Editorial Board, Wall Street Journal; The Trumps and the Truth
"Even Donald Trump might agree that a major reason he won the 2016 election is because voters couldn’t abide Hillary Clinton’s legacy of scandal, deception and stonewalling. Yet on the story of Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election, Mr. Trump and his family are repeating mistakes that doomed Mrs. Clinton."
"Even Donald Trump might agree that a major reason he won the 2016 election is because voters couldn’t abide Hillary Clinton’s legacy of scandal, deception and stonewalling. Yet on the story of Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election, Mr. Trump and his family are repeating mistakes that doomed Mrs. Clinton."
FBI Public Service Announcement: CONSUMER NOTICE: INTERNET-CONNECTED TOYS COULD PRESENT PRIVACY AND CONTACT CONCERNS FOR CHILDREN, July 17, 2017
July 17, 2017
Alert Number
I-071717-PSA
Questions regarding this PSA should be directed to your local FBI Field Office.
Local Field Office Locations: www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field
Local Field Office Locations: www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field
CONSUMER NOTICE: INTERNET-CONNECTED TOYS COULD PRESENT PRIVACY AND CONTACT CONCERNS FOR CHILDREN
The FBI encourages consumers to consider cyber security prior to introducing smart, interactive, internet-connected toys into their homes or trusted environments. Smart toys and entertainment devices for children are increasingly incorporating technologies that learn and tailor their behaviors based on user interactions. These toys typically contain sensors, microphones, cameras, data storage components, and other multimedia capabilities – including speech recognition and GPS options. These features could put the privacy and safety of children at risk due to the large amount of personal information that may be unwittingly disclosed.WHY DOES THIS MATTER TO MY FAMILY?
The features and functions of different toys vary widely. In some cases, toys with microphones could record and collect conversations within earshot of the device. Information such as the child’s name, school, likes and dislikes, and activities may be disclosed through normal conversation with the toy or in the surrounding environment. The collection of a child’s personal information combined with a toy’s ability to connect to the Internet or other devices raises concerns for privacy and physical safety. Personal information (e.g., name, date of birth, pictures, address) is typically provided when creating user accounts. In addition, companies collect large amounts of additional data, such as voice messages, conversation recordings, past and real-time physical locations, Internet use history, and Internet addresses/IPs. The exposure of such information could create opportunities for child identity fraud. Additionally, the potential misuse of sensitive data such as GPS location information, visual identifiers from pictures or videos, and known interests to garner trust from a child could present exploitation risks.Consumers should examine toy company user agreement disclosures and privacy practices, and should know where their family’s personal data is sent and stored, including if it’s sent to third-party services. Security safeguards for these toys can be overlooked in the rush to market them and to make them easy to use. Consumers should perform online research of these products for any known issues that have been identified by security researchers or in consumer reports.
WHAT MAKES INTERNET-CONNECTED TOYS VULNERABLE?
Data collected from interactions or conversations between children and toys are typically sent and stored by the manufacturer or developer via server or cloud service. In some cases, it is also collected by third-party companies who manage the voice recognition software used in the toys. Voice recordings, toy Web application (parent app) passwords, home addresses, Wi-Fi information, or sensitive personal data could be exposed if the security of the data is not sufficiently protected with the proper use of digital certificates and encryption when it is being transmitted or stored.Smart toys generally connect to the Internet either:
- Directly, through Wi-Fi to an Internet-connected wireless access point; or
- Indirectly, via Bluetooth to an Android or iOS device that is connected to the Internet.
WHAT CONSUMER LAWS EXIST TO PROTECT MY CHILDREN?
The Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) imposes requirements on Web site and online service operators directed to children under the age of 13 and on operators of other sites and services who knowingly collect personal online information on children under 13 (for further details on COPPA and protecting children online, refer tohttps://www.consumer.ftc.gov/topics/protecting-kids-online). On 21 June 2017, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) updated its guidance for companies required to comply with COPPA to ensure those companies implement key protections with respect to Internet-connected toys and associated services, to include the use of mobile apps, Internet-enabled location-based services, and voice-over IP services (https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/blogs/business-blog/2017/06/ftc-updates-coppa-compliance-plan-business). In addition, a manufacturer’s failure to implement reasonable security measures for data collected by its Internet-connected toys could subject that company to an FTCenforcement action under Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, which prohibits unfair or deceptive practices in the marketplace. The FBI is encouraging all consumers to research areas and circumstances concerning the toys and Web services where laws may or may not provide coverage.WHAT SHOULD I DO?
The FBI encourages consumers to consider the following recommendations, at a minimum, prior to using Internet-connected toys.- Research for any known reported security issues online to include, but not limited to:
- Only connect and use toys in environments with trusted and secured Wi-Fi Internet access
- Research the toy’s Internet and device connection security measures
- Use authentication when pairing the device with Bluetooth (via PIN code or password)
- Use encryption when transmitting data from the toy to the Wi-Fi access point and to the server or cloud
- Research if your toys can receive firmware and/or software updates and security patches
- If they can, ensure your toys are running on the most updated versions and any available patches are implemented
- Research where user data is stored – with the company, third party services, or both – and whether any publicly available reporting exists on their reputation and posture for cyber security
- Carefully read disclosures and privacy policies (from company and any third parties) and consider the following:
- If the company is victimized by a cyber-attack and your data may have been exposed, will the company notify you?
- If vulnerabilities to the toy are discovered, will the company notify you?
- Where is your data being stored?
- Who has access to your data?
- If changes are made to the disclosure and privacy policies, will the company notify you?
- Is the company contact information openly available in case you have questions or concerns?
- Closely monitor children’s activity with the toys (such as conversations and voice recordings) through the toy’s partner parent application, if such features are available
- Ensure the toy is turned off, particularly those with microphones and cameras, when not in use
- Use strong and unique login passwords when creating user accounts (e.g., lower and upper case letters, numbers, and special characters)
- Provide only what is minimally required when inputting information for user accounts (e.g., some services offer additional features if birthdays or information on a child’s preferences are provided)
FBI to parents: Beware, your kid's smart toy could be a security risk; ZDNet, July 18, 2017
Liam Tung, ZDNet; FBI to parents: Beware, your kid's smart toy could be a security risk
"The FBI has warned parents that internet-connected toys could pose privacy and "contact concerns" for children.
The FBI on Monday released a public service announcement (PSA) warning that smart toy sensors such as microphones, cameras and GPS, raise a concern for the "privacy and physical safety" of children.
"These features could put the privacy and safety of children at risk due to the large amount of personal information that may be unwittingly disclosed," it warns.
It highlights that toys can collect the child's name, school, preferences and activities when conversing with the toy or talking near it."
"The FBI has warned parents that internet-connected toys could pose privacy and "contact concerns" for children.
The FBI on Monday released a public service announcement (PSA) warning that smart toy sensors such as microphones, cameras and GPS, raise a concern for the "privacy and physical safety" of children.
"These features could put the privacy and safety of children at risk due to the large amount of personal information that may be unwittingly disclosed," it warns.
It highlights that toys can collect the child's name, school, preferences and activities when conversing with the toy or talking near it."
What the Enron E-mails Say About Us; New Yorker, July 24 Issue
Nathan Heller, New Yorker; What the Enron E-mails Say About Us
"Small, sometimes moving dramas unwind in the folders of sent mail. In May, 2001, a trader who is given to enthusiastic, exclamation-laden e-mails tells a friend that it’s already getting hot in Houston, which is a pain, because he’s begun jogging again, to lose 8.5 pounds. He has just been through a breakup. A vice-president is having a custody battle in September, 2001, and sends a legal aide a frenzied, unedited, and wrenching plea: “How can she be aloud to keep me from my son?” Some of the most interesting messages were never meant for anyone else’s eyes. That same jogger, still romantically at loose ends, e-mails his Hotmail account a link to workouts on fitnessheaven.com. An employee on the legal team sends his personal AOL account a joke he may have found worth mastering. (“Moses, Jesus and an old man are golfing,” it begins.) “Do you know what’s included in Enron’s Code of Ethics?” an e-mail advertising an in-house informational event prompts. “Do you know what policies affect corporate conduct? Ask Sharon Butcher, Assistant General Counsel of Corporate Legal, all your questions about our corporate policies today.” The message was sent on June 5, 2001. Ten weeks later, Jeffrey Skilling resigned as president and C.E.O. A programmed search could find this e-mail, but it wouldn’t be able to locate the irony. For this, we need the same human instrument—faulty, romantic, and duplicitous—that brought Enron to that self-defeating point."
"Small, sometimes moving dramas unwind in the folders of sent mail. In May, 2001, a trader who is given to enthusiastic, exclamation-laden e-mails tells a friend that it’s already getting hot in Houston, which is a pain, because he’s begun jogging again, to lose 8.5 pounds. He has just been through a breakup. A vice-president is having a custody battle in September, 2001, and sends a legal aide a frenzied, unedited, and wrenching plea: “How can she be aloud to keep me from my son?” Some of the most interesting messages were never meant for anyone else’s eyes. That same jogger, still romantically at loose ends, e-mails his Hotmail account a link to workouts on fitnessheaven.com. An employee on the legal team sends his personal AOL account a joke he may have found worth mastering. (“Moses, Jesus and an old man are golfing,” it begins.) “Do you know what’s included in Enron’s Code of Ethics?” an e-mail advertising an in-house informational event prompts. “Do you know what policies affect corporate conduct? Ask Sharon Butcher, Assistant General Counsel of Corporate Legal, all your questions about our corporate policies today.” The message was sent on June 5, 2001. Ten weeks later, Jeffrey Skilling resigned as president and C.E.O. A programmed search could find this e-mail, but it wouldn’t be able to locate the irony. For this, we need the same human instrument—faulty, romantic, and duplicitous—that brought Enron to that self-defeating point."
Escaping Big Pharma’s Pricing With Patent-Free Drugs; New York Times, July 18, 2017
Fran Quigley, New York Times; Escaping Big Pharma’s Pricing With Patent-Free Drugs
"Although President Trump said before taking office that drug companies were “getting away with murder” and had campaigned on lowering drug prices, his administration is doing the opposite. A draft order on drug pricing that became public in June would grant pharmaceutical companies even more power to charge exorbitantly. For example, it could shrink a federal program that requires companies to sell at a discount to clinics and hospitals serving low-income patients.
Exorbitant prices are one thing that’s very wrong with the way we make medicines. The other is: medicines for what? If a malady has no market in wealthy countries, it gets no attention. Poor-country diseases, known as “neglected diseases,” have a ferocious impact: One of every six people in the world, including a half-billion children, suffers from neglected diseases. Yet of the 756 new drugs approved between 2001 and 2011, less than 4 percent targeted those diseases. The industry spends far more on lobbying government agencies to extend monopolies on high-cost drugs — or hand out deals like the Zika vaccine — than it does on research for a vaccine against dengue fever, which poses a risk for 40 percent of the world’s population.
But there’s one drug company that behaves differently."
"Although President Trump said before taking office that drug companies were “getting away with murder” and had campaigned on lowering drug prices, his administration is doing the opposite. A draft order on drug pricing that became public in June would grant pharmaceutical companies even more power to charge exorbitantly. For example, it could shrink a federal program that requires companies to sell at a discount to clinics and hospitals serving low-income patients.
Exorbitant prices are one thing that’s very wrong with the way we make medicines. The other is: medicines for what? If a malady has no market in wealthy countries, it gets no attention. Poor-country diseases, known as “neglected diseases,” have a ferocious impact: One of every six people in the world, including a half-billion children, suffers from neglected diseases. Yet of the 756 new drugs approved between 2001 and 2011, less than 4 percent targeted those diseases. The industry spends far more on lobbying government agencies to extend monopolies on high-cost drugs — or hand out deals like the Zika vaccine — than it does on research for a vaccine against dengue fever, which poses a risk for 40 percent of the world’s population.
But there’s one drug company that behaves differently."
Monday, July 17, 2017
Outgoing Ethics Chief: U.S. Is ‘Close to a Laughingstock’; New York Times, July 17, 2017
Eric Lipton and Nicholas Fandos, New York Times; Outgoing Ethics Chief: U.S. Is ‘Close to a Laughingstock’
"Walter M. Shaub Jr., who is resigning as the federal government’s top ethics watchdog on Tuesday, said the Trump administration had flouted or directly challenged long-accepted norms in a way that threatened to undermine the United States’ ethical standards, which have been admired around the world.
“It’s hard for the United States to pursue international anticorruption and ethics initiatives when we’re not even keeping our own side of the street clean. It affects our credibility,” Mr. Shaub said in a two-hour interview this past weekend — a weekend Mr. Trump let the world know he was spending at a family-owned golf club that was being paid to host the U.S. Women’s Open tournament. “I think we are pretty close to a laughingstock at this point.”
Mr. Shaub called for nearly a dozen legal changes to strengthen the federal ethics system: changes that, in many cases, he had not considered necessary before Mr. Trump’s election. Every other president since the 1970s, Republican or Democrat, worked closely with the ethics office, he said."
"Walter M. Shaub Jr., who is resigning as the federal government’s top ethics watchdog on Tuesday, said the Trump administration had flouted or directly challenged long-accepted norms in a way that threatened to undermine the United States’ ethical standards, which have been admired around the world.
“It’s hard for the United States to pursue international anticorruption and ethics initiatives when we’re not even keeping our own side of the street clean. It affects our credibility,” Mr. Shaub said in a two-hour interview this past weekend — a weekend Mr. Trump let the world know he was spending at a family-owned golf club that was being paid to host the U.S. Women’s Open tournament. “I think we are pretty close to a laughingstock at this point.”
Mr. Shaub called for nearly a dozen legal changes to strengthen the federal ethics system: changes that, in many cases, he had not considered necessary before Mr. Trump’s election. Every other president since the 1970s, Republican or Democrat, worked closely with the ethics office, he said."
Sunday, July 16, 2017
How can we stop algorithms telling lies?; Guardian, July 16, 2017
Cathy O'Neil, Guardian;
[Kip Currier: Cathy O'Neil is shining much-needed light on the little-known but influential power of algorithms on key aspects of our lives. I'm using her thought-provoking 2016 Weapons of Math Destruction: How Big Data Increases Inequality And Threatens Democracy as one of several required reading texts in my Information Ethics graduate course at the University of Pittsburgh's School of Computing and Information.]
"A proliferation of silent and undetectable car crashes is harder to investigate than when it happens in plain sight.
I’d still maintain there’s hope. One of the miracles of being a data sceptic in a land of data evangelists is that people are so impressed with their technology, even when it is unintentionally creating harm, they openly describe how amazing it is. And the fact that we’ve already come across quite a few examples of algorithmic harm means that, as secret and opaque as these algorithms are, they’re eventually going to be discovered, albeit after they’ve caused a lot of trouble.
What does this mean for the future? First and foremost, we need to start keeping track. Each criminal algorithm we discover should be seen as a test case. Do the rule-breakers get into trouble? How much? Are the rules enforced, and what is the penalty? As we learned after the 2008 financial crisis, a rule is ignored if the penalty for breaking it is less than the profit pocketed. And that goes double for a broken rule that is only discovered half the time...
It’s time to gird ourselves for a fight. It will eventually be a technological arms race, but it starts, now, as a political fight. We need to demand evidence that algorithms with the potential to harm us be shown to be acting fairly, legally, and consistently. When we find problems, we need to enforce our laws with sufficiently hefty fines that companies don’t find it profitable to cheat in the first place. This is the time to start demanding that the machines work for us, and not the other way around."
How can we stop algorithms telling lies?
[Kip Currier: Cathy O'Neil is shining much-needed light on the little-known but influential power of algorithms on key aspects of our lives. I'm using her thought-provoking 2016 Weapons of Math Destruction: How Big Data Increases Inequality And Threatens Democracy as one of several required reading texts in my Information Ethics graduate course at the University of Pittsburgh's School of Computing and Information.]
"A proliferation of silent and undetectable car crashes is harder to investigate than when it happens in plain sight.
I’d still maintain there’s hope. One of the miracles of being a data sceptic in a land of data evangelists is that people are so impressed with their technology, even when it is unintentionally creating harm, they openly describe how amazing it is. And the fact that we’ve already come across quite a few examples of algorithmic harm means that, as secret and opaque as these algorithms are, they’re eventually going to be discovered, albeit after they’ve caused a lot of trouble.
What does this mean for the future? First and foremost, we need to start keeping track. Each criminal algorithm we discover should be seen as a test case. Do the rule-breakers get into trouble? How much? Are the rules enforced, and what is the penalty? As we learned after the 2008 financial crisis, a rule is ignored if the penalty for breaking it is less than the profit pocketed. And that goes double for a broken rule that is only discovered half the time...
It’s time to gird ourselves for a fight. It will eventually be a technological arms race, but it starts, now, as a political fight. We need to demand evidence that algorithms with the potential to harm us be shown to be acting fairly, legally, and consistently. When we find problems, we need to enforce our laws with sufficiently hefty fines that companies don’t find it profitable to cheat in the first place. This is the time to start demanding that the machines work for us, and not the other way around."
How They Justify Collusion; Slate, July 15, 2017
William Saletan, Slate; How They Justify Collusion
"The meeting remained secret until this week, when its details and the emails were leaked to the New York Times. In response, Trump, his aides, and their allies in the right-wing media have presented a flurry of excuses. The excuses are even more damning than the emails. They expose the nihilism of the Trump family and its allies. Here’s the list..."
Saturday, July 15, 2017
Ramzan Kadyrov says there are no gay men in Chechnya — and if there are any, they should move to Canada; Washington Post, July 15, 2017
Adam Taylor, Washington Post; Ramzan Kadyrov says there are no gay men in Chechnya — and if there are any, they should move to Canada
[Kip Currier: Kudos to brave and principled journalists around the world for raising awareness of untold examples of barbarism and ignorance, giving voice to those who suffer and are often silenced and unrecognized. Humankind is indebted to you for your important work.]
"“This is nonsense,” Kadyrov said when asked about the allegations. “We don't have those kinds of people here. We don't have any gays. If there are any, take them to Canada.”
“Praise be to god,” the Chechen leader adds. “Take them far from us so we don't have them at home. To purify our blood, if there are any here, take them.”
Kadyrov's comments came during an interview with HBO reporter David Scott for the show “Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel.” The interview is just one part of a broader package that will air at 10 p.m. Eastern time on Tuesday about how Kadyrov is using mixed martial arts (MMA) to spread a political message overseas...
In his interview with Scott, Kadyrov initially laughs dismissively at questions about the allegations. “Why did he come here?” he says to someone off camera. “What's the point of these questions?” But as Scott presses him, Kadyrov talks angrily about the reporters and activists who write about LGBT rights in Chechnya.
“They are devils. They are for sale. They are not people,” he says. “God damn them for what they are accusing us of. They will have to answer to the almighty for this.”
Elena Milashina, one of the two Novaya Gazeta reporters who broke the story, told WorldViews in April that she had gone into hiding after threats against her newspaper's staff from religious leaders in Chechnya. “It reminds us of the situation with Charlie Hebdo,” Milashina said, referring to the satirical French newspaper that was attacked by Islamist militant gunmen in 2015, resulting in the deaths of 12."
[Kip Currier: Kudos to brave and principled journalists around the world for raising awareness of untold examples of barbarism and ignorance, giving voice to those who suffer and are often silenced and unrecognized. Humankind is indebted to you for your important work.]
"“This is nonsense,” Kadyrov said when asked about the allegations. “We don't have those kinds of people here. We don't have any gays. If there are any, take them to Canada.”
“Praise be to god,” the Chechen leader adds. “Take them far from us so we don't have them at home. To purify our blood, if there are any here, take them.”
Kadyrov's comments came during an interview with HBO reporter David Scott for the show “Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel.” The interview is just one part of a broader package that will air at 10 p.m. Eastern time on Tuesday about how Kadyrov is using mixed martial arts (MMA) to spread a political message overseas...
In his interview with Scott, Kadyrov initially laughs dismissively at questions about the allegations. “Why did he come here?” he says to someone off camera. “What's the point of these questions?” But as Scott presses him, Kadyrov talks angrily about the reporters and activists who write about LGBT rights in Chechnya.
“They are devils. They are for sale. They are not people,” he says. “God damn them for what they are accusing us of. They will have to answer to the almighty for this.”
Elena Milashina, one of the two Novaya Gazeta reporters who broke the story, told WorldViews in April that she had gone into hiding after threats against her newspaper's staff from religious leaders in Chechnya. “It reminds us of the situation with Charlie Hebdo,” Milashina said, referring to the satirical French newspaper that was attacked by Islamist militant gunmen in 2015, resulting in the deaths of 12."
New Bill Aims To Prevent White House From Dodging The Free Press; HuffPost, July 13, 2017
HuffPost; New Bill Aims To Prevent White House From Dodging The Free Press
"A Connecticut representative has introduced a new bill Thursday that would require the White House to hold at least two televised press briefings per week, in response to the Trump administrations’s recent restrictions on press access.
“The Free Press Act,” sponsored by Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), comes in the wake of a series of White House actions that limit the media’s access to the executive. The White House has repeatedly prohibited news outlets from televising White House press briefings, and has increasingly communicated with reporters in restricted settings shielded from public view...
Himes noted that he did not expect the bill to garner much support from the Republican majority, but that he would keep pushing it.
“While a Republican might say, gosh this feels like it’s anti-Trump, it’s actually pro-transparency, it’s pro-democracy, and it would apply equally to future Democratic presidents as it does to this Republican president,” he said.
“When you’re talking about something as important as White House policy, I think it’s really important that American citizens can at least feel like they were in the room.”"
"A Connecticut representative has introduced a new bill Thursday that would require the White House to hold at least two televised press briefings per week, in response to the Trump administrations’s recent restrictions on press access.
“The Free Press Act,” sponsored by Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), comes in the wake of a series of White House actions that limit the media’s access to the executive. The White House has repeatedly prohibited news outlets from televising White House press briefings, and has increasingly communicated with reporters in restricted settings shielded from public view...
Himes noted that he did not expect the bill to garner much support from the Republican majority, but that he would keep pushing it.
“While a Republican might say, gosh this feels like it’s anti-Trump, it’s actually pro-transparency, it’s pro-democracy, and it would apply equally to future Democratic presidents as it does to this Republican president,” he said.
“When you’re talking about something as important as White House policy, I think it’s really important that American citizens can at least feel like they were in the room.”"
Friday, July 14, 2017
Face scans for US citizens flying abroad stir privacy issues; Associated Press via Hawaii News Now, July 12, 2017
Frank Bajak and David Koenig, Associated Press via Hawaii News Now; Face scans for US citizens flying abroad stir privacy issues
"During the trials, passengers will be able to opt out. But a DHS assessment of the privacy impact indicates that won't always be the case.
"During the trials, passengers will be able to opt out. But a DHS assessment of the privacy impact indicates that won't always be the case.
"The only way for an individual to ensure he or she is not subject to collection of biometric information when traveling internationally is to refrain from traveling," says the June 12 document on the website of Customs and Border Protection, which runs the DHS program...
Such concerns shouldn't stop the government from moving ahead with the program and U.S. citizens have already sacrificed considerable privacy as the price of fighting terrorists, said Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which promotes restrictions on immigration.
He called it a "moral and security imperative."
Vote Fraud Commission Releases Public Comments, Email Addresses And All; NPR, July 14, 2017
Scott Neuman, NPR; Vote Fraud Commission Releases Public Comments, Email Addresses And All
"The presidential commission investigating alleged election fraud has released 112 pages of unredacted emails of public comment, raising further privacy concerns amid a legal challenge to the panel's request for sensitive voter data.
In many cases, the emails, which are largely critical and often mocking of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity led by Vice President Pence and Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, contain expletives as well as the sender's email address.
"This cavalier attitude toward the public's personal information is especially concerning given the commission's request for sensitive data on every registered voter in the country," Theresa Lee, a staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union's Voting Rights Project, said.
However, the vice president's press secretary, Marc Lotter, in an email cited by The Washington Post, compared the comments to those of "individuals appearing before commission" who would submit their names before making comments."
"The presidential commission investigating alleged election fraud has released 112 pages of unredacted emails of public comment, raising further privacy concerns amid a legal challenge to the panel's request for sensitive voter data.
In many cases, the emails, which are largely critical and often mocking of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity led by Vice President Pence and Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, contain expletives as well as the sender's email address.
"This cavalier attitude toward the public's personal information is especially concerning given the commission's request for sensitive data on every registered voter in the country," Theresa Lee, a staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union's Voting Rights Project, said.
However, the vice president's press secretary, Marc Lotter, in an email cited by The Washington Post, compared the comments to those of "individuals appearing before commission" who would submit their names before making comments."
A patent lawyer switches teams; Crain's Chicago Business, July 8, 2017
Claire Bushey, Crain's Chicago Business; A patent lawyer switches teams
"Unlike a traditional law firm, Blackbird is structured as a limited liability company, not a partnership, and it has no clients. Instead, it acquires patents from inventors or small businesses. Blackbird then sues companies for patent infringement on its own behalf, and it shares an unspecified percentage of any settlement or judgment with the original patent owner.
Blackbird filed 107 lawsuits between September 2014 and May, including against Amazon, Fitbit, Netflix and kCura, a Chicago company that makes software used by law firms. It has settled with Amazon. The other three cases are ongoing.
Three months ago it sued San Francisco-based Cloudflare, and in May the website infrastructure company blasted Blackbird as "a dangerous new breed of patent troll" and launched a scorched-earth campaign against the 11-person business. Cloudflare, valued at $3.2 billion and with a seven-employee Champaign office, offered to the public a total of $50,000 for evidence that would invalidate any of 35 patents Blackbird holds. It also lodged ethics complaints with legal disciplinary bodies in Illinois and Massachusetts, and it was successful in prompting Illinois Rep. Keith Wheeler (R-Oswego) to introduce a bill that would outlaw Blackbird's business model...
A lawyer at Intel coined the epithet "patent troll" in 2001 to refer to Anthony Brown, a one-time Jenner & Block partner turned serial patent lawsuit filer, and his Chicago lawyer, the late Ray Niro. A troll asserts a patent of dubious quality, hoping the company will settle the infringement lawsuit quickly for maybe $50,000 to avoid spending millions on litigation. Detractors often slap the label on patent holders who do not manufacture a product, so-called nonpracticing entities."
"Unlike a traditional law firm, Blackbird is structured as a limited liability company, not a partnership, and it has no clients. Instead, it acquires patents from inventors or small businesses. Blackbird then sues companies for patent infringement on its own behalf, and it shares an unspecified percentage of any settlement or judgment with the original patent owner.
Blackbird filed 107 lawsuits between September 2014 and May, including against Amazon, Fitbit, Netflix and kCura, a Chicago company that makes software used by law firms. It has settled with Amazon. The other three cases are ongoing.
Three months ago it sued San Francisco-based Cloudflare, and in May the website infrastructure company blasted Blackbird as "a dangerous new breed of patent troll" and launched a scorched-earth campaign against the 11-person business. Cloudflare, valued at $3.2 billion and with a seven-employee Champaign office, offered to the public a total of $50,000 for evidence that would invalidate any of 35 patents Blackbird holds. It also lodged ethics complaints with legal disciplinary bodies in Illinois and Massachusetts, and it was successful in prompting Illinois Rep. Keith Wheeler (R-Oswego) to introduce a bill that would outlaw Blackbird's business model...
A lawyer at Intel coined the epithet "patent troll" in 2001 to refer to Anthony Brown, a one-time Jenner & Block partner turned serial patent lawsuit filer, and his Chicago lawyer, the late Ray Niro. A troll asserts a patent of dubious quality, hoping the company will settle the infringement lawsuit quickly for maybe $50,000 to avoid spending millions on litigation. Detractors often slap the label on patent holders who do not manufacture a product, so-called nonpracticing entities."
Toronto Public Library Refusing to Cancel Planned Neo-Nazi Gathering; Torontoist, July 12, 2017
Evan Balgord, Torontoist; Toronto Public Library Refusing to Cancel Planned Neo-Nazi Gathering
"Prominent members of Canada’s neo-Nazi movement are holding a memorial service at a Toronto Public Library branch tonight for Barbara Kulaszka—a lawyer who defended them in front of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal.
"Prominent members of Canada’s neo-Nazi movement are holding a memorial service at a Toronto Public Library branch tonight for Barbara Kulaszka—a lawyer who defended them in front of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal.
Jewish organizations want the Toronto Public Library to cancel the Richview Library booking, but, in an email, Ana-Maria Critchley, manager of stakeholder relations for the Toronto Public Library, tells Torontoist that’s not happening."
Letter to the Editor "Code Of Ethics", Press & Dakotan, July 13, 2017
Letter to the Editor, George Fournier MD, FACS, Yankton, Press & Dakotan,
Code Of Ethics
"With the current controversy surrounding the permitting of CAFOs [concentrated animal feeding operations] in Yankton County and concerns being voiced about the seeming unethical and almost subliminal way the commissioners and the zoning commission have relaxed zoning laws for proposed CAFOs, I asked the question: Is there a code of ethics and principles that Yankton County commissioners must adhere to in the performance of their duties as commissioners?
A Google search of the topic as well as a search of the county web site fails to specify the code. What is out there is a Commissioners Handbook, authored by the South Dakota Association of County Commissioners (SDACC). I read the second edition. The ethics section is on page 17.
Reading the section several times gives me the sinking feeling that there are potential ethical land mines faced by the commissioners. Two of the five commissioners are officers at a local bank, and a third is described in his bio on the commissioners’ website as, “He runs a diversified operations of alfalfa, soybeans, corn and hogs. Ray sits on many agricultural-related boards and is all about the future of the industry.” Really? Is he also all about the welfare of the citizens who elected him to office?
In the ethics section of the SDACC Commissioner’s Handbook on page 18: “… they should abstain from a vote on issues on which they would profit or enhance a relationship.” Clearly there are potential ethical issues facing our commissioners that need to be cleared up.
Should these three commissioners recuse themselves from voting on CAFO issues to avoid the appearance of impropriety or conflict of interest? It is unsettling to think that Yankton County commissioners could be blatantly violating the code of ethics suggested by their association."
Reading the section several times gives me the sinking feeling that there are potential ethical land mines faced by the commissioners. Two of the five commissioners are officers at a local bank, and a third is described in his bio on the commissioners’ website as, “He runs a diversified operations of alfalfa, soybeans, corn and hogs. Ray sits on many agricultural-related boards and is all about the future of the industry.” Really? Is he also all about the welfare of the citizens who elected him to office?
In the ethics section of the SDACC Commissioner’s Handbook on page 18: “… they should abstain from a vote on issues on which they would profit or enhance a relationship.” Clearly there are potential ethical issues facing our commissioners that need to be cleared up.
Should these three commissioners recuse themselves from voting on CAFO issues to avoid the appearance of impropriety or conflict of interest? It is unsettling to think that Yankton County commissioners could be blatantly violating the code of ethics suggested by their association."
Watching America lose its moral authority in real time; Washington Post, July 14, 2017
Dana Milbank, Washington Post; Watching America lose its moral authority in real time
"I traveled with my family in Australia for three weeks as a guest of the Universities of Sydney and Melbourne, invited to explain what’s happening in President Trump’s America.
As if there were an explanation.
Of more interest was what I learned from the Australians. To visit this stalwart ally and talk with its people was to see how the United States, in the space of just a few months, has utterly lost its moral authority."
"I traveled with my family in Australia for three weeks as a guest of the Universities of Sydney and Melbourne, invited to explain what’s happening in President Trump’s America.
As if there were an explanation.
Of more interest was what I learned from the Australians. To visit this stalwart ally and talk with its people was to see how the United States, in the space of just a few months, has utterly lost its moral authority."
Moral Vacuum in the House of Trump; New York Times, July 14, 2017
David Brooks, New York Times; Moral Vacuum in the House of Trump
"Once the scandal broke you would think Don Jr. would have some awareness that there were ethical stakes involved. You’d think there would be some sense of embarrassment at having been caught lying so blatantly.
But in his interview with Sean Hannity he appeared incapable of even entertaining any moral consideration. “That’s what we do in business,” the younger Trump said. “If there’s information out there, you want it.” As William Saletan pointed out in Slate, Don Jr. doesn’t seem to possess the internal qualities necessary to consider the possibility that he could have done anything wrong.
That to me is the central takeaway of this week’s revelations. It’s not that the Russia scandal may bring down the administration. It’s that over the past few generations the Trump family has built an enveloping culture that is beyond good and evil."
"Once the scandal broke you would think Don Jr. would have some awareness that there were ethical stakes involved. You’d think there would be some sense of embarrassment at having been caught lying so blatantly.
But in his interview with Sean Hannity he appeared incapable of even entertaining any moral consideration. “That’s what we do in business,” the younger Trump said. “If there’s information out there, you want it.” As William Saletan pointed out in Slate, Don Jr. doesn’t seem to possess the internal qualities necessary to consider the possibility that he could have done anything wrong.
That to me is the central takeaway of this week’s revelations. It’s not that the Russia scandal may bring down the administration. It’s that over the past few generations the Trump family has built an enveloping culture that is beyond good and evil."
Illinois Issues: The Battle Over Transparency And Privacy In The Digital Age; NPR Illinois, July 13, 2017
Daisy Contreras, NPR Illiois; Illinois Issues: The Battle Over Transparency And Privacy In The Digital Age
"Privacy experts like John Verdi from the Future of Privacy Forum says that he believes much of the debate between opponents and proponents comes from the nature of the topic, which is in of itself a complicated issue because of the patchwork of legislation across different states.
“It is a vastly complicated space, where you have potential benefits from data to consumers, to businesses, to the economy — to governments. And you also have real concrete privacy and security risks for individuals.”...
For the time being, some consumers and privacy advocates like Carolyn Parrish, just want website owners and app developers to establish consensus about what might be considered too much data sharing and to establish ground rules for transparency with consumers. “Giving people greater visibility into what’s happening behind the scenes—it’s useful. Knowledge is helpful to people to help them make educated choices.”"
"Privacy experts like John Verdi from the Future of Privacy Forum says that he believes much of the debate between opponents and proponents comes from the nature of the topic, which is in of itself a complicated issue because of the patchwork of legislation across different states.
“It is a vastly complicated space, where you have potential benefits from data to consumers, to businesses, to the economy — to governments. And you also have real concrete privacy and security risks for individuals.”...
For the time being, some consumers and privacy advocates like Carolyn Parrish, just want website owners and app developers to establish consensus about what might be considered too much data sharing and to establish ground rules for transparency with consumers. “Giving people greater visibility into what’s happening behind the scenes—it’s useful. Knowledge is helpful to people to help them make educated choices.”"
Thursday, July 13, 2017
Monkey selfie photographer says he's broke: 'I'm thinking of dog walking'; Guardian, July 12, 2017
Julia Carrie Wong, Guardian; Monkey selfie photographer says he's broke: 'I'm thinking of dog walking'
"The one consolation for Slater is that he believes that his photograph has helped to save the crested black macaque from extinction.
“These animals were on the way out and because of one photograph, it’s hopefully going to create enough ecotourism to make the locals realize that there’s a good reason to keep these monkeys alive,” Slater said. “The picture hopefully contributed to saving the species. That was the original intention all along.”"
"The one consolation for Slater is that he believes that his photograph has helped to save the crested black macaque from extinction.
“These animals were on the way out and because of one photograph, it’s hopefully going to create enough ecotourism to make the locals realize that there’s a good reason to keep these monkeys alive,” Slater said. “The picture hopefully contributed to saving the species. That was the original intention all along.”"
Tuesday, July 11, 2017
Why the 12 July protest to protect net neutrality matters; Guardian, July 11, 2017
Olivia Solon, Guardian; Why the 12 July protest to protect net neutrality matters
"About 200 internet companies and activist groups are coming together this week to mobilize their users into opposing US government plans to scrap net neutrality protections.
The internet-wide day of action, scheduled for Wednesday 12 July, will see companies including Facebook, Google, Amazon, Vimeo, Spotify, Reddit and Pornhub notify their users that net neutrality – a founding principle of the open internet – is under attack. The Trump administration is trying to overturn Obama-era regulation that protected net neutrality, and there is less than a week left for people to object.
Just as the internet came together in a blackout to protest against the Stop Online Piracy Act (Sopa) in 2012, many websites will on Wednesday feature a prominent message on their homepage, showing visitors what the web would look like without net neutrality and urging them to contact Congress. But what exactly is net neutrality, why is it under threat, and what can individuals do to protect it?"
"About 200 internet companies and activist groups are coming together this week to mobilize their users into opposing US government plans to scrap net neutrality protections.
The internet-wide day of action, scheduled for Wednesday 12 July, will see companies including Facebook, Google, Amazon, Vimeo, Spotify, Reddit and Pornhub notify their users that net neutrality – a founding principle of the open internet – is under attack. The Trump administration is trying to overturn Obama-era regulation that protected net neutrality, and there is less than a week left for people to object.
Just as the internet came together in a blackout to protest against the Stop Online Piracy Act (Sopa) in 2012, many websites will on Wednesday feature a prominent message on their homepage, showing visitors what the web would look like without net neutrality and urging them to contact Congress. But what exactly is net neutrality, why is it under threat, and what can individuals do to protect it?"
Microsoft Courts Rural America, And Politicians, With High-Speed Internet; NPR, All Tech Considered, July 11, 2017
Aarti Shahani, NPR, All Tech Considered; Microsoft Courts Rural America, And Politicians, With High-Speed Internet
"Millions of people in rural America don't have the Internet connectivity that those in cities take for granted. Microsoft is pledging to get 2 million rural Americans online, in a five-year plan; and the company is going to push phone companies and regulators to help get the whole 23.4 million connected."
"Millions of people in rural America don't have the Internet connectivity that those in cities take for granted. Microsoft is pledging to get 2 million rural Americans online, in a five-year plan; and the company is going to push phone companies and regulators to help get the whole 23.4 million connected."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)