Daniel W. Drezner, The Washington Post; How is an academic CV different from a résumé?
"During the weekend, the Chronicle of Higher Education’s Megan Zahneis
wrote up Phillips’s study, noting some possible concerns: “While it has
popped up in a few high-profile cases, CV falsification is an instance
of academic misconduct that might not make as many headlines as fudging
data or plagiarism. But the difficulty of detecting it could make it all
the more insidious.” Indeed, the grad students who did the coding for
Phillips et al. got more and more upset as they proceeded. As Phillips
explained to Zahneis, “That’s because most of these were applicants for
entry-level positions, which is what they hoped to be applying for
someday.""
Wednesday, October 23, 2019
Tuesday, October 22, 2019
Under digital surveillance: how American schools spy on millions of kids; The Guardian, October 22, 2019
Lois Beckett, The Guardian; Under digital surveillance: how American schools spy on millions of kids
"The new school surveillance technology doesn’t turn off when the school day is over: anything students type in official school email accounts, chats or documents is monitored 24 hours a day, whether students are in their classrooms or their bedrooms.
Tech companies are also working with schools to monitor students’ web searches and internet usage, and, in some cases, to track what they are writing on public social media accounts.
Parents and students are still largely unaware of the scope and intensity of school surveillance, privacy experts say, even as the market for these technologies has grown rapidly, fueled by fears of school shootings, particularly in the wake of the Parkland shooting in February 2018, which left 17 people dead."
"The new school surveillance technology doesn’t turn off when the school day is over: anything students type in official school email accounts, chats or documents is monitored 24 hours a day, whether students are in their classrooms or their bedrooms.
Tech companies are also working with schools to monitor students’ web searches and internet usage, and, in some cases, to track what they are writing on public social media accounts.
Parents and students are still largely unaware of the scope and intensity of school surveillance, privacy experts say, even as the market for these technologies has grown rapidly, fueled by fears of school shootings, particularly in the wake of the Parkland shooting in February 2018, which left 17 people dead."
Saturday, October 19, 2019
Mark Zuckerberg doesn’t understand free speech in the 21st century; The Guardian, October 18, 2019
Siva Vaidhyanathan, The Guardian; Mark Zuckerberg doesn’t understand free speech in the 21st century
"The problem of the 21st century is cacophony. Too many people are yelling at the same time. Attentions fracture. Passions erupt. Facts crumble. It’s increasingly hard to deliberate deeply about complex crucial issues with an informed public. We have access to more knowledge yet we can’t think and talk like adults about serious things...
The thing is, a thriving democracy needs more than motivation, the ability to find and organize like-minded people. Democracies also need deliberation. We have let the institutions that foster discussion among well informed, differently-minded people crumble. Soon all we will have left is Facebook. Look at Myanmar to see how well that works."
"The problem of the 21st century is cacophony. Too many people are yelling at the same time. Attentions fracture. Passions erupt. Facts crumble. It’s increasingly hard to deliberate deeply about complex crucial issues with an informed public. We have access to more knowledge yet we can’t think and talk like adults about serious things...
The thing is, a thriving democracy needs more than motivation, the ability to find and organize like-minded people. Democracies also need deliberation. We have let the institutions that foster discussion among well informed, differently-minded people crumble. Soon all we will have left is Facebook. Look at Myanmar to see how well that works."
Thursday, October 17, 2019
How to Stop the Abuse of Location Data; The New York Times, October 16, 2019
Jeff Glueck, The New York Times; How to Stop the Abuse of Location Data
"Companies should have to maintain data with adequate security protections, including encryption
at rest and in transit. Employees at companies that collect data on
millions of consumers should undergo privacy and ethics training.
Companies should require clients and other people who use the data to
promise that they will not use the tech and data for unethical or
discriminatory practices — and should penalize those that act
unethically. Regulation should force companies to create ethics
committees where management and employees must discuss their privacy and
ethical data use policies regularly."
There are no formal rules for what is ethical — or even legal — in the location data business. That needs to change.
"Companies should have to maintain data with adequate security protections, including encryption
at rest and in transit. Employees at companies that collect data on
millions of consumers should undergo privacy and ethics training.
Companies should require clients and other people who use the data to
promise that they will not use the tech and data for unethical or
discriminatory practices — and should penalize those that act
unethically. Regulation should force companies to create ethics
committees where management and employees must discuss their privacy and
ethical data use policies regularly."
Tuesday, October 15, 2019
What Teaching Ethics in Appalachia Taught Me About Bridging America’s Partisan Divide; Politico, October 13, 2019
Evan Mandery, Politico; What Teaching Ethics in Appalachia Taught Me About Bridging America’s Partisan Divide
"The aim “is to create a space in which I can admit—let in—another person’s voice,” Gilligan says. It’s a way of stimulating empathy. “You never really understand a person until you consider things from his point of view—until you climb into his skin and walk around in it,” Atticus Finch tells Scout in To Kill a Mockingbird. An emerging body of research shows that Finch—or Harper Lee—was right.
Curious things start to happen to people when they listen generously. At the most superficial level, one hears things that he or she might not like. But one also hears the sincerity of people’s convictions, the authenticity of their experiences, and the nuance of their narratives. Being open is transformative because, almost inevitably, one finds that the stories they’ve been told about what people believe oversimplify reality...
Caleb Wright, who’s from Chapel Hill says, “The value is that you can staunchly disagree with someone, but also humanize the person.” Adds Gaby, “It was more to learn about each other than to change people’s minds.”
The point, in other words, is to combat “othering.”
“People don’t change their minds, they just change their opinion about the other side,” says Ravi Iyer, a social psychologist who, with Jonathan Haidt and Matt Motyl, founded Civil Politics, a nonprofit aimed at bridging moral divisions. “The evidence is imperfect,” Iyer says, “but all of the imperfect evidence is telling a similar story.”
That story is known as the contact hypothesis—a well-supported theory in social psychology that contact between members of different groups is likely to reduce mutual prejudice...
I left my experience at App with a richer understanding of Southern conservatives and libertarians, but more significantly with great optimism, even exuberance, about the untapped potential of experiences that teach people how to talk productively about their differences. Even after a career spent moderating conversations on controversial issues, I learned how to listen better and was changed by the stories I heard.
Imagine if, instead of requiring a swim test for college students or gym for middle-schoolers, we required students to sit in a room with a diverse group of people and listen to the stories of their life. “If I wanted to prepare children to live as citizens in a democratic society,” Gilligan says, “nothing would be more valuable than to teach them to listen.”"
There’s a language for talking about hot-button issues. And we’re not learning it.
"The aim “is to create a space in which I can admit—let in—another person’s voice,” Gilligan says. It’s a way of stimulating empathy. “You never really understand a person until you consider things from his point of view—until you climb into his skin and walk around in it,” Atticus Finch tells Scout in To Kill a Mockingbird. An emerging body of research shows that Finch—or Harper Lee—was right.
Curious things start to happen to people when they listen generously. At the most superficial level, one hears things that he or she might not like. But one also hears the sincerity of people’s convictions, the authenticity of their experiences, and the nuance of their narratives. Being open is transformative because, almost inevitably, one finds that the stories they’ve been told about what people believe oversimplify reality...
Caleb Wright, who’s from Chapel Hill says, “The value is that you can staunchly disagree with someone, but also humanize the person.” Adds Gaby, “It was more to learn about each other than to change people’s minds.”
The point, in other words, is to combat “othering.”
“People don’t change their minds, they just change their opinion about the other side,” says Ravi Iyer, a social psychologist who, with Jonathan Haidt and Matt Motyl, founded Civil Politics, a nonprofit aimed at bridging moral divisions. “The evidence is imperfect,” Iyer says, “but all of the imperfect evidence is telling a similar story.”
That story is known as the contact hypothesis—a well-supported theory in social psychology that contact between members of different groups is likely to reduce mutual prejudice...
I left my experience at App with a richer understanding of Southern conservatives and libertarians, but more significantly with great optimism, even exuberance, about the untapped potential of experiences that teach people how to talk productively about their differences. Even after a career spent moderating conversations on controversial issues, I learned how to listen better and was changed by the stories I heard.
Imagine if, instead of requiring a swim test for college students or gym for middle-schoolers, we required students to sit in a room with a diverse group of people and listen to the stories of their life. “If I wanted to prepare children to live as citizens in a democratic society,” Gilligan says, “nothing would be more valuable than to teach them to listen.”"
Seven Bold Leaders Reveal How Ethical Leadership Is A Boon To Business; Forbes, October 14, 2019
Bruce Weinstein, Forbes; Seven Bold Leaders Reveal How Ethical Leadership Is A Boon To Business
"Ethical leadership in a business benefits the bottom line. It’s also a boon to the people who work for the organization and the people it serves.
The relationship between ethical conduct and benefits is one of the themes of this year’s Global Ethics Day. The Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs created this event nine years ago to provide an “opportunity for organizations around the world to hold events on or around this day, exploring the meaning of ethics in international affairs.”
Last year, I observed Global Ethics Day in this column by asking 20 leaders what “ethics” meant to them. Each provided a one-sentence summary. This year we’re stretching out a bit. I asked seven leaders to provide a concrete example or two of how ethical leadership benefits businesses, employees, clients and communities.
Here’s what they said."
"Ethical leadership in a business benefits the bottom line. It’s also a boon to the people who work for the organization and the people it serves.
The relationship between ethical conduct and benefits is one of the themes of this year’s Global Ethics Day. The Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs created this event nine years ago to provide an “opportunity for organizations around the world to hold events on or around this day, exploring the meaning of ethics in international affairs.”
Last year, I observed Global Ethics Day in this column by asking 20 leaders what “ethics” meant to them. Each provided a one-sentence summary. This year we’re stretching out a bit. I asked seven leaders to provide a concrete example or two of how ethical leadership benefits businesses, employees, clients and communities.
Here’s what they said."
Student tracking, secret scores: How college admissions offices rank prospects before they apply; The Washington Post, October 14, 2019
Douglas MacMillan and Nick Anderson, The Washington Post; Student tracking, secret scores: How college admissions offices rank prospects before they apply
"Admissions
officers say behavioral tracking helps them serve students in the
application process. When a college sees that a qualified student is
serious about applying based on the student’s Web behavior, it can
dedicate more staffers to follow up...
But
Web tracking may unfairly provide an advantage to students with better
access to technology, said Bradley Shear, a Maryland lawyer who has
pushed for better regulation of students’ online privacy. A low-income
student may be a strong academic candidate but receive less attention
from recruiters because the student does not own a smartphone or have
high-speed Internet access at home, he said.
“I don’t think the algorithm should run the admissions department,” Shear said."
Monday, October 14, 2019
MARVEL & Others Sued Over X-MEN: THE ANIMATED SERIES Theme Song Alleging Copyright Infringement - Report; Newsarama, October 9, 2019
Chris Arant, Newsarama; MARVEL & Others Sued Over X-MEN: THE ANIMATED SERIES Theme Song Alleging Copyright Infringement - Report
"Marvel Entertainment, the Walt Disney Company, and others are being sued for copyright infringement over the 1990s theme song to X-Men: The Animated Series due to its similiarities to a 1980s Hungarian cop show's theme, according to TMZ. The similarities between the two themes have been noted before online, and now a representative from the estate of the original show's composer has reportedly filed a lawsuit."
"Marvel Entertainment, the Walt Disney Company, and others are being sued for copyright infringement over the 1990s theme song to X-Men: The Animated Series due to its similiarities to a 1980s Hungarian cop show's theme, according to TMZ. The similarities between the two themes have been noted before online, and now a representative from the estate of the original show's composer has reportedly filed a lawsuit."
Artificial Intelligence Moving to Battlefield as Ethics Weighed; Bloomberg Government, October 10, 2019
, Bloomberg Government; Artificial Intelligence Moving to Battlefield as Ethics Weighed
Ethical uses of the technology could include the development
of landmines, similar to the Claymore mines used by the U.S. in
Vietnam, that can distinguish between adults carrying weapons and
children, the nonprofit research group the Mitre Corp. told the defense
board at a public hearing at Carnegie Mellon University in March.
Shanahan’s center first employed the technology to help fight wildfires in California and elsewhere and has discussed humanitarian relief uses in the Pacific with Japan and Singapore. Much of the potential for military artificial intelligence lies outside direct battlefield operations in areas such as logistics and accounting."
"The Pentagon, taking the next big step of deploying artificial
intelligence to aid troops and help select battlefield targets, must
settle lingering ethical concerns about using the technology for waging
war...
Shanahan’s center first employed the technology to help fight wildfires in California and elsewhere and has discussed humanitarian relief uses in the Pacific with Japan and Singapore. Much of the potential for military artificial intelligence lies outside direct battlefield operations in areas such as logistics and accounting."
Wednesday, October 9, 2019
FBI violated Americans’ privacy by abusing access to NSA surveillance data, court rules; October 8, 2019
Nick Statt, The Verge; FBI violated Americans’ privacy by abusing access to NSA surveillance data, court rules
The ruling was made in October 2018 by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), a secret government court responsible for reviewing and authorizing searches of foreign individuals inside and outside the US. It was just made public today."
"The Federal Bureau of Investigation made tens of
thousands of unauthorized searches related to US citizens between 2017
and 2018, a court ruled. The agency violated both the law that
authorized the surveillance program they used and the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution.
The ruling was made in October 2018 by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), a secret government court responsible for reviewing and authorizing searches of foreign individuals inside and outside the US. It was just made public today."
Americans and Digital Knowledge; Pew Research Center, October 9, 2019
Emily A. Vogels and Monica Anderson, Pew Research Center; Americans and Digital Knowledge
"A new Pew Research Center survey finds that Americans’ understanding
of technology-related issues varies greatly depending on the topic, term
or concept. While a majority of U.S. adults can correctly answer
questions about phishing scams or website cookies, other items are more
challenging. For example, just 28% of adults can identify an example of
two-factor authentication – one of the most important ways
experts say people can protect their personal information on sensitive
accounts. Additionally, about one-quarter of Americans (24%) know that
private browsing only hides browser history from other users of that
computer, while roughly half (49%) say they are unsure what private
browsing does.
This survey consisted of 10 questions designed to test Americans’ knowledge of a range of digital topics, such as cybersecurity or the business side of social media companies. The median number of correct answers was four. Only 20% of adults answered seven or more questions correctly, and just 2% got all 10 questions correct."
A majority of U.S. adults can answer fewer than
half the questions correctly on a digital knowledge quiz, and many
struggle with certain cybersecurity and privacy questions
This survey consisted of 10 questions designed to test Americans’ knowledge of a range of digital topics, such as cybersecurity or the business side of social media companies. The median number of correct answers was four. Only 20% of adults answered seven or more questions correctly, and just 2% got all 10 questions correct."
Most people don’t understand privacy, and that’s a huge opportunity for design; Fast Company, October 9, 2019
Mark Wilson, Fast Company; Most people don’t understand privacy, and that’s a huge opportunity for design
New research highlights just how clueless we are when it comes to digital privacy. It’s time for companies to step up and fill in the gaps.
"About half of Americans don’t even recognize that privacy policies are a binding contract between websites and their users in the first place.
The findings come courtesy of a new report by Pew Research, which polled 4,727 U.S. adults with a straightforward, 10-question test. It checked for basic knowledge about phishing, online advertising, and cookies. Only 20% of people answered 7 of 10 questions correctly. Just as devastating? Only 2% of people got all 10 questions right...
It’s easy to blame people in these situations. Get educated about technology already! Learn your privacy rights! Isn’t it obvious all that legalese constitutes a binding contract? But the fact is, people are pretty smart when given the right opportunity. Everyone you know understands, more or less, how to use relatively complicated platforms like email and social media. They understand both how to pull the levers and what those levers do. What they don’t understand is who might be watching those levers being pulled, why they’re allowed to be watching, and for what purpose they are watching in the first place."
Tuesday, October 8, 2019
California makes ‘deepfake’ videos illegal, but law may be hard to enforce; The Guardian, October 7, 2019
Kari Paul, The Guardian; California makes ‘deepfake’ videos illegal, but law may be hard to enforce
AB 730 makes it illegal to circulate doctored videos, images or audio of politicians within 60 days of an election
"California made it illegal to create or distribute “deepfakes” in a move meant to protect voters from misinformation but may be difficult to enforce.
"California made it illegal to create or distribute “deepfakes” in a move meant to protect voters from misinformation but may be difficult to enforce.
California’s governor, Gavin Newsom, on Thursday signed legislation
that makes it illegal to create or distribute videos, images, or audio
of politicians doctored to resemble real footage within 60 days of an
election.
Deepfakes are videos manipulated by artificial intelligence to overlay images of celebrity faces on others’ bodies, and are meant to make viewers think they are real."
Deepfakes are videos manipulated by artificial intelligence to overlay images of celebrity faces on others’ bodies, and are meant to make viewers think they are real."
Inside the Deepfake ‘Arms Race’; The Daily Beast, October 7, 2019
David Axe, The Daily Beast; Inside the Deepfake ‘Arms Race’
Can countermeasures neutralize the coming wave of high-tech disinformation?
"The first deepfakes appeared in late 2017 on Reddit. An anonymous user
calling themselves “deepfakes”—a portmanteau of artificial-intelligence
“deep learning” and “fakes”—imposed celebrities’ faces on pornography...
A deepfake video, still image, or audio recording is the product of a
clever bit of coding called a “generative adversarial network,” or GAN. A
GAN has two components: a discriminator and a generator. The
discriminator is trying to tell fake media from real media. The
generator is trying to fool the discriminator with increasingly
realistic-seeming fakes."
The Supreme Court Denies Domino’s Petition in a Win for Disability Rights; Slate, October 7, 2019
Aaron Mak, Slate; The Supreme Court Denies Domino’s Petition in a Win for Disability Rights
"On Monday, the Supreme Court handed down an order announcing it would not take up a petition from the Domino’s pizza chain to appeal a lower-court decision dictating that the company must make its website and app accessible to people with disabilities. The decision is a major win for disability rights advocates, who have been arguing that the Americans with Disabilities Act applies to websites, digital platforms, and other nonphysical spaces."
"On Monday, the Supreme Court handed down an order announcing it would not take up a petition from the Domino’s pizza chain to appeal a lower-court decision dictating that the company must make its website and app accessible to people with disabilities. The decision is a major win for disability rights advocates, who have been arguing that the Americans with Disabilities Act applies to websites, digital platforms, and other nonphysical spaces."
Sunday, October 6, 2019
Scientist Who Discredited Meat Guidelines Didn’t Report Past Food Industry Ties; The New York Times, October 4, 2019
Tara Parker-Pope and , The New York Times;
Scientist Who Discredited Meat Guidelines Didn’t Report Past Food Industry Ties
The
lead researcher, Bradley C. Johnston, said he was not required to
report his past relationship with a powerful industry trade group.
"In an interview,
Dr. Johnston said his past relationship with ILSI had no influence on
the current research on meat recommendations. He said he did not report
his past relationship with ILSI because the disclosure form asked only
about potential conflicts within the past three years. Although the
ILSI-funded study publication falls within the three-year window, he
said the money from ILSI arrived in 2015, and he was not required to
report it for the meat study disclosure.
“That
money was from 2015 so it was outside of the three year period for
disclosing competing interests,” said Dr. Johnston. “I have no
relationship with them whatsoever.”"
Why We Need a Code of Ethics for the Supreme Court; Time, October 1, 2019
Alicia Bannon and Johanna Kalb, Time; Why We Need a Code of Ethics for the Supreme Court
"Alicia Bannon is the co-author of Supreme Court Ethics: The Need for an Ethics Code and Additional Transparency. Bannon is the managing director of the Brennan Center’s Democracy Program and head of its Fair Courts team.
"Judges are supposed to take steps to avoid even the appearance of bias or political activity. But over the last twenty years, we’ve seen Supreme Court justices engage in activities forbidden under the code of ethics for other federal judges. Members of the Court have given partisan speeches. They have failed to recuse themselves from cases with which they have apparent conflicts of interest. Some have accepted lavish gifts from people and organizations who also fund constitutional litigation...
Of course, having a code of conduct isn’t a cure-all, whether the code applies to judges, professors, or CEOs. But it’s vital for transparency and accountability. By adopting a code of ethics that is publicly available, the Court would shape expectations among judges and the public about acceptable behavior. A code would anticipate and give guidance on knotty ethical dilemmas, and also help to protect the justices against criticism for the tricky ethical decisions they make. And if the justices slip up, a code would allow them to be held accountable, by each other, in the court of public opinion and, in very rare instances, through impeachment."
"Alicia Bannon is the co-author of Supreme Court Ethics: The Need for an Ethics Code and Additional Transparency. Bannon is the managing director of the Brennan Center’s Democracy Program and head of its Fair Courts team.
Johanna Kalb is the co-author of Supreme Court Ethics: The Need for an Ethics Code and Additional Transparency. Kalb is a fellow at the Brennan Center and associate dean and professor at Loyola University New Orleans College of Law."
"Judges are supposed to take steps to avoid even the appearance of bias or political activity. But over the last twenty years, we’ve seen Supreme Court justices engage in activities forbidden under the code of ethics for other federal judges. Members of the Court have given partisan speeches. They have failed to recuse themselves from cases with which they have apparent conflicts of interest. Some have accepted lavish gifts from people and organizations who also fund constitutional litigation...
Of course, having a code of conduct isn’t a cure-all, whether the code applies to judges, professors, or CEOs. But it’s vital for transparency and accountability. By adopting a code of ethics that is publicly available, the Court would shape expectations among judges and the public about acceptable behavior. A code would anticipate and give guidance on knotty ethical dilemmas, and also help to protect the justices against criticism for the tricky ethical decisions they make. And if the justices slip up, a code would allow them to be held accountable, by each other, in the court of public opinion and, in very rare instances, through impeachment."
Bootleg film shows Florida prison in all its danger, squalor. An inmate shot it on the sly; The Miami Herald, October 4, 2019
Romy Ellenbogen, The Miami Herald; Bootleg film shows Florida prison in all its danger, squalor. An inmate shot it on the sly
"David Fathi, the director of the ACLU’s National Prison Project, said as technology has developed, videos and photos from inside prisons have become more common.
“This would be, to my knowledge, the first prison documentary filmed exclusively by a prisoner with a cellphone,” he said.
Fathi said the issue is paradoxical — prisons have good reason for forbidding cellphones, but the footage also increases transparency, shining daylight in a dark place and potentially exposing abuses."
"David Fathi, the director of the ACLU’s National Prison Project, said as technology has developed, videos and photos from inside prisons have become more common.
“This would be, to my knowledge, the first prison documentary filmed exclusively by a prisoner with a cellphone,” he said.
Fathi said the issue is paradoxical — prisons have good reason for forbidding cellphones, but the footage also increases transparency, shining daylight in a dark place and potentially exposing abuses."
Federal whistleblowers would do it again, even after retaliation and ‘professional suicide’; The Washington Post, October 4, 2019
Joe Davidson, The Washington Post; Federal whistleblowers would do it again, even after retaliation and ‘professional suicide’
"“Was the destruction of my career and family worth the excruciating time and money, ostracism and vilification? No,” [former FBI agent Jane Turner] said Wednesday. “Was standing up and doing the ethical, legal and moral whistleblowing the right thing? Yes. Would I do it again? My moral and legal compass would not allow any different course of action.
Her advice to the CIA whistleblower: “Carefully weigh the costs to you, your family and your career when deciding whether to blow the whistle. And document, document, document … because the hierarchy will lie.”"
"“Was the destruction of my career and family worth the excruciating time and money, ostracism and vilification? No,” [former FBI agent Jane Turner] said Wednesday. “Was standing up and doing the ethical, legal and moral whistleblowing the right thing? Yes. Would I do it again? My moral and legal compass would not allow any different course of action.
Her advice to the CIA whistleblower: “Carefully weigh the costs to you, your family and your career when deciding whether to blow the whistle. And document, document, document … because the hierarchy will lie.”"
Saturday, October 5, 2019
The Hippocratic License: A new software license that prohibits uses that contravene the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights; BoingBoing, October 4, 2019
Cory Doctorow, BoingBoing; The Hippocratic License: A new software license that prohibits uses that contravene the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights
"The Open Source Initiative maintains the canonical list of free/open licenses based on compliance with its Open Source Definition, which excludes licenses that ""discriminate against any person or group of persons" and that "restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor." On this basis, OSI cofounder Bruce Perens says the Hippcratic License is not compatible with the OSD.
Ehmke calls the OSD "horribly dated" because it doesn't enable software developers to ensure that "our technology isn't used by fascists.""
"The Open Source Initiative maintains the canonical list of free/open licenses based on compliance with its Open Source Definition, which excludes licenses that ""discriminate against any person or group of persons" and that "restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor." On this basis, OSI cofounder Bruce Perens says the Hippcratic License is not compatible with the OSD.
Ehmke calls the OSD "horribly dated" because it doesn't enable software developers to ensure that "our technology isn't used by fascists.""
An Open Source License That Requires Users to Do No Harm; Wired, October 4, 2019
Klint Finley, Wired;
"Increasingly, some developers are calling on their employers and the government to stop using their work in ways they believe are unethical...
Coraline Ada Ehmke wants to give her fellow developers more control over how their software is used. Software released under her new "Hippocratic License" can be shared and modified for almost any purpose, with one big exception: "Individuals, corporations, governments, or other groups for systems or activities that actively and knowingly endanger, harm, or otherwise threaten the physical, mental, economic, or general well-being of individuals or groups in violation of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”
Defining what it means to do harm is inherently contentious, but Ehmke hopes that tying the license to existing international standards will reduce the uncertainty. The declaration of human rights "is a document that's 70 years old and is pretty well established and accepted for its definition of harm and what violating human rights really means," she says."
An Open Source License That Requires Users to Do No Harm
Open
source software can generally be freely copied and reused. One
developer wants to impose ethical constraints on the practice.
"Increasingly, some developers are calling on their employers and the government to stop using their work in ways they believe are unethical...
Coraline Ada Ehmke wants to give her fellow developers more control over how their software is used. Software released under her new "Hippocratic License" can be shared and modified for almost any purpose, with one big exception: "Individuals, corporations, governments, or other groups for systems or activities that actively and knowingly endanger, harm, or otherwise threaten the physical, mental, economic, or general well-being of individuals or groups in violation of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”
Defining what it means to do harm is inherently contentious, but Ehmke hopes that tying the license to existing international standards will reduce the uncertainty. The declaration of human rights "is a document that's 70 years old and is pretty well established and accepted for its definition of harm and what violating human rights really means," she says."
Friday, October 4, 2019
Gatekeeping Is Not The Same As Censorship; Forbes, August 22, 2019
Kalev Leetaru, Forbes; Gatekeeping Is Not The Same As Censorship
"With each new effort by social media companies to reign in the deluge of digital falsehoods, accusations pour forth that such efforts represent censorship. In reality, the two represent very different concepts, with censorship referring to the repression of ideas in alignment to political, social or moral views, while gatekeeping in its broadest sense refers to efforts to maintain the quality of information published in a given venue. A censor prohibits discussion of topics with which they disagree. A gatekeeper is viewpoint-neutral, ensuring only that the information has been thoroughly vetted and verified...
In the end, both social platforms and society at large must recognize the clear distinction between the dangers of censorship and the benefits of gatekeeping."
"With each new effort by social media companies to reign in the deluge of digital falsehoods, accusations pour forth that such efforts represent censorship. In reality, the two represent very different concepts, with censorship referring to the repression of ideas in alignment to political, social or moral views, while gatekeeping in its broadest sense refers to efforts to maintain the quality of information published in a given venue. A censor prohibits discussion of topics with which they disagree. A gatekeeper is viewpoint-neutral, ensuring only that the information has been thoroughly vetted and verified...
In the end, both social platforms and society at large must recognize the clear distinction between the dangers of censorship and the benefits of gatekeeping."
The Authoritarian’s Worst Fear? A Book; The New York Times, October 3, 2019
, The New York Times; The Authoritarian’s Worst Fear? A Book
""Regimes are expending so much energy attacking books because their supposed limitations have begun to look like strengths: With online surveillance, digital reading carries with it great risks and semi-permanent footprints; a physical book, however, cannot monitor what you are reading and when, cannot track which words you mark or highlight, does not secretly scan your face, and cannot know when you are sharing it with others."
""Regimes are expending so much energy attacking books because their supposed limitations have begun to look like strengths: With online surveillance, digital reading carries with it great risks and semi-permanent footprints; a physical book, however, cannot monitor what you are reading and when, cannot track which words you mark or highlight, does not secretly scan your face, and cannot know when you are sharing it with others."
Thursday, October 3, 2019
E.U.’s Top Court Rules Against Facebook in Global Takedown Case; The New York Times, October 3, 2019
, The New York Times; E.U.’s Top Court Rules Against Facebook in Global Takedown Case
"The case has been closely watched
because of its potential ripple effects for regulating internet
content. The enforcement of defamation, libel and privacy laws varies
from country to country, with language and behavior that is allowed in
one nation prohibited in another. The court’s decision highlights the
difficulty of creating uniform standards to govern an inherently
borderless web and then enforcing them.
Facebook
and other critics have warned that letting a single nation force an
internet platform to delete material elsewhere would hurt free
expression...
Last week, the European Court of Justice limited the reach of the European privacy law known as the “right to be forgotten,”
which allows European citizens to demand Google remove links to
sensitive personal data from search results. The court said Google could
not be ordered to remove links to websites globally, except in certain
circumstances when weighed against the rights to free expression and the
public’s right to information."
Wednesday, October 2, 2019
Congress and Trump Agreed They Want a National Privacy Law. It Is Nowhere in Sight.; The New York Times, October 1, 2019
David McCabe, The New York Times;
"But after months of talks, a national privacy
law is nowhere in sight...
The struggle to regulate consumer data shows how
lawmakers have largely been unable to turn rage at Silicon Valley’s practices
into concrete action...
But the fervor to crack down on Silicon Valley has
produced only a single new law, a bill to prevent sex trafficking online...
The
United States has some laws that protect consumers’ privacy, like medical
information collected by a doctor. But Congress has never set an overarching
national standard for how most companies gather and use data. Regulators in
Europe, in contrast, put strict new privacy rules into effect last year.
Many tech
companies built lucrative businesses off their users’ personal information,
often by offering a “free” product in return.”
The Last Hope for Net Neutrality; Slate, October 1, 2019
April Glaser, Slate; The Last Hope for Net Neutrality
A federal appeals court upheld the FCC’s repeal of the open-internet rules. But it allowed for states to save them.
"It’s confirmed: Net neutrality is legally dead. On Tuesday morning, a federal appeals court reaffirmed the Federal Communications Commission’s repeal of Obama-era net neutrality rules that prohibited internet providers from blocking, slowing down, or speeding up access to websites. In a 200-page decision, the judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit agreed with FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, who in 2017 vowed to “fire up a weed whacker” and destroy the regulations, which had only been on the books for about two years at the time.
While it’s been legal for internet providers to block access to websites since June 2018, when the FCC’s net neutrality repeal hit the books, advocates and website owners who depend on unfettered consumer access to the web were hopeful that the court would invalidate the repeal. Now, internet providers like Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T can do whatever they want with their customers’ connections and web access as long as they state that they reserve the right to do so in their terms of service. That doesn’t mean the internet is going to change tomorrow, or that Comcast will start throttling with abandon anytime soon. But by allowing telecom companies to sell faster speeds to the websites that can afford it, the deregulation threatens the ideal of the open web—a level playing field that allows anyone to build a website that can reach anyone.
There is a significant silver lining in Tuesday’s ruling, however: The court struck down the part of the FCC’s 2017 rules that attempted to preempt state net neutrality rules. That reaffirms legislation and executive orders across the country that seek to preserve the pre-2017 status quo in which companies could not mess with websites’ and customers’ access to the internet. Nine states—Hawaii, Montana, New York, New Jersey, Washington, Rhode Island, California, Montana, and Vermont—have passed their own net neutrality rules. Another 27 states have seen legislation proposed to protect net neutrality. More than 100 mayors of cities across the country likewise have pledged not to sign contracts with internet providers that violate net-neutrality principles."
Tuesday, October 1, 2019
Roboethics: The Human Ethics Applied to Robots; Interesting Engineering, September 22, 2019
Susan Fourtané , Interesting Engineering; Roboethics: The Human Ethics Applied to Robots
Who or what is going to be held responsible when or if an autonomous system malfunctions or harms humans?
"On ethics and roboethics
Ethics is the branch of philosophy which studies human conduct, moral assessments, the concepts of good and evil, right and wrong, justice and injustice. The concept of roboethics brings up a fundamental ethical reflection that is related to particular issues and moral dilemmas generated by the development of robotic applications.
Roboethics --also called machine ethics-- deals with the code of conduct that robotic designer engineers must implement in the Artificial Intelligence of a robot. Through this kind of artificial ethics, roboticists must guarantee that autonomous systems are going to be able to exhibit ethically acceptable behavior in situations where robots or any other autonomous systems such as autonomous vehicles interact with humans.
Ethical issues are going to continue to be on the rise as long as more advanced robotics come into the picture. In The Ethical Landscape of Robotics (PDF) by Pawel Lichocki et al., published by IEEE Robotics and Automation Magazine, the researchers list various ethical issues emerging in two sets of robotic applications: Service robots and lethal robots."
Who or what is going to be held responsible when or if an autonomous system malfunctions or harms humans?
"On ethics and roboethics
Ethics is the branch of philosophy which studies human conduct, moral assessments, the concepts of good and evil, right and wrong, justice and injustice. The concept of roboethics brings up a fundamental ethical reflection that is related to particular issues and moral dilemmas generated by the development of robotic applications.
Roboethics --also called machine ethics-- deals with the code of conduct that robotic designer engineers must implement in the Artificial Intelligence of a robot. Through this kind of artificial ethics, roboticists must guarantee that autonomous systems are going to be able to exhibit ethically acceptable behavior in situations where robots or any other autonomous systems such as autonomous vehicles interact with humans.
Ethical issues are going to continue to be on the rise as long as more advanced robotics come into the picture. In The Ethical Landscape of Robotics (PDF) by Pawel Lichocki et al., published by IEEE Robotics and Automation Magazine, the researchers list various ethical issues emerging in two sets of robotic applications: Service robots and lethal robots."
Metro’s ethics changes are welcome. But they’re only a start.; The Washington Post, September 29, 2019
, The Washington Post; Metro’s ethics changes are welcome. But they’re only a start.
"THE
REPUTATION of former Metro chairman Jack Evans wasn’t the only thing
that was tarnished amid the swirl of allegations that he used his public
office to advance his private interests. Public trust in the Metro
board was also badly shaken after it completely botched its handling of
the allegations. It’s encouraging, then, that the board has taken a
first step in its own rehabilitation by amending its code of ethics.
A Teenager Killed Himself After Being Outed as Bisexual. His Family Wants Justice.; The New York Times, September 30, 2019
, The New York Times;
"Channing’s death underscores the challenges of combating cyberbullying, which has proliferated in recent years. According to a report last year from the Pew Research Center, 59 percent of teenagers said they had been bullied or harassed online — and many of them thought teachers, social media companies and politicians were failing to help.
In schools across the country, L.G.B.T. students are more likely to be bullied and experience depression than their straight peers, studies have found."
A Teenager Killed Himself After Being Outed as Bisexual. His Family Wants Justice.
The
family and classmates of Channing Smith, a high school junior, said his
death was a result of “social media bullying” and called for a thorough
investigation.
"Channing’s death underscores the challenges of combating cyberbullying, which has proliferated in recent years. According to a report last year from the Pew Research Center, 59 percent of teenagers said they had been bullied or harassed online — and many of them thought teachers, social media companies and politicians were failing to help.
In schools across the country, L.G.B.T. students are more likely to be bullied and experience depression than their straight peers, studies have found."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)