[liberationtech] Advisory >> Special Issue on Privacy (Free to Download)

[Robert Mathews (OSIA)]

*Dear Privacy Professionals/Privacy Enthusiasts:*

I would like to share with you that the peer-reviewed ***Journal of
Health & Technology'**s* *(**Springer **Nature* - *WHO *- *IUPESM)
*Special Issue on Privacy & Security (Vol. 7, Issue 4) is now freely
available to download - for the next 30 days. 

The entire issue can be seen, and accessed here:
https://link.springer.com/journal/12553/7/4/page/1


Warm regards.
-- 
-- 
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing the moderator at 
zakwh...@stanford.edu.

[liberationtech] Twenty-Five Years Later: What Happened to Progressive Tech Policy?

[Doug Schuler]

Marc Rotenberg and Larry Irving address that question in Washington
Spectator. https://washingtonspectator.org/rotenberg-tech-policy/

This is part of the equation.

— Doug
-- 
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing the moderator at 
zakwh...@stanford.edu.

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook Asks - Hard Questions: Social Media and Democracy

[carlo von lynX]

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 01:01:30PM -0500, Richard Brooks wrote:
> A general concern should be who does the regulation and
> to what ends? The UN is questionable, since the majority
> of its members are autocrats. The non-autocrats are
> typically controlled by the large corporations.

Us. We can write the legislation and if it makes sense
to large chunks of society we can demand its enactment.

Just some years ago people like me wrote the law proposal
on how to handle the former airport of Tegel in Berlin.
And then the path from petition to referendum finally
made that proposal the current law.

I hear we have similar mechanisms in the EU. And if you
consider how TTIP fell because of public pressure, even
US Congress can listen to people from the Internet, if
they aggregate.

> I think the question of how to have a globally open
> forum for legitimate discourse is probably unsolvable,
> since I do not think we can have a consensus on what
> "legitimate discourse" is.

There are many groups working on such a definition and
I guess out of desperate need to do something some of
their work will be adopted. I for instance have gained
experience in doing liquid democratic organization and
have learned how to design a justice system so that
people in a group don't jump at each other's throats
as they try to get along.

> Should it allow antifa? Should it include racists?

If the rules of the discursive process are sufficiently
well defined, then everyone is inhibited from causing
damage or bring forward opinions that aren't compatible
with previous fundamental decisions such as human rights
etc. To ensure that rules are respected you need
moderators and to ensure that moderators aren't abusing
their powers you need judges. That's what it takes to
really have online democracy - simplifications may fail.

> I wonder, honestly, if an abuse resistant platform
> is possible. Also, I wonder if it would be desirable.

There are plenty of other spaces where you can speak
your mind in disrespectful ways of others etc, but in
a public democratic debating platform a democratic
structure is necessary.

> And, I have no good answers to any of these questions.

I've been researching these topics for years now,
that's why I dare to speak so matter-of-factly about
things I seriously learned.

On 01/22/2018 08:53 PM, Andrés Leopoldo Pacheco Sanfuentes wrote:
> I don’t believe that to betray democracy will ever be “technically 
> impossible”

Depends on the degree of betrayal. I am saying that
we can have an Internet that by design is resistant
to surveillance and data mining. Therefore apps will
have to be paid by micropayment and the apps will not
be able to send user data back to the manufacturer -
they only exchange data with your social network in
a way you expect.

That's the other topic I've been working on since 2010
now, so I am kind of confident that this is real.

> It all boils down to ETHICS, not TECHNOLOGY.

In the early years of the net there was this meme that
technology can not fix social problems. It is profoundly
wrong. Technology can implement not only social norms,
it can even enact laws. I learned that as early as 1997
when I deployed a chat system that worked differently
than IRC. It was by design unsuited for operator wars etc.

> And ALL the “Social Network” COMMERCIAL platforms are NON-DEMOCRATIC BY 
> DESIGN. They’re basically no different in that respect than traditional 
> (corporate-controlled) broadcast stations.

Exactly. That is what the law would change. It would
require all social networks to operate out of your
personal device and have no central place of data
aggregation.


-- 
  E-mail is public! Talk to me in private using encryption:
 http://loupsycedyglgamf.onion/LynX/
  irc://loupsycedyglgamf.onion:67/lynX
 https://psyced.org:34443/LynX/
-- 
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing the moderator at 
zakwh...@stanford.edu.

[liberationtech] Refugee & Forced Migration HCI Research: Resource Help Request

[Amirah Majid]

 Apologies for cross-posting!

Dear Research Community,

We are a group of interdisciplinary HCI researchers focusing on the
technology related issues of people experiencing forced migration, such as
refugees, asylum seekers, internally displaced, and the undocumented.

This year at the ACM International Conference on Supporting Group Work
(GROUP) we came together in a workshop called, ‘Refugees & Technology:
Determining the Role of HCI Research’, links below. As a result of this
workshop we would like to build a curated list of scholarly resources that
support generative and ethical research in the area of Forced Migration -
HCI studies. We intend to make this list publicly available in order to
support this growing research area.

We are asking for your help! If you know of HCI-related refugee or forced
migration work, or other resources that you think could inform and support
this work, could you send us the citation or link? Resources we are looking
for include scholarly texts, projects, conferences, or anything else you
think could help. Bookmark the workshop website for updates to this
community resource!

Thank you in advance for your help!

Sincerely,

Amirah Majid on behalf of the workshop participants.

Please send replies to: ami...@uw.edu.

Links:

ACM GROUP Conference, https://group.acm.org/conferences/group18/

Refugees & Technology: Determining the Role of HCI Research Workshop,
http://displaced-hci.info/

*___*
*Please note: I check and respond to e-mail once daily, weekdays only, at
4:00 P.M. PST. *

*A. M. Majidأميرة ماجد‬‎*
she/her pronouns
PhD candidate: multi-cultural computing & refugee informatics
Information School, University of Washington Seattle USA
https://users.resist.ca/~amirah/
-- 
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing the moderator at 
zakwh...@stanford.edu.

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook Asks - Hard Questions: Social Media and Democracy

[Andrés Leopoldo Pacheco Sanfuentes]

I don’t believe that to betray democracy will ever be “technically 
impossible”

It all boils down to ETHICS, not TECHNOLOGY.

And ALL the “Social Network” COMMERCIAL platforms are NON-DEMOCRATIC BY DESIGN. 
They’re basically no different in that respect than traditional 
(corporate-controlled) broadcast stations.

Regards / Saludos / Grato

Andrés Leopoldo Pacheco Sanfuentes

> On Jan 22, 2018, at 9:52 AM, carlo von lynX  
> wrote:
> 
> No need to follow the link, here are the interesting snippets:
> 
>> Now, we’re as determined as ever to fight the negative influences and ensure 
>> that our platform is unquestionably a source for democratic good.
> 
> Just like democracy is no longer a democracy if somebody could
> decide to switch off, say, separation of powers or verifiability
> of vote, democracy is no longer a democracy if one corporation
> has the choice on whether to be a "source of democratic good" or
> secretively possibly unvoluntarily be not so. Therefore, the fact
> that Facebook has achieved such a role is unconstitutional.
> Actually, the way the whole Internet is easy to eavesdrop and do
> big data analysis upon is making every democracy whose voters use
> it struturally a post-democracy. How long until we regulate this?
> 
>> Our role is to ensure that the good outweighs the forces that can compromise 
>> healthy discourse.
> 
> Incorrect. No online platform should have this much power to
> make such decisions.
> 
> Further articles comment on the good and bad of social media,
> entirely neglecting that a properly regulated Internet would
> eliminate the risks of social media and only leave us with
> the good aspects of it, so there is zero reason to continue
> dealing with the threats of technology as if the benefits are
> inevitabily interweaved. That is a fallacy, albeit a
> remarkably popular one.
> 
> So do yourself a favor and skip reading those articles, they
> are only trying to convince you that Facebook is a reasonable
> company to entrust with the power to corrupt democracy, as if
> the Malvinas incident in 2009 hadn't already proven the opposite.
> 
> You can have all the apps and Internet fun you like, but to
> betray democracy must be technically impossible. Such an
> abuse-resistant Internet is possible. Society has to care
> and to regulate.
> 
> If anything of that sounds wrong or exaggerated, then you are 
> missing some of the clues. I can fill you in.
> 
> -- 
>  E-mail is public! Talk to me in private using encryption:
> http://loupsycedyglgamf.onion/LynX/
>  irc://loupsycedyglgamf.onion:67/lynX
> https://psyced.org:34443/LynX/
> -- 
> Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
> list guidelines will get you moderated: 
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
> change to digest, or change password by emailing the moderator at 
> zakwh...@stanford.edu.
-- 
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing the moderator at 
zakwh...@stanford.edu.

[liberationtech] Developer to help Counterpart enhance its website for defending civic space

[Kara Andrade]

My colleagues and I are looking for a developer to help us enhance our website 
for defending civic space.  Specifically we're looking for Wordpress developers 
with skills in building knowledge sharing platforms. If you know of anyone, 
this is the last week to apply!

Counterpart International is seeking proposals from qualified firms and 
organizations for the second stage of web platform development services and 
ongoing maintenance for its Innovation for Change (I4C) website.

Apply here. 


Best,
Kara

-- 
Kara Andrade
Senior Innovation Specialist | Innovation for Change
kandr...@counterpart.org
www.counterpart.org 



-- 
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing the moderator at 
zakwh...@stanford.edu.

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook Asks - Hard Questions: Social Media and Democracy

[Andrés Leopoldo Pacheco Sanfuentes]

>  to betray democracy must be technically impossible

This sentence is so UNTRUE! 

The very fact that what appear like very democratic forums (Facebook, Twitter, 
Instagram, etc.) are basically ruled by marketing, which is the same thing as 
“money in politics,” in the much more impactful context of the daily life of 
the planet, makes the sentence above DOUBLESPEAK.
-- 
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing the moderator at 
zakwh...@stanford.edu.

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook Asks - Hard Questions: Social Media and Democracy

[Richard Brooks]

> 
> You can have all the apps and Internet fun you like, but to
> betray democracy must be technically impossible. Such an
> abuse-resistant Internet is possible. Society has to care
> and to regulate.
> 

A general concern should be who does the regulation and
to what ends? The UN is questionable, since the majority
of its members are autocrats. The non-autocrats are
typically controlled by the large corporations.

I think the question of how to have a globally open
forum for legitimate discourse is probably unsolvable,
since I do not think we can have a consensus on what
"legitimate discourse" is.

Should it allow antifa? Should it include racists?
How do you fact check? If you exclude antifa and
racists (I am not drawing an equivalency here, I
am just citing groups that would be likely to
be excluded), wouldn't you be excluding the
dis-satisfied groups that are disturbing democratic
norms?

I wonder, honestly, if an abuse resistant platform
is possible. Also, I wonder if it would be desirable.

And, I have no good answers to any of these questions.
-- 
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing the moderator at 
zakwh...@stanford.edu.

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook Asks - Hard Questions: Social Media and Democracy

[carlo von lynX]

No need to follow the link, here are the interesting snippets:

> Now, we’re as determined as ever to fight the negative influences and ensure 
> that our platform is unquestionably a source for democratic good.

Just like democracy is no longer a democracy if somebody could
decide to switch off, say, separation of powers or verifiability
of vote, democracy is no longer a democracy if one corporation
has the choice on whether to be a "source of democratic good" or
secretively possibly unvoluntarily be not so. Therefore, the fact
that Facebook has achieved such a role is unconstitutional.
Actually, the way the whole Internet is easy to eavesdrop and do
big data analysis upon is making every democracy whose voters use
it struturally a post-democracy. How long until we regulate this?

> Our role is to ensure that the good outweighs the forces that can compromise 
> healthy discourse.

Incorrect. No online platform should have this much power to
make such decisions.

Further articles comment on the good and bad of social media,
entirely neglecting that a properly regulated Internet would
eliminate the risks of social media and only leave us with
the good aspects of it, so there is zero reason to continue
dealing with the threats of technology as if the benefits are
inevitabily interweaved. That is a fallacy, albeit a
remarkably popular one.

So do yourself a favor and skip reading those articles, they
are only trying to convince you that Facebook is a reasonable
company to entrust with the power to corrupt democracy, as if
the Malvinas incident in 2009 hadn't already proven the opposite.

You can have all the apps and Internet fun you like, but to
betray democracy must be technically impossible. Such an
abuse-resistant Internet is possible. Society has to care
and to regulate.

If anything of that sounds wrong or exaggerated, then you are 
missing some of the clues. I can fill you in.

-- 
  E-mail is public! Talk to me in private using encryption:
 http://loupsycedyglgamf.onion/LynX/
  irc://loupsycedyglgamf.onion:67/lynX
 https://psyced.org:34443/LynX/
-- 
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing the moderator at 
zakwh...@stanford.edu.

[liberationtech] Facebook Asks - Hard Questions: Social Media and Democracy

[Steven Clift]

See:

http://po.st/facebookhardquestionsdemocracy


Discuss:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/opengovgroup/permalink/2063068567258062/


Steven Clift  -  Executive Director, E-Democracy.org
   cl...@e-democracy.org  -  +1 612 234 7072
   http://twitter.com/democracy

Join in: http://facebook.com/groups/opengovgroup
Digital engagement for your org via E-Democracy:
   http://po.st/engageclift
-- 
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing the moderator at 
zakwh...@stanford.edu.