Of Interest

  • Austria’s bid to end online anonymity triggers crackdown fears

    Date published: 
    June 2, 2019

    "People would be allowed to use pseudonyms when posting online, but platforms could be forced to hand out the users’ private information to third parties, including private persons, seeking prosecution for defamation or other crimes.

    “The chilling effect for freedom of speech is real,” said Thomas Lohninger."

  • Privacy and Civil Liberties Board Considers Three Ways for Congress to Address Controversial Surveillance Program

    Date published: 
    June 1, 2019

    "The NSA is allowed to collect records for individuals up to two times removed from targets, creating exponential growth in the total number of records. Without this “two hops” rule, the effectiveness of the program would be “greatly diminished,” according to Jonathan Mayer, a professor of computer science and public affairs at Princeton University."

  • Why Net Neutrality Advocates Remain Optimistic

    Date published: 
    June 1, 2019

    "Eshoo and her copanelists, Federal Communications Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel, Reddit CEO Steven Huffman, and Stanford law professor Barbara van Schewick, remained doggedly optimistic about the future of net neutrality in the United States."

  • Reddit Co-founder, Congresswoman advocate for net neutrality at Law School event

    Date published: 
    May 31, 2019

    "Van Schewick argued that the motivation for removing net neutrality rules came largely from ISPs looking to capitalize on their positions as gatekeepers. She said that in 2013, prior to net neutrality regulations being put in place, six large ISPs started using “choke points” to slow down certain games and and videos, only speeding them up if the hosting websites were willing to pay.

    “The ISPs have more money, and they definitely have more lobbyists,” Schewick said. “But that does not mean they get to win. They only win if we are silent.”"

  • The Week in Tech: Disinformation’s Huge Inaction Problem

    Date published: 
    May 31, 2019

    "“What’s not so clear yet is whether G.D.P.R. has had an effect on privacy and on corporate data practices,” said Omer Tene, vice president and chief knowledge officer at the International Association of Privacy Professionals. “Has the underlying business model of the internet changed? Is consumer privacy better? I think those questions are very much still open.”"

  • Experts present most pressing issues facing global lawmakers on citizens’ privacy, democracy and rights to freedom of speech

    Date published: 
    May 31, 2019

    "“Make commitments to public service journalism”, Ben Scott, The Center for Internet and Society, Stanford Law School

    Ben states that technology doesn’t cause the problem of data misinformation, and irregulation. It infact accelerates it. This calls for policies to be made to limit the exploitation of these technology tools by malignant actors and by companies that place profits over the public interest. He says, “we have to view our technology problem through the lens of the social problems that we’re experiencing.”"

  • Public forum to Examine the USA Freedom Act, Telephone Records Program (Past Event)

    May 31, 2019
    Washington, DC

    Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board Chairman Adam Klein and Board Members Edward Felten and Jane Nitze have announced a May 31, 2019 public forum in Washington, DC to examine the USA FREEDOM Act and the government’s call detail records (CDR) program under that law. Several key provisions of the USA FREEDOM Act will sunset in December unless they are reauthorized by Congress.

  • Open Letter to GCHQ Regarding Threats Posed by their Ghost Proposal

    Today I join several cybersecurity, civil liberties, civil society organizations and researchers in responding to the United Kingdom's GCHQ recent proposal to silently add 'ghost' users from law enforcement or the security services to online chats and calls, including those conducted via encrypted messaging tools like WhatApp, iMessage, or Signal.

  • Facebook is still letting border militias organize on its platform

    Date published: 
    May 30, 2019

    "Jennifer Granick, a surveillance and cybersecurity counsel with the ACLU, explains that the purpose of the law “isn’t necessarily to protect the tech companies, but to protect the American people in having a platform where you can post information and post our stories, because if the platforms were liable for information that their users publish, then they wouldn’t be able to publish that information. They would have to go through some kind of advanced review process.”"

Pages

Subscribe to Of Interest