Weiye Loh's Library tagged → View Popular, Search in Google
real-name registration on China’s social media platforms, a policy formally taking effect on March 16, was meant to ensure “the privacy and secrecy of individuals, corporations and the nation.”
-
According to my own research, real-name registration for the internet is done by many countries around the world. But first it requires a basis in the law. In the mobile phone sector now we’re only at about 58 percent real-name registered, and about 40 percent of the market remains unregistered. This is a process, and it has to be explained. The trials with real-name registration on the Weibo are for the sake of the orderly and healthy development of the internet — in order to protect the privacy and secrecy of individuals, corporations and the nation.
Facebook has admitted that it constantly tracks its 750 million users even after they log out.
Technology bloggers have discovered that the social networking site monitors the other webpages the users visit, reported The Daily Mail.
Engineering director of Facebook, Mr Arturo Bejar, admitted that users continue to be tracked after they log out, but was quick to point out that the data was deleted right away.
-
The data that is sent back to Facebook's servers include the IP address, or unique identifier of your computer, and a log of what you have been viewing.
These information help Facebook make billions of dollars each year from advertising, as such information is highly valuable.
-
The tracking practices were exposed by Australian technology blogger Nik Cubrilovic, who found that when a user signs up to Facebook, monitoring files known as "cookies" get stored on the user's computer.
Mr Cubrilovic wrote: "Even if you are logged out, Facebook still knows and can track every page you visit. The only solution is to delete every Facebook cookie in your browser, or to use a separate (web) browser for Facebook interactions."
- 1 more annotation(s)...
Journalists are indispensably well positioned to expose abuses of power, but a press pass is not a moral unlimited-ride card.
The University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit, target of "ClimateGate", has released nearly all its remaining data on temperature measurements following a freedom of information bid.
-
The unit works with the UK Met Office to compile one of the world's most used records of global temperature change.
Most temperature data was already available, but critics of climate science want everything public.
Data from Trinidad and Tobago is being released against the country's wishes.
Following the latest release, raw data from virtually all of the world's 5,000-plus weather stations is freely available.
-
The only exceptions concern 19 weather stations in Poland, for which the Polish national weather service has declined to release data, for reasons it has not elaborated.
- 2 more annotation(s)...
Over the past several months researchers at the Stanford Security Lab have been developing a platform for measuring dynamic web content. One of our chief applications is a system for automated enforcement of Do Not Track by detecting the myriad forms of third-party tracking, including cookies, HTML5 storage, fingerprinting, and much more. While the software isn't quite polished enough for public release, we're eager to share some unexpected early results on the advertising ecosystem. Please bear in mind that these are preliminary findings from experimental software; our primary aims at this stage are developing the platform and validating the approach to third-party tracking detection. Many thanks to Jovanni Hernandez and Akshay Jagadeesh for their invaluable research assistance.
-
We manually identified tracking cookies (cookies that appeared to contain a unique identifier or substantially unique information) and how they were altered throughout each test. A spreadsheet of results is available. Please email if you would like a copy of the data we logged while testing a particular company's content.
In today’s Web 3.0 personal data rich economy, reputation is replacing cash, Fertik believes. And he is confident that his company, Reputation.com, is well placed to become the new rating index of this digital ecosystem.
But Fertik isn’t ecstatic about the way in which new online products, such as facial recognition technology, are exploiting the privacy of online consumers. Arguing that “data is the new oil,” Fertik believes that the only people not benefitting from today’s social economy are consumers themselves. Rather than government legislation, however, the solution, Fertik told me, are more start-up entrepreneurs like himself providing paid products that empower consumers in our Web 3.0 world of pervasive personalized data.
This is the second and final part of my interview with Fertik. Yesterday, he explained to me why people will pay for privacy.
How do you stop hackers from attacking your network? Build an entirely new infrastructure. That’s the idea behind the new .secure network, which will work just like any other network except for one thing: once you enter, you waive your right to privacy.
-
Popular Science explains the rationale:
China and other regimes around the world inherently have an upper hand when it comes to cyber defense because their lack of civil liberty protections lets the government freely monitor online activity. Things like “deep packet inspection” (which gained notoriety during Iranian election protests back in 2009) that let governments monitor citizens traffic also let them monitor for unusual activity … The U.S. Internet, by virtue of its adherence civil liberties, is more like the wild west. Everyone does everything online anonymously, and while that’s great for liberties, it’s also dangerous when cyber criminals/foreign hackers are roaming the cyber countryside
-
The .secure zone would essentially mimic the way the internet is regulated in more oppressive regimes, creating a space where banks, government contractors and the government can do business without fear of being hacked. Keith Alexander, who has the totally not made-up title of Cyber Command Chief, and several lawmakers are pushing for the new infrastructure, saying it’s absolutely necessary for national security. While the vulnerability of our infrastructure is a major concern, we’d wager a lot of Americans might have a problem with a section of the internet where your right to privacy is nonexistent.
The FTC has given thumbs up to a company, Social Intelligence Corp., selling a new kind of employee background check to employers. This one scours the internet for your posts and pictures to social media sites and creates a file of all the dumb stuff you ever uploaded online. For instance, this sample they provided was flagged for "Demonstrating potentially violent behavior" because of "flagrant display of weapons or bombs."
The FTC said that the file, which will last for up to seven years, does not violate the Fair Credit Reporting Act. The company also says that info in your file will be updated when you remove pictures from the social media sites. Forbes reports, "new employers who run searches through Social Intelligence won't have access to the materials if they are completely removed from the Internet."
companies see consumer data as something that they can use to target ads or offers, or perhaps that they can sell to third parties, but not as something that consumers themselves might want. Of course, this is not an entirely new idea, but most pundits on both sides – privacy advocates and marketers – don’t realize that rather than protecting consumers or hiding from them, companies should be bringing them into the game.
I believe that successful companies will turn personal data into an asset by giving it back to their customers in an enhanced form. I am not sure exactly how this will happen, but current players will either join this revolution or lose out.
-
ost disclosure statements are not designed to be read; they are designed to be clicked on. But some companies actually want their customers to read and understand the statements. They don’t want customers who might sue, and, just in case, they want to be able to prove that the customers did understand the risks.
So the leaders in disclosure statements right now tend to be financial and health-care companies – and also space-travel and extreme-sports vendors. They sincerely want to let their customers know what they are getting into, because a regretful customer is a vengeful one.
That means making disclosure statements readable. I would suggest turning them into a quiz. The user would not simply click a single button, but would have to select the right button for each question. For example:
What are my chances of dying in space?
A) 5%
B) 30%
C) 1-4% (the correct answer, based on experience so far; current spacecraft are believed to be safer.)
Now imagine:
Who can see my data?
A) I can.
B) XYZ Corporation.
C) XYZ Corporation’s marketing partners. (Click here to see the list.)
D) XYZ Corporation’s affiliates and anyone it chooses.
As the customer picks answers, she gets a good idea of what is going on. In fact, if you're a marketer, why not dispense with a single right answer and let the consumer specify what she wants to have happen with her data (and corresponding privileges/access rights if necessary)? That’s much more useful than vague policy statements. Suddenly, the disclosure statement becomes a consumer application that adds value to the vendor-consumer relationship.
-
And show the data themselves rather than a description.
- 5 more annotation(s)...
We tend to speak of journalists, of their role, their rights, their responsibilities and very often their lack of restraint and how it should be addressed. But this is misleading, and prevents us from seeing some of the complexities and possibilities, because the word ‘journalist’, in this context, covers two very different groups of people. One group is the actual journalists, as traditionally understood, and the other is those people whose principal professional activity is invading other people’s privacy for the purpose of publication.
-
Journalism is demonstrably valuable to society. It tells us what is new, important and interesting in public life, it holds authority to account, it promotes informed debate, it entertains and enlightens. For sure, it comes with complications. It is rushed and imperfect, it sometimes upsets people and in pursuit of its objectives it occasionally does unpleasant or even illegal things. But by and large we accept these less welcome aspects of journalism as part of the package, and we do so because journalism as a whole is in the public interest. It does good, or to put it another way, we would be much poorer without it.
-
journalists themselves are slow to draw the distinction because theirs is traditionally an open industry, without barriers and categories, and also because they don’t tend to think of what they do in terms of doing good and being valuable.
- 4 more annotation(s)...
how much freedom we are willing to give up for safety. For Americans, the answer is usually “Not much.” Especially when the people being punished are us, as opposed to far-off terrorists. If the LAPD’s numbers are correct and red-light collisions are down 62% at lights with cameras, is it worth to end the program because we don’t like getting tickets? Or are these legitimate privacy concerns? What do you think?
-
the city has a network of cameras perched up on traffic lights, just waiting for you to break the law so it can snap a photo of you and send you a $400 ticket. It’s not hard to see how many L.A. drivers have come to resent the lights as a symbol of Big Brother, an invasive and cynical way for the city to collect easy cash. That’s why the Los Angeles Police Commission recently decided to kill the program, that is unless the City Council vetoes it.
So what’s Utopianist about some fairly snazzy, semi-affordable spy glasses that allow their users to furtively record video of the goings-on around them?
-
The Roy Orbison looking Eyez will feature a 720p HD recording camera, microphone, Bluetooth and WiFi connectivity, 8 GB flash memory, and three hours of battery life. Using an iPhone or Android app you can transmit what your Eyez record directly to the web, or you can save and upload it later using a microUSB port.
Here’s a promo clip of the glasses from ZionEyez, the start-up company developing them:
-
At $150 a pair, these glasses are cheap enough to become invaluable tools for journalists in volatile regions, especially those living under regimes who restrict free speech and press — where being seen recording video can be dangerous
- 1 more annotation(s)...
Twitter didn’t bust an injunction just for the hell of it. It pointed to a need for greater transparency. The medium is the message. Those in power can’t afford to not know how this works.
What is more arrogant: to think you can ignore a huge part of the culture? Or to think someone out there might be interested in what you had for lunch? Those who think that’s all the net or Twitter are about are indeed twits.
-
doing everything online cuts off whole communities of folk with no internet access, but I watch my kids and I see that the radical changes are not about to happen. They have happened.
-
This is not just about Press freedom: our whole notion of privacy changed when mobile phones took off. The way we relate to each other in public space is policed by CCTV when it’s bad and captured on phones when it’s good.
- 4 more annotation(s)...
Twitter has been forced to hand over the personal details of a British user in a libel battle that could have huge implications for free speech on the web.
The social network has passed the name, email address and telephone number of a south Tyneside councillor accused of libelling the local authority via a series of anonymous Twitter accounts. South Tyneside council took the legal fight to the superior court of California, which ordered Twitter, based in San Francisco, to hand over the user's private details.
It is believed to be the first time Twitter has bowed to legal pressure to identify anonymous users and comes amid a huge row over privacy and free speech online.
Ryan Giggs, the Manchester United footballer named as being the plaintiff in a gagging order preventing reporting of an alleged affair with a reality TV model, is separately attempting to unmask Twitter users accused of revealing details of the privacy injunction.
-
Giggs brought the lawsuit at the high court in London and the move to use California courts is likely to be seen as a landmark moment in the internet privacy battle.
Ahmed Khan, the south Tyneside councillor accused of being the author of the pseudonymous Twitter accounts, described the council's move as "Orwellian". Khan received an email from Twitter earlier this month informing him that the site had handed over his personal information. He denies being the author of the allegedly defamatory material.
-
Khan said the information Twitter handed over was "just a great long list of numbers". The subpeona ordered Twitter to hand over 30 pieces of information relating to several Twitter accounts, including @fatcouncillor and @ahmedkhan01.
"I don't fully understand it but it all relates to my Twitter account and it not only breaches my human rights, but it potentially breaches the human rights of anyone who has ever sent me a message on Twitter.
- 1 more annotation(s)...
Will celebrities now have to sue Twitter and other social network sites to keep details of their sex lives private? That is exactly what one famous soccer player here is threatening to do. This well-known athlete, who is married, obtained an injunction to block his name from being used in connection with an alleged affair with the model Imogen Thomas. Her name has appeared publicly but not his.
His name is all over Twitter, and now he is threatening to sue the social network. But Twitter is located in California. If the football player sues there ... well, no California law would protect his name not appearing on the court documents as the plaintiff.
“Social Privacy in Networked Publics: Teens’ Attitudes, Practices, and Strategies”
by danah boyd and Alice Marwick
Smartphones running Google's Android software collect data about the user's movements in almost exactly the same way as the iPhone, according to an examination of files they contain. The discovery, made by a Swedish researcher, comes as the Democratic senator Al Franken has written to Apple's chief executive Steve Jobs demanding to know why iPhones keep a secret file recording the location of their users as they move around, as the Guardian revealed this week.
-
Smartphones running Google's Android software collect data about the user's movements in almost exactly the same way as the iPhone, according to an examination of files they contain. The discovery, made by a Swedish researcher, comes as the Democratic senator Al Franken has written to Apple's chief executive Steve Jobs demanding to know why iPhones keep a secret file recording the location of their users as they move around, as the Guardian revealed this week.
-
Magnus Eriksson, a Swedish programmer, has shown that Android phones – now the bestselling smartphones – do the same, though for a shorter period. According to files discovered by Android devices keep a record of the locations and unique IDs of the last 50 mobile masts that it has communicated with, and the last 200 Wi-Fi networks that it has "seen". These are overwritten, oldest first, when the relevant list is full. It is not yet known whether the lists are sent to Google. That differs from Apple, where the data is stored for up to a year.
- 5 more annotation(s)...
The study’s authors argue that removing age restrictions from sites like Facebook might actually be the best way of improving child safety online.
Elisabeth Staksrud, from the University of Oslo and one of the report’s authors comments that: “since children often lie about their age to join ‘forbidden’ sites it would be more practical to identify younger users and to target them with protective measures.”
-
-
The study, titled Social Networking, Age and Privacy, looked at trends among 25,000 young people across Europe. Researchers noted that European children are taking undue risks online:
A quarter of 9-16 year-olds on social networking sites across Europe have their profile set to ‘public’. One fifth of children whose profile is public display their address and/or phone number, twice as many as for those with private profiles. However, children in the U.K. tended to be more careful – only 10 per cent have their profiles set to ‘public.’
- 3 more annotation(s)...
Corporations have no right to "personal privacy" when it comes to government records requested under the Freedom of Information Act, a unanimous Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.
-
The court made short work of AT&T's argument in a dispute with the Federal Communications Commission. The telecommunications company had contended that because "person" is sometimes defined in federal law to mean a corporation as well as an individual, the company was entitled to a FOIA exemption that relates to "personal privacy."
Selected Tags
Related Tags
Top Contributors
Groups interested in Privacy
Highlighter, Sticky notes, Tagging, Groups and Network: integrated suite dramatically boosting research productivity. Learn more »
Join Diigo
