122 Matching Annotations
  1. Last 7 days
  2. Nov 2021
  3. Oct 2021
    1. When the most powerful company in the world possesses an instrument for manipulating billions of people—an instrument that only it can control, and that its own employees say is badly broken and dangerous—we should take notice.
  4. Sep 2021
    1. Africanslavery lacked two elements that made American slavery the most cruel formof slavery in history: the frenzy for limitless profit that comes from capitalisticagriculture; the reduction of the slave to less than human status by the use ofracial hatred, with that relentless clarity based on color, where white wasmaster, black was slave.

      While we've generally moved beyond chattel slavery, I'm struck by the phrase frenzy for limitless profit that comes from capitalistic agriculture. Though we don't have slavery, is American culture all-too captured by the idea of frenzied capitalism to the tune that the average American (the 99%) is a serf in their own country? Are we still blinded by our need for (over-)consumption?

      Are we recommitting the sins of the past perhaps in milder forms because of a blindness to an earlier original sin of capitalism?

      Do we need to better vitiate against raw capitalism with more regulation to provide a healthier mixed economy?

  5. Aug 2021
    1. Francis Fukuyama et al., Middleware for Dominant Digital Platforms: A Technological Solution to a Threat to Democracy, Stanford Cyber Policy Center, 3, https://fsi-live.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/cpc-middleware_ff_v2.pdf.
    2. Every year, in my platform-regulation class, I draw a Venn diagram on the board with three interlocking circles: privacy, speech, and competition. Then we identify all the issues that fall at the intersection of two or more circles. Interoperability, including for content-moderation purposes, is always smack in the middle. It touches every circle. This is what makes it hard. We have to solve problems in all those areas to make middleware work. But this is also what makes the concept so promising. If—or when—we do manage to meet this many-sided challenge, we will unlock something powerful.

      Interesting point about the intersection of interoperability. Are there other features that also touch them all?

    3. Francis Fukuyama has called "middleware": content-curation services that could give users more control over the material they see on internet platforms such as Facebook or Twitter.
  6. Jul 2021
    1. Elements of Metacognition Researchers distinguish between metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive regulation (Flavell, 1979, 1987; Schraw & Dennison, 1994).

      metacognitive knowledge vs metacognitive regulation

      • Metacognitive knowledge refers to what individuals know about themselves as cognitive processors
      • Metacognitive regulation refers to adjustments individuals make to their processes to help control their learning, such as planning, information management strategies, comprehension monitoring, de-bugging strategies, and evaluation of progress and goal
    1. It’s a familiar trick in the privatisation-happy US – like, say, underfunding public education and then criticising the institution for struggling.

      This same thing is being seen in the U.S. Post Office now too. Underfund it into failure rather than provide a public good.

      Capitalism definitely hasn't solved the issue, and certainly without government regulation. See also the last mile problem for internet service, telephone service, and cable service.

      UPS and FedEx apparently rely on the USPS for last mile delivery in remote areas. (Source for this?)

      The poor and the remote are inordinately effected in almost all these cases. What other things do these examples have in common? How can we compare and contrast the public service/government versions with the private capitalistic ones to make the issues more apparent. Which might be the better solution: capitalism with tight government regulation to ensure service at the low end or a government monopoly of the area? or something in between?

  7. Jun 2021
    1. We should favor ways of organizing our social and economic life so things that are socially productive are more nearly equally rewarded. And we should pick ways of making things, ways of delivering services, ways of running schooling that don’t skew achievement so far at the very top. … We could organize finance so that the middle of the skill distribution, the old home loan officer, is the dominant worker. We could organize medicine in such a way that the difference between the specialist doctor, the nurse practitioner, and the pharmacist is relatively small and most health care is delivered by people in the middle of the skill distribution. ... The core thing to do is to find policies both in education and the labor market that recompress the distribution of economic roles.

      This sounds like a positive move, but will require a lot of government regulation/oversight.

      Placing caps on runaway capitalism and meritocracy could be required to keep us from killing ourselves.

  8. May 2021
    1. I worked on a recent project to sketch out for a centre-right German think-tank how a European data commons might work. I tried to steer it away from property rights and towards what you’d get if you started with the commons and then worked back to what data could be harnessed, and to which collective purposes. This is eminently do-able, and pushes you towards two distinct areas; groups of people who are served poorly or not at all by current data regimes, and existing cooperatives, unions and mutual societies who could collect and process their members’ data to improve collective bargaining, or licence access to it to generate revenue and boost affiliate membership. Viewing personal data as a collective asset points towards all sorts of currently under-provided public goods (I briefly describe several, on p. 74 here – yes, oddly enough, this stuff got shoved into an annex).

      Apparently lots of reading to catch up on here.

      I definitely like the idea of starting with the commons and working backwards, not only with respect to data, but with respect to most natural resources. This should be the primary goal of governments and the goal should be to prevent private individuals and corporations from privatizing profits and socializing the losses.

      Think of an individual organism in analogy to a country or even personkind. What do we call a group of cells that grows without check and consumes all the resources? (A cancer). The organism needs each cell and group of cells to work together for the common good. We can't have a group of cis-gender white men aggregating all the power and resources for themselves at the cost of the rest otherwise they're just a cancer on humanity.

    2. To change incentives so that personal data is treated with appropriate care, we need criminal penalties for the Facebook executives who left vulnerable half a billion people’s personal data, unleashing a lifetime of phishing attacks, and who now point to an FTC deal indemnifying them from liability because our phone numbers and unchangeable dates of birth are “old” data.

      We definitely need penalties and regulation to fix our problems.

    1. For example, we know one of the ways to make people care about negative externalities is to make them pay for it; that’s why carbon pricing is one of the most efficient ways of reducing emissions. There’s no reason why we couldn’t enact a data tax of some kind. We can also take a cautionary tale from pricing externalities, because you have to have the will to enforce it. Western Canada is littered with tens of thousands of orphan wells that oil production companies said they would clean up and haven’t, and now the Canadian government is chipping in billions of dollars to do it for them. This means we must build in enforcement mechanisms at the same time that we’re designing principles for data governance, otherwise it’s little more than ethics-washing.

      Building in pre-payments or a tax on data leaks to prevent companies neglecting negative externalities could be an important stick in government regulation.

      While it should apply across the board, it should be particularly onerous for for-profit companies.

    1. it makes a difference whether the argument made before Congress is “Facebook is bad, cannot reform itself, and is guided by people who know what they’re doing but are doing int anyway—and the company needs to be broken up immediately” or if the argument is “Facebook means well, but it sure would be nice if they could send out fewer notifications and maybe stop recommending so much conspiratorial content.”

      Note the dramatic difference between these spaces and the potential ability for things to get better.

    1. Howard, J., Huang, A., Li, Z., Tufekci, Z., Zdimal, V., Westhuizen, H.-M. van der, Delft, A. von, Price, A., Fridman, L., Tang, L.-H., Tang, V., Watson, G. L., Bax, C. E., Shaikh, R., Questier, F., Hernandez, D., Chu, L. F., Ramirez, C. M., & Rimoin, A. W. (2021). An evidence review of face masks against COVID-19. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(4). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2014564118

  9. Apr 2021
  10. Mar 2021
    1. Other countries are already focusing their regulatory efforts on engineering and design. France has discussed appointing an algorithm auditor, who would oversee the effects of platform engineering on the French public. The U.K. has proposed that companies assess the impact of algorithms on illegal content distribution and illegal activity on their platforms. Europe is heading in that direction too.
    2. Theodore Roosevelt—who denounced the “unfair money-getting” that created a “small class of enormously wealthy and economically powerful men, whose chief object is to hold and increase their power”—rewrote the rules. He broke up monopolies to make the economy more fair, returning power to small businesses and entrepreneurs. He enacted protections for working people. And he created the national parks, public spaces for all to enjoy.

      We could definitely use another round of this now. Where is the end of our current gilded age?

  11. Feb 2021
  12. Jan 2021
    1. Users fully depend on WhatsApp developers. If WhatsApp developers decide to include user-hostile features in the app, users must go with it. They can’t switch to a different server or client without switching away from WhatsApp and losing the ability to communicate with all their WhatsApp contacts.

      This is the sort of monopoly behavior that needs to be regulated.

  13. Nov 2020
    1. the lifecycle of most companies is that they grow by delivering much more value than they charge for, they raise funds based on their growth, and then they make those investments pay off by capturing more value. In its maturity, a company will capture a greater share of the value it creates.

      The deal with pharma, in theory, is that they're given market exclusivity for a limited time to recoup their investment in R&D. With startups, they give us free or subsidized service for a limited time and recoup by exploiting their scale afterwards. Whereas with pharma, their upside is capped, with startups, society's upside is capped.

  14. Oct 2020
    1. Similarly, technology can help us control the climate, make AI safe, and improve privacy.

      regulation needs to surround the technology that will help with these things

    1. When a dominant firm buys its a nascent challenger, alarm bells are supposed to ring. Yet both American and European regulators found themselves unable to find anything wrong with the takeover.
    1. We need to debate what kind of hypermedia suit our vision of society - how we create the interactive products and on-line services we want to use, the kind of computers we like and the software we find most useful. We need to find ways to think socially and politically about the machines we develop. While learning from the can-do attitude of the Californian individualists, we also must recognise that the potentiality of hypermedia can never solely be realised through market forces. We need an economy which can unleash the creative powers of hi-tech artisans. Only then can we fully grasp the Promethean opportunities of hypermedia as humanity moves into the next stage of modernity.

      Great ending. These words are as true today as they were 25 years ago.

    1. But that state of consciousness that permits the growth of liberalism seems to stabilize in the way one would expect at the end of history if it is underwritten by the abundance of a modern free market economy.

      Writers spend an awful lot of time focused too carefully on the free market economy, but don't acknowledge a lot of the major benefits of the non-free market parts which are undertaken and executed often by governments and regulatory environments. (Hacker & Pierson, 2016)

    1. “Deliver with Amazon. Be your own boss. Great earnings. Flexible hours. Make more time for whatever drives you.” Amazon has taken a page from Uber and is leveraging the romanticization of entrepreneurship, the need for flexibility, and the decreasing options of non-degreed workers in rural areas. There are already stories depicting breakneck delivery schedules that obviate luxuries such as bathroom breaks. FedEx drivers get paternity leave and (gasp) health insurance.

      Again, it's the ability to canibalize at the lowest levels that helps tech companies to out-compete their rivals. Companies should be regulated away from being able to do this, particularly for non-employees.

    1. Part of the problem is that most policies look only 12 months into the future, ignoring long-term trends even as insurance availability influences development and drives people’s long-term decision-making.

      Another place where markets are failing us. We need better regulation for this sort of behavior.

  15. Sep 2020
  16. Aug 2020
  17. Jul 2020
  18. Jun 2020
  19. May 2020
  20. Apr 2020
    1. Vers une régulation nécessaire du marché de l’info ?

      On trouve ici la question principale à laquelle répond cet article : Face à la prolifération des fake news faut-il agir, et si oui comment?

      La première partie de la question est presque réthorique, après l'argumentation qui vient d'être faite la réponse "oui" s'impose d'elle-même, il faut agir.

      La deuxième partie de cette question est introduite 3 lignes plus bas par un "Que faire?" qui permet à l'auteur d'apporter ses deux propositions.

    2. Que faire ? “Ouvrir un chapitre sur la régulation du marché de l’information, en concertation avec les pouvoirs politiques et les grands acteurs du net. Cela consiste à s’intéresser à la question de la visibilité des contenus” analyse-t- il. Est-il normal que certains mots-clefs renvoient prioritairement à des sites contraires à l’orthodoxie scientifique ? Les GAFA** en concertation avec les politiques ont assurément un rôle à jouer à ce sujet. “L’autre aspect, au moins aussi important, est l’éducation. Il faut se saisir de cette révolution du marché de l’information pour opérer une révolution pédagogique et offrir aux apprenants toutes les occasions pour qu’ils puissent comprendre non seulement le contenu – de la connaissance – mais aussi les raisons pour lesquelles ce contenu leur résiste”, conclut-il. L’urgence est réelle

      Ce paragraphe présente la thèse de l'auteur qui est la suivante : On ne doit pas rester inactif face à la prolifération des fausses informations : il faut réguler la visibilité des contenus et promouvoir l'éducation aux médias et à la pensée critique.

  21. Mar 2020
    1. To join the Privacy Shield Framework, a U.S.-based organization is required to self-certify to the Department of Commerce and publicly commit to comply with the Framework’s requirements. While joining the Privacy Shield is voluntary, the GDPR goes far beyond it.
    2. The GDPR is a sea change and requires companies to go much further than they have in the past under the old framework. Principles like data minimization, what constitutes valid consent, and when a business can claim a legitimate interest in someone's personal data provide serious challenges to U.S. businesses.
    3. That outcome, in fact, is why the General Data Protection Regulation has been introduced. GDPR is being billed by the EU as the biggest shake-up of data privacy regulations since the birth of the web, saying it sets new standards in the wake of the recent Facebook data harvesting scandal.
    1. Also inevitable if the mass deception continues: More regulation. If businesses don’t behave ethically on their own, laws will be drawn up to force change.
    1. Ryan said he believes the GDPR has resulted in a “game of chicken” between the tech industry and regulators, where companies are trying to see what they can get away with and doing the bare minimum — without taking meaningful action or, often, actually complying with the law.
    1. This is another total nonsense decision from incompetent law makers. Why not make website owners keep their online businesses online by force, even if they stop making money, just for the sake of "free information"?
    1. While Americans tend to prioritize individual liberty, Europeans are more inclined to value the role of the state. Americans are generally more tolerant of offensive speech than Europeans. That has translated to a greater impetus to regulate tech in Europe.
  22. Jan 2020
    1. use of the strong UAAU signal in highly expressed genes and for the occurrence of the weaker UGAC signal at several recording sites.

      three types of recoding events: stop-codon readthrough, –1 ribosome frameshifting and translational bypassing

      (Rodnina, Marina V., et al. "Translational recoding: canonical translation mechanisms reinterpreted." Nucleic acids research (2019).)

    1. suggestive of protein extension, especially at UGA codons, which rely exclusively on the reduced function RF2 variant of the K-12 strain for termination
  23. Dec 2019
    1. Sec. 7-30. Reporting. By January 1, 2021, and on January 1 of every year thereafter, or upon request by the Illinois Cannabis Regulation Oversight Officer, each cannabis business establishment licensed under this Act shall report to the Illinois Cannabis Regulation Oversight Officer, on a form to be provided by the Illinois Cannabis Regulation Oversight Officer, information that will allow it to assess the extent of diversity in the medical and adult use cannabis industry and methods for reducing or eliminating any identified barriers to entry, including access to capital. The information to be collected shall be designed to identify the following:        (1) the number and percentage of licenses provided to     Social Equity Applicants and to businesses owned by minorities, women, veterans, and people with disabilities;        (2) the total number and percentage of employees in     the cannabis industry who meet the criteria in (3)(i) or (3)(ii) in the definition of Social Equity Applicant or who are minorities, women, veterans, or people with disabilities;         (3) the total number and percentage of contractors     and subcontractors in the cannabis industry that meet the definition of a Social Equity Applicant or who are owned by minorities, women, veterans, or people with disabilities, if known to the cannabis business establishment; and        (4) recommendations on reducing or eliminating any     identified barriers to entry, including access to capital, in the cannabis industry.

      Each year, the Illinois Cannabis Regulation Oversight Officer, currently former State Sen. Toi Hutchinson, shall receive a report from each business allowing the office to assess diversity in the recreational and medicinal industry.

    1. Moving back to a focus on protocols over platforms can solve many of these problems.

      This may also only be the case if large corporations are forced to open up and support those protocols. If my independent website can't interact freely and openly with something like Twitter on a level playing field, then it really does no good.