Current Berkman People and Projects

Keep track of Berkman-related news and conversations by subscribing to this page using your RSS feed reader. This aggregation of blogs relating to the Berkman Center does not necessarily represent the views of the Berkman Center or Harvard University but is provided as a convenient starting point for those who wish to explore the people and projects in Berkman's orbit. As this is a global exercise, times are in UTC.

The list of blogs being aggregated here can be found at the bottom of this page.

April 25, 2017

Berkman Center front page
Next Gen Podcast Distribution Protocols:

Subtitle

Innovation and Governance in Open Development Initiatives

Teaser

The goals of the symposium include furthering cooperation among various players in the world of podcast creation and distribution and consideration of recommendations on standards, enhancements, extensions, and other methods to support the growth of podcasting as an open and inclusive medium.

Event Date

May 11 2017 8:30am to May 11 2017 5:00pm
Thumbnail Image: 

Thursday, May 11, 2017, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm
Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
Harvard Law School campus, Wasserstein Hall
1585 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA​
Milstein East C (room 2036, second floor)

Registration is limited. Please apply here.


Presented by the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University and the Tow Center for Digital Journalism at the Columbia Journalism School, in Collaboration with the syndicated.media Open Working Group.


On May 11, 2017, the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society and Tow Center for Digital Journalism will host and facilitate a symposium, in collaboration with the syndicated.media open working group, to address the process of developing standards that support the distribution of syndicated audio content.  The event will look back at the evolution of the RSS protocol and look forward at the need for new technical infrastructure to support an expanding podcast distribution landscape.  Participants will have the opportunity to engage in both higher-level policy discussions and technical deep-dives throughout the course of this one-day event.

The goals of the symposium include furthering cooperation among various players in the world of podcast creation and distribution and consideration of recommendations on standards, enhancements, extensions, and other methods to support the growth of podcasting as an open and inclusive medium.  It will bring together academic, non-profit, and commercial constituencies to address, among other things:

  • the history of media protocols;

  • promises and pitfalls associated with open development initiatives;

  • rights issues relevant to openly syndicated content;

  • questions of governance and stakeholder engagement; and

  • technical planning and implementation for next generation podcast distribution

The symposium will mix talks and panels that generally address these issues (curated by the Berkman Klein and Tow Center teams) with opportunities for breakouts that allow deeper dives into technical questions around distribution protocols for podcasts and other forms of serialized media (facilitated by members of the syndicated.media community).

Registration is limited; sign up here.  The symposium will be followed by a separate, two-day “Audio for Good”  event, co-hosted by PRX, RadioPublic, and the HBS Digital Initiative.  Applications to participate can be submitted here.


About the Hosts

The Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society is a research center based at Harvard University.  The Center’s Center's mission is to explore and understand cyberspace; to study its development, dynamics, norms, and standards; and to assess the need or lack thereof for laws and sanctions.  Berkman Klein is a research center, premised on the observation that what it seeks to learn is not already recorded. The Center’s method is to build out into cyberspace, record data, self-study, and share. Its mode is entrepreneurial nonprofit.

The Tow Center for Digital Journalism, established in 2010, provides journalists with the skills and knowledge to lead the future of digital journalism and serves as a research and development center for the profession as a whole. Operating as an institute within Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism, the Tow Center is poised to take advantage of a unique combination of factors to foster the development of digital journalism. Its New York location affords access to cutting-edge technologists, a strong culture of journalism and multiple journalism and communication schools, with outstanding universities attached to them. The Tow Center is where technology and journalism meet, and where education and practice meet.

Syndicated.media is a community-driven working group with a mission to ensure that podcasting grows to meet the needs of listeners, creators, producers, publishers, advertisers, and developers, without sacrificing the groundwork that has been established to make it an open and inclusive medium. The goal of the working group is to develop clear and comprehensive standards and best practices. The group now includes more than 100 representatives from a growing number of podcast industry stakeholders, including international participants, and intends to incrementally release updates to existing standards and recommendations for new proposals.

Photo courtesy of Alba Cobra

by candersen at April 25, 2017 04:54 PM

Digital Expungement: Rehabilitation in the Digital Age

Subtitle

with Berkman Klein Faculty Associate, Eldar Haber

Teaser

Can digital technology lead to the extinction of criminal rehabilitation? How should policymakers strike a balance between protecting civil rights and public safety while ensuring the reintegration into society of individuals with expunged criminal history?

Parent Event

Berkman Klein Luncheon Series

Event Date

Apr 25 2017 12:00pm to Apr 25 2017 12:00pm
Thumbnail Image: 

Tuesday, April 25, 2017 at 12:00 pm
Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University

Media from this event will be posted on this page soon!

The concept of criminal rehabilitation in the digital age is intriguing. How can we ensure proper reintegration into society of individuals with a criminal history that was expunged by the state when their wrongdoings remain widely available through commercial vendors (data brokers) and online sources like mugshot websites, legal research websites, social media platforms, and media archives? What are constitutional and pragmatic challenges to ensure digital rehabilitation? Is there a viable solution to solve this conundrum?

About Eldar

Eldar Haber is an Associate Professor (Senior Lecturer) at the Faculty of Law, Haifa University and a Faculty Associate at the Berkman-Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University. He earned his Ph.D. from Tel-Aviv University and completed his postdoctoral studies as a fellow at the Berkman-Klein Center. His main research interests consist of various facets of law and technology including cyber law, intellectual property law (focusing mainly on copyright), privacy, civil rights and liberties, and criminal law. His works were published in various flagship law reviews worldwide, including top-specialized law and technology journals of U.S. universities such as Harvard, Yale and Stanford. His works were presented in various workshops and conferences around the globe, and were cited in academic papers, governmental reports, the media, and U.S. Federal courts.

by candersen at April 25, 2017 04:00 PM

Meeting 21st Century Municipal Internet Access Needs

Subtitle

Perspectives from Boston City Hall and Brookline on City and Regional Infrastructure Planning

Teaser

Hosted by Responsive Communities, a project of the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University.

Event Date

Apr 25 2017 10:00am to Apr 25 2017 12:30pm
Thumbnail Image: 

Tuesday, April 25, 2017 between 10:00 am - 12:30 pm
Harvard Law School campus, Wasserstein Hall

This event is hosted by Responsive Communities, a project of the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University.

At this free public event, Jascha Franklin-Hodge, Boston's CIO, will describe the city's ongoing efforts at fostering private sector competition in providing high-speed wired and wireless Internet access. And Kevin Stokes, CIO of Brookline, will discuss the opportunities and challenges in trying to work across institutional and state agency boundaries to obtain fiber-optic network access to boost local bandwidth and reduce costs. Municipal and state officials are invited to attend and then participate in a discussion about best practices and opportunities for collaboration. The event will conclude with an audience Q&A and bag lunch.

10:00-10:05: Introductory remarks: Waide Warner and David Talbot, Responsive Communities, Berkman Klein Center

10:05-⁠10:20: Boston's strategy: Jascha Franklin–Hodge, City of Boston

10:20-10:35: Efforts at inter-agency collaboration: Kevin Stokes, Town of Brookline

10:35-11:15: Open discussion between speakers and invited leaders from municipalities and state agencies and authorities

11:15-⁠11:30: Audience Q&A

11:30-⁠12:30: Bag lunch and networking
 

ABOUT THE SPEAKERS

As Boston’s CIO, Jascha Franklin-Hodge works to enhance online service delivery, empower city employees with effective digital tools, and improve access to technology and Internet access service across all Boston neighborhoods. His efforts in Boston include mapping 175 miles of existing city-owned conduit to decrease costs of network deployments, streamlining processes and permitting associated with investment in broadband infrastructure, and ensuring that city infrastructure projects accommodate future network construction. Today five wired and wireless broadband providers serve residents in the city. Franklin-Hodge is now beginning to examine how to prepare for next-generation wireless deployments.

Kevin Stokes has served as CIO for the Town of Brookline and its public schools for 12 years. With municipal and school bandwidth needs rising sharply, Stokes wants wider access to fiber-optic networks and the ability to directly reach wholesale bandwidth available in Boston.  Brookline sits near locations with MBTA and Mass DOT fiber optic lines, as well as hospitals and universities with fiber-optic networks. Stokes, like other municipal CIOs, would like to identify decision-makers and negotiate agreements with public and nonprofit network owners. 

by candersen at April 25, 2017 12:00 PM

April 24, 2017

Cyberlaw Clinic - blog
First Circuit Hears Oral Argument in Unusual Copyright Case

On April 6, 2017, Cyberlaw Clinic students attended oral argument in a First Circuit copyright appeal involving a curious set of facts and legal issues. The case pitted Richard Goren, a Massachusetts attorney, against Xcentric Ventures, LLC, the owner of an online consumer review website known as the Ripoff Report. Goren was upset by a review of his services posted on Ripoff Report by Christian DuPont, the defendant in a prior case where Goren had represented the plaintiff. Goren initially sued Dupont in Massachusetts state court, alleging that Dupont’s review was defamatory. Dupont failed to appear, and thus defaulted. After obtaining a default judgment, Goren requested that Xcentric remove the posting. Xcentric refused, citing the Ripoff Report’s strict “no removal policy.”

Here’s where the dispute gets weird. Upset by Xcentric’s response, Goren obtained amended relief from the same state court that presided over the defamation suit. This amended relief purported to assign Dupont’s copyright in the post to Goren, and to make Goren Dupont’s “attorney-in-fact” to effectuate the transfer. After obtaining a copyright registration, Goren sued Xcentric in federal district court, alleging inter alia that Xcentric had infringed Goren’s newfound proprietary rights as the post’s “owner.”

Goren’s strategy was dubious. He attempted to use copyright law as a backdoor to remedy the alleged defamation. This amounted to a misuse of copyright to censor speech, which is ironic given that copyright law is meant to incentivize the distribution of creative works to the public. Unfortunately, Goren’s strategy is not unprecedented. Similar attempts to use copyright as a means of censorship have been rejected in both the Eleventh and Ninth Circuits. See Katz v. Google Inc., 802 F.3d 1178, 1184 (11th Cir. 2015); Garcia v. Google, Inc., 786 F.3d 733, 736 (9th Cir. 2015) (“[A] weak copyright claim cannot justify censorship in the guise of authorship.”)

Xcentric defended the lawsuit by arguing that the copyright assignment was involuntary, and thus invalid under Section 201(e) of the Copyright Act. See 17 U.S.C. § 201(e). Section 201(e) prohibits involuntary transfers of copyright ownership. According to Xcentric, this meant that the Massachusetts state judge lacked authority to grant Goren the relief he had obtained. Instead, ownership should never have left Dupont’s hands. Since the transfer of ownership resulted from a default judgment in a state defamation suit, Xcentric argued that the transfer was involuntary, and thus invalid under Section 201(e). The district court agreed with Xcentric’s view of the law. It granted Xcentric summary judgment, acknowledging that 201(e) voided the purported transfer of ownership.

Goren appealed the district court’s ruling to the First Circuit, which heard oral argument earlier this month. It seems very likely that the First Circuit will affirm on the Section 201(e) issue. At oral argument, the First Circuit panel appeared to accept the logic of Xcentric’s argument, without questioning its counsel about 201(e). The panel instead focused on a separate attorneys’ fees issue, indicating that it might be leaning toward an affirmance on the merits.

Beyond the copyright claim, Goren also contended that Xcentric’s conduct violated state defamation and competition laws. The district court held that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act gave Xcentric immunity from those claims. Section 230 states that “[n]o provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.” 47 U.S.C. § 230(c). As an online forum for user reviews, the Ripoff Report qualifies as an “interactive computer service” under the CDA. Dupont, as the post’s author, was the sole “information content provider.” Because of 230’s immunity provision, the district court held that Xcentric could not be found liable for a post it didn’t author. Instead, Goren’s only remedy was against Dupont—against whom Goren has already obtained a default judgment.

While the law clearly immunizes Xcentric from liability for defamation, the policy questions raised by this case are a bit murkier. The CDA was meant to facilitate the growth of the internet as a medium for communication, by ensuring that websites hosting user-generated content could operate without threat of liability for their users’ acts. Congress determined that the threat of liability against such sites was too onerous, given the obvious financial disincentive that the threat of money damages would provide. However, the CDA also gives sites immunity from equitable relief, which means that they can refuse to remove defamatory posts with impunity. This puts individuals like Goren in a difficult situation: Goren obtained a state court defamation judgment against Dupont, but he lacks any practical recourse to have the post removed from the internet.

While immunity from money damages makes sense, does the same hold true for equitable relief? It isn’t obvious that well-tailored equitable relief would pose too-stringent a burden on websites hosting user-generated content. While this policy consideration certainly doesn’t justify Goren’s misuse of copyright law, it might make his strategy a bit more understandable.

Given the law as it stands, the First Circuit will likely affirm the district court’s rulings in favor of Xcentric. While there might be room for debate on the CDA policy question, the law is straightforward. The law is similarly clear on the copyright issue: the purported transfer of ownership cannot be sustained given 201(e)’s ban on involuntary transfers. Goren’s attempt to hijack copyright law might have been clever, but it was suspicious from the start. For the reasons discussed above, his attempt will ultimately fail.  

by Leo Angelakos at April 24, 2017 06:13 PM

John Palfrey
Statement regarding past abuse at Andover

Today, we know that many schools, including Andover, have not always lived up to our commitment to protect students in our care. Over the past year, independent investigators from Sanghavi Law Office have been carrying out a review of all reports of sexual misconduct at our school. We have repeatedly asked community members to share concerns or information they may have with these independent investigators. In August 2016, I sent a public letter to the Andover community about what we knew at that time. Since then, we have received further reports and have referred them all for review to the investigators. On campus, we remain focused on ensuring that we do right by the students we have the privilege to teach today.

Matters related to past teacher misconduct are currently appearing in the press. We take these matters extremely seriously. Our hearts go out to all those who were harmed at our school and at all schools in the past. At Andover, we are committed to learning as much as we can about our school’s past, offering support and acknowledgment for survivors of sexual misconduct, and ensuring the safety and security of all students on our campus today. The harms done to students in the past must never be repeated.


by jgpalfrey at April 24, 2017 06:05 PM

Jeffrey Schnapp
TEDwards

It’s easy to poke fun at some of the tics and tropes that have come to define TED over the course of its 32 years of “spreading ideas that matter.” But the fact remains that TED has been transformative and the TED stage is one of the world’s defining communications and innovation platforms, now fully global, interconnected with a multiplicity of television, radio, and web-based channels, and followed by audiences that number in the tens of millions.

My robotic side kick Gita and I are looking forward to joining the community of the TED speakers this week in Vancouver to talk about the role of robotics in the future of light mobility: movability as we like to call it at Piaggio Fast Forward, which is to say, mobility with a playful and functionally meaningful difference. Here’s what the ludic Piaggio Dictionary at the end of FuturPiaggio has to say about movability:

Movibilità / (Movability) = a Piaggio core value since its foundation, movability means a full-spectrum approach to the problems associated with human mobility that encompasses ships, aircraft, trains, cars, buses, trains, motorcycles, scooters, mopeds, marine outboards, and even bicycles (from Bianchi, once under Piaggio ownership, to the Piaggio e-Bike).

I’ll share the TED talk after it is published online. In the meantime, Gita says… “hi.”

by jeffrey at April 24, 2017 02:34 PM

April 21, 2017

Harry Lewis
Birthday stuff
I turned 70 on April 19. I made the decision some time ago to creep toward retirement around now. So I am giving up my role as Director of Undergraduate Studies in CS, a role I have had most years since even before there was a CS undergraduate major. I will be teaching half time for the next two years (I have already blogged about the cool new Classics of Computer Science course I will be teaching). I then have a year of saved sabbatical, so will transition to Research Professor or some such title on July 1, 2020.

To mark the moment, and to celebrate what has happened to the field of CS at Harvard and elsewhere in the years since I started teaching at Harvard in 1974, SEAS put on a big celebration on my birthday. Many of my former students and teaching fellows attended, and there was a terrific program of talks. You can watch all six hours of it if you are a beggar for punishment! Here is the video -- thanks to the CS50 team for producing it and getting it up so quickly. (If you just want to hear what I, Bill Gates, and Mark Zuckerberg had to say, go to about 20 minutes from the end.)

And Harvard Magazine has a nice report on the event. Thanks to everyone, and especially to Margo Seltzer, David Parkes, and Henry Leitner for their roles in putting this together.

We were able to reproduce a facsimile of A 30th Anniversary Family Photo, which I will post when I get it.

In the meantime, here is another classic -- six women computer scientists of the class of 1980 all came back for the celebration. That really means a lot to me! From left to right, Jeanette Hung, Jennifer (Greenspan) Hurwitz, Betty (Ryan) Tylko, Diane (Wasserman) Feldman, HRL, Christine (Ausnit) Hood, and boo gershun. Thanks!


by Harry Lewis (noreply@blogger.com) at April 21, 2017 11:05 PM

Stuart Shieber - The Occasional Pamphlet
WWHD?
… Harry Lewis…
…personal role model…
Image of Harry Lewis courtesy of Harvard John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences

This past Wednesday, April 19, was a celebration of computer science at Harvard, in honor of the 70th birthday of my undergraduate adviser, faculty colleague, former Dean of Harvard College, baseball aficionado, and personal role model Harry Lewis. The session lasted all day, with talks and reminiscences from many of Harry’s past students, myself included. For those interested, my brief remarks on the topic of “WWHD?” (What Would Harry Do?) can be found in the video of the event.

By the way, the “Slow Down” memo that I quoted from is available from Harry’s website. I recommend it for every future college first-year student.

by Stuart Shieber at April 21, 2017 07:26 PM

Justin Reich
Projects that Learn
Every effort to improve instruction and learning in schools is an opportunity for professional development for educators and school leaders.

by Justin Reich at April 21, 2017 12:43 PM

April 20, 2017

David Weinberger
Mail from Xpeditr

Xpeditr has really overestimated the size of my wine cellar.

wine cellar

The post Mail from Xpeditr appeared first on Joho the Blog.

by davidw at April 20, 2017 10:56 PM

Alien knowledge

Medium has published my long post about how our idea of knowledge is being rewritten, as machine learning is proving itself to be more accurate than we can be, in some situations, but achieves that accuracy by “thinking” in ways that we can’t follow.

This is from the opening section:

We are increasingly relying on machines that derive conclusions from models that they themselves have created, models that are often beyond human comprehension, models that “think” about the world differently than we do.

But this comes with a price. This infusion of alien intelligence is bringing into question the assumptions embedded in our long Western tradition. We thought knowledge was about finding the order hidden in the chaos. We thought it was about simplifying the world. It looks like we were wrong. Knowing the world may require giving up on understanding it.

The post Alien knowledge appeared first on Joho the Blog.

by davidw at April 20, 2017 12:56 AM

April 18, 2017

Berkman Center front page
Internet Access as a Basic Service: Inspiration from our Canadian Neighbors

Subtitle

featuring Mr. Jean-Pierre Blais, Chairman of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission

Teaser

Join the Berkman Klein Center and the HLS Canadian Law Student Association as Mr. Blais speaks about broadband, internet, and the future of connectivity in Canada and around the world

Parent Event

Berkman Klein Luncheon Series

Event Date

Apr 18 2017 12:00pm to Apr 18 2017 12:00pm
Thumbnail Image: 

Tuesday, April 18, 2017 at 12:00 pm
Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University

Check back soon for video and audio from this talk!

This event is being sponsored by the HLS Canadian Law Student Association and the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University.

Deemed the modern equivalent of building roads or railways, connecting every person and business to high-speed internet is on the minds of policymakers, advocates, and industry players. Under the leadership of Mr. Jean-Pierre Blais, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (“CRTC”) ruled in December 2016 that broadband internet access is a basic and vital service, thus ensuring that broadband internet joins the ranks of local phone service. The CRTC’s announced reforms will impact over 2 million Canadian households, especially those in remote and isolated areas. The policy aims to ensure that internet download speeds of 50mbps and upload speeds of 10mbps are available to 90% of Canadian homes and business by 2021. 

Join the Berkman Klein Center and the HLS Canadian Law Student Association as Mr. Blais speaks about broadband, internet, and the future of connectivity in Canada and around the world. 

About Jean-Pierre Blais

Before joining the CRTC, Mr. Blais was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Board Secretariat’s Government Operations Sector. In this capacity, he provided advice on the management oversight and corporate governance of various federal departments, agencies and crown corporations.
From 2004 to 2011, he was Assistant Deputy Minister of Cultural Affairs at the Department of Canadian Heritage. While there, he created the Task Force on New Technologies to study the impact of the Internet and digital technologies on Canada’s cultural policies. In addition, he served as Director of the Canadian Television Fund. His responsibilities also included cultural trade policy and international policies and treaties, such as the UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expression. As the Director of Investment from 2004 to 2011, he reviewed transactions in the cultural sector under the Investment Canada Act and provided advice to the Minister of Canadian Heritage.
Mr. Blais also served as Assistant Deputy Minister of International and Intergovernmental Affairs at the Department of Canadian Heritage. He played a pivotal role in the rapid adoption of the UNESCO Anti-Doping Convention and in garnering international support for the World Anti-Doping Agency’s Anti-Doping Code. Moreover, he represented the Government of Canada on the Vancouver 2010 Winter Games Bid Corporation.
As the CRTC’s Executive Director of Broadcasting from 1999 to 2002, he notably oversaw the development of a licensing framework for new digital pay and specialty services and led reviews of major ownership transactions. He previously was a member of the Legal Directorate, serving as General Counsel, Broadcasting and Senior Counsel. From 1985 to 1991, Mr. Blais was an attorney with the Montreal-based firm Martineau Walker.
Mr. Blais holds a Master of Laws from the University of Melbourne in Australia, as well as a Bachelor of Civil Law and a Bachelor of Common Law from McGill University. He is a member of the Barreau du Québec and the Law Society of Upper Canada.

His term ends on June 17, 2017.

by candersen at April 18, 2017 04:00 PM

The Online Humor Conversation Series at MIT

Subtitle

A spring event series with the MIT Media Lab's Center for Civic Media, and co-sponsored by the Berkman Klein Center

Teaser

From using humor as a tool for resisting an authoritarian government, to rating dogs online, this spring's humor event series has got it all!

Thumbnail Image: 

The Online Humor Conversation Series at MIT brings comedians working online in conversation with academics and researchers to discuss humor's impact and influence on the internet, society and culture.

Join us for conversations on:

  • Cuteness, dogs, and humor in online discourse
  • Humor as a tool for resisting an authoritarian government
  • Race and humor online
  • ...and much more!

Visit mithumorseries.com to find out how to attend in person!

All events are free and open to the public.

Generously funded by the MIT De Florez Fund for Humor, in association with the MIT Media Lab's Center for Civic Media, and co-sponsored by the Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University.

by djones at April 18, 2017 03:04 PM

April 17, 2017

Berkman Center front page
A More Perfect Internet: Promoting Digital Civility and Combating Cyber-Violence

Subtitle

Arturo J. Carrillo is Professor of Law, The George Washington University Law School

Teaser

An exploration of issues related to digital incivility with an emphasis on cyber-violence. When digital turns incivil, how does the law respond?

Event Date

Apr 19 2017 12:00pm to Apr 19 2017 12:00pm
Thumbnail Image: 

Wednesday, April 19, 2017 at 12:00 pm
Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
 

This event is be co-sponsored by the Human Rights Program at Harvard Law School and the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University.

This talk will address a range of issues relating to digital incivility with en emphasis on cyber-violence. What are the most common negative behaviors online? How are these perceived and experienced by users? What is cyber-violence? Who does it target? What steps can be taken to prevent such behaviors? How should they be addressed once they've occurred? What challenges does the legal system face when dealing with cyber-violence related offenses? Professor Carrillo will draw from the Cyber-Violence Project he co-directs at GW Law School to offer responses to these and related questions.

About Arturo

Arturo J. Carrillo is Professor of Law, Director of the International Human Rights Clinic, and Co-Director of the Global Internet Freedom & Human Rights Project at The George Washington University Law School. Before joining the faculty, Professor Carrillo served as the acting director of the Human Rights Clinic at Columbia Law School, where he was also Lecturer in Law and the Henkin Senior Fellow with Columbia’s Human Rights Institute. Prior to entering the academy in 2000, he worked as a legal advisor in the Human Rights Division of the United Nations Observer Mission to El Salvador (ONUSAL), as well as for non-governmental organizations in his native Colombia, where he also taught international law and human rights. From 2005 to 2010, Professor Carrillo was a senior advisor on human rights to the U.S. Agency on International Development (USAID) in Colombia. 

Professor Carrillo’s expertise is in public international law; Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) and human rights, especially Internet freedom; transitional justice; human rights and humanitarian law; and comparative clinical legal education. He is the author of a number of publications in English and Spanish on these topics. His recent article, "Having Your Cake and Eating It Too? Zero-rating, Net Neutrality and International Law," was published by the Stanford Technology Law Review (Fall 2016). As part of his clinical practice, Professor Carrillo has litigated extensively in U.S. courts and before regional human rights tribunals. Professor Carrillo received a BA from Princeton University, a JD from The George Washington University, and an LLM from Columbia University.

by candersen at April 17, 2017 11:51 AM

April 13, 2017

MediaBerkman
Joi Ito and Iyad Rahwan on AI & Society
AI technologies have the potential to vastly enhance the performance of many systems and institutions, from making transportation safer, to enhancing the accuracy of medical diagnosis, to improving the efficiency of food safety inspections. However, AI systems can also create moral hazards, by potentially diminishing human accountability, perpetuating biases that are inherent to the AI's training data, or optimizing for one performance measure at the expense of others. These challenges require new kinds of "user interfaces" between machines and society. We will explore these issues, and how they would interface with existing institutions. About Joi Ito Joi Ito is the director of the MIT Media Lab, Professor of the Practice at MIT and the author, with Jeff Howe, of Whiplash: How to Survive Our Faster Future (Grand Central Publishing, 2016). Ito is chairman of the board of PureTech Health and serves on several other boards, including The New York Times Company, Sony Corporation, the MacArthur Foundation and the Knight Foundation. He is also the former chairman and CEO of Creative Commons, and a former board member of ICANN, The Open Source Initiative, and The Mozilla Foundation. Ito is a serial entrepreneur who helped start and run numerous companies including one of the first web companies in Japan, Digital Garage, and the first commercial Internet service provider in Japan, PSINet Japan/IIKK. He has been an early-stage investor in many companies, including Formlabs, Flickr, Kickstarter, littleBits, and Twitter. Ito has received numerous awards, including the Lifetime Achievement Award from the Oxford Internet Institute and the Golden Plate Award from the Academy of Achievement, and he was inducted into the SXSW Interactive Festival Hall of Fame in 2014. Ito has been awarded honorary doctorates from The New School and Tufts University. About Iyad Rahwan Iyad Rahwan is the AT&T Career Development Professor and an Associate Professor of Media Arts & Sciences at the MIT Media Lab, where he leads the Scalable Cooperation group. A native of Aleppo, Syria, Rahwan holds a PhD from the University of Melbourne, Australia, and is an affiliate faculty at the MIT Institute of Data, Systems and Society (IDSS). Rahwan's work lies at the intersection of the computer and social sciences, with a focus on collective intelligence, large-scale cooperation, and the social aspects of Artificial Intelligence. His team built the Moral Machine, which has collected 28 million decisions to-date about how autonomous cars should prioritize risk. Rahwan's work appeared in major academic journals, including Science and PNAS, and was featured in major media outlets, including the New York Times, The Economist, Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post. More info on this event here: https://cyber.harvard.edu/events/luncheons/2017/04/Ito

by the Berkman Klein Center at April 13, 2017 04:05 PM

Center for Research on Computation and Society (Harvard SEAS)
6 Reasons Fake News is the End of the World as we Know it

Location: 

Thompson Room, Barker Center, 12 Quincy St, Cambridge, MA 02138

6 reasons Fake News is the end of the world as we know it
Date: May 2, 2017
Time: 9:00AM - 5:00PM
Location: The Thompson Room, Barker Center, 12 Quincy St, Cambridge, MA 02138

by kmavon at April 13, 2017 03:38 PM

Jeffrey Schnapp
The Video is the Massage

Here’s a gem from the archives that is more than worthy of your attention: the televisual translation of the Fiore/McLuhan/Agel experimental paperback The Medium is the Massage, courtesy of McGraw-Hill “text films,” several Pennsylvania libraries, and Internet Archive. It’s a prescient piece of cybernetic pop, starring McLuhan qua new media oracle, circa 1970. Aside from the psychedelic lighting and special effects, it’s the excitement with which the words electric and electronic are pronounced that holds my attention. (But don’t miss the cameos by Alan Kaprow and John Cage.)

As readers of The Electric Information Age Book and listeners of The Electric Information Age Album by The Masses will be well aware, the Fiore/McLuhan/Agel book was first expanded into a Columbia Records LP, only later to undergo this televisual adaptation.

by jeffrey at April 13, 2017 02:14 AM

April 12, 2017

Berkman Center front page
Digital Health @ Harvard, April 2017 – Holding Hospitals Hostage: From HIPAA to Ransomware

Subtitle

featuring Dr. Josephine Wolff

Teaser

For hospitals and healthcare providers, data protection efforts have long been driven by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. This talk will look at recent trends in the online threats facing hospitals and consider how effective HIPAA is at addressing these threats, and how it has shaped the state of healthcare data security--for better and for worse.

Parent Event

Digital Health @ Harvard | Brown Bag Lunch Series

Event Date

Apr 27 2017 12:00pm to Apr 27 2017 12:00pm
Thumbnail Image: 

This is a talk in the monthly Digital Health @ Harvard Brown Bag Lunch Series, which is co-hosted by the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics and the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University.

Thursday, April 27, 2017 at 12:00 pm
Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
23 Everett Street, Second Floor, Cambridge, MA
RSVP required to attend in person.
Event will be live webcast at 12:00 pm.

In 2016, more than a dozen hospitals and healthcare organizations were targeted by ransomware attacks that temporarily blocked crucial access to patient records and hospital systems until administrators agreed to make ransom payments to the perpetrators. Emerging online threats such as ransomware are forcing hospitals and healthcare providers to revisit and re-evaluate the existing patient data protection standards, codified in the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that have dictated most healthcare security measures for more than two decades. This talk will look at how hospitals are grappling with these new security threats, as well as the ways that the focus on HIPAA compliance has, at times, made it challenging for these institutions to adapt to an emerging threat landscape.

About Dr. Wolff

Josephine Wolff is an assistant professor in the Public Policy department at RIT and a member of the extended faculty of the Computing Security department. She is a faculty associate at the Harvard Berkman Center for Internet & Society and a fellow at the New America Cybersecurity Initiative.

Wolff recieved her PhD. in Engineering Systems Division and M.S. in Technology and Policy from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, as well as her A.B. in Mathematics from Princeton University.

Her research interests include cybersecurity law and policy, defense-in-depth, security incident reporting models, economics of information security, and insurance and liability protection for computer security incidents. She researches cybersecurity policy with an emphasis on the social and political dimensions of defending against security incidents, looking at the intersection of technology, policy, and law for defending computer systems and the ways that technical and non-technical computer security mechanisms can be effectively combined, as well as the ways in which they may backfire. Currently, she is working on a project about a series of cybersecurity incidents over the course of the past decade, tracing their economic and legal aftermath and their impact on the current state of technical, social, and political lines of defense. She writes regularly about cybersecurity for Slate, and her writing has also appeared in The Atlantic, Scientific American, The New Republic, Newsweek, and The New York Times Opinionator blog.

Loading...

by ahancock at April 12, 2017 02:00 PM

David Weinberger
The CluePlane Manifesto

(An unauthorized, unapproved homage to The Cluetrain Manifesto).
bi-plane

A powerful global reaccommodation has begun. Corporations are rediscovering themselves in their muscular masculinity. For we are the makers, the takers, and above all else, we are the winners. Customers, employees, the needy, the vulnerable are, by definition, the losers. Each one of them would gladly trade their seat for one of the tufted leather chairs in our CEO’s office. Instead, make sure your pathetic seatbacks are returned to their upright position, your trays are stowed, and you’re buckled in. For this is your pilot speaking, and we’re ready to fly the friendly skies of “PUT YOUR HANDS WHERE I CAN SEE THEM, MOTHERFUCKER!”

  1. Markets are reaccommodations.

  2. There’s the crew and there’s the screwed. Deal with it.

  3. When jack-booted thugs rough up paying passengers and drag them from your plane, it’s time for the CEO to step up and declare that there’s two sides to every story.

  4. There’s no customer need that cannot be met by a bag of off-brand peanuts.

  5. Customers of course have rights. But only once they have lawyers.

  6. Think of it like this: Boarding a airplane is like opening a shrink-wrapped product, an act that involuntarily voids all your rights. Except boarding a plane means also giving up the shreds of human dignity we didn’t already strip from you during the nudie scan, the TSA ritual ball or tit squeeze, the routine totally un-profiled examination of the darker-hued among us, the lack of sufficient seats in the boarding area, the unexplained delays, and the segregation into social strata announced over the PA. Also, I think we may have missed a spot in your rectum.

  7. Costs have gone up while fuel prices and basic services have gone down, yet more and more people are flying. Therefore, passengers must love us more than ever. You can’t argue with math!

  8. Virtually no other industry uses overbooking as a routine best practice because they don’t love their customers are much as we do.

  9. “First they came for my free crappy meal, and I said nothing. Then they came for my carry-ons, and I said nothing. Then they just said ‘Fuck it’ and came for the guy sitting next to me and dragged him off the plane by the ankles. And I said something, and I video-ed it and I posted it.” Sorry, I couldn’t hear you. I’ve got a corporate reputation to maintain.

  10. Every act of corporate brutality can be fixed by combining the power of euphemism with the audacity of neologism, catalyzed by a really expensive blue suit.

  11. It’s great to know that we’re making our employees so proud! Right, gang? Gang?

  12. Hey, it’s us against them, where “them” are the customers, right, gang? Oh, c’mon, gang, quit kidding around!

  13. You know who’s the victim here? The shareholders. How about some sympathy for them, eh?

  14. Y’know, it’d be a lot easier for us to fly empty planes and not have to deal with you all. You’re welcome. Ingrates.

  15. Hey, catch! Here’s your guitar. Sorry-not-sorry for the crushing.

  16. Have a bag of last year’s peanuts, on us.


Notes

1. No official affilliation with Cluetrain.

2. Thanks to Frank Scavo (@fscavo) and Alan Lepofsky (@alanlepo) for the prod and the idea.

3. Also posted at Medium

4. Photo posted to Pixabay by JayClark1. CC0 – Public Domain.

The post The CluePlane Manifesto appeared first on Joho the Blog.

by davidw at April 12, 2017 01:21 PM

Berkman Center front page
[TODAY] The International State of Digital Rights, a Conversation with the UN Special Rapporteur

Subtitle

David Kaye in conversation with Nani Jansen Reventlow

Teaser

Join the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression, David Kaye, in conversation with Berkman Klein Center Fellow, Nani Jansen Reventlow.

Event Date

Apr 25 2017 4:00pm to Apr 25 2017 4:00pm
Thumbnail Image: 

Tuesday, April 25, 2017 at 4:00 pm
Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
Harvard Law School campus
Wasserstein Hall, Room 2012 (second floor)
Reception immediately following at HLS Pub

RSVP required to attend in person
Event will be live webcast on this page at 4:00 pm

Watch Live

Click below for the live webcast on this page starting at noon.

 

 

 

If you experience a video disruption reload to refresh the webcast, or try the video here. (This link may not work in Chrome).

 

This event is being co-sponsored by The Human Rights Program at Harvard Law School and the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University.
 
On 25 April, UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression, David Kaye, will visit the Berkman Klein Center. He will be hosted in conversation by Nani Jansen Reventlow, a Fellow at the Berkman Klein Center and Adviser to the Cyberlaw Clinic, about his upcoming thematic report on digital access and human rights, as well as the most burning issues regarding free speech online and digital rights including encryption, fake news, online gender-based abuse and the global epidemic of internet censorship.
 
The Special Rapporteur will also speak about his work in both national and international free speech cases, after which the audience will have the opportunity to address any further issues they would like to discuss.
 
Following the event, please join us for a reception in the Harvard Law School Pub located on the first floor of Wasserstein Hall.
 

About David Kaye

David Kaye, a clinical professor of law at the University of California, Irvine, is the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, appointed by the UN Human Rights Council in June 2014. His rapporteurship has addressed, among other topics, encryption and anonymity as promoters of freedom of expression, the protection of whistleblowers and journalistic sources, and the roles and responsibilities of private Internet companies. Early in his career he was a lawyer in the U.S. State Department, handling issues such as the applicability of the Geneva Conventions in the wake of the attacks of September 11, 2001. His academic research and writing have focused on accountability for serious human rights abuses, international humanitarian law, and the international law governing use of force. A member of the Council on Foreign Relations and former member of the Executive Council of the American Society of International Law, he has also published essays in such publications as Foreign Affairs, The New York Times, Foreign Policy, JustSecurity and The Los Angeles Times.

About Nani Jansen Reventlow

Nani Jansen Reventlow is an Associate Tenant at Doughty Street Chambers and a 2016-2017 Fellow at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University. She is a recognised international lawyer and expert in human rights litigation responsible for groundbreaking freedom of expression cases across several national and international jurisdictions. 

Between 2011 and 2016, Nani has overseen the litigation practice of the Media Legal Defence Initiative (MLDI) globally, leading or advising on cases before various national and international courts. At the Berkman Klein Center, Nani's work focuses on cross-disciplinary collaboration in litigation that challenges barriers to free speech online. She also acts as an Advisor to the Cyberlaw Clinic.

Links

 

Loading...

by candersen at April 12, 2017 01:00 PM

In Dialogue with Loomio & Enspiral: Moving Platform Cooperativism from Theory to Practice

Subtitle

Featuring Richard D. Bartlett, MJ Kaplan, and Natalia Lombardo

Teaser

Join some of the worker-owners of the Loomio co-op for an inside look at some of the more mature experiments under the “Platform Cooperativism” umbrella.

Event Date

Apr 14 2017 5:00pm to Apr 14 2017 5:00pm
Thumbnail Image: 

Friday, April 14, 2017 at 5:00 pm
Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
23 Everett Street, Second Floor Conference Room
RSVP required to attend in person.
 

Loomio is a platform for cooperative decision-making, built by a worker-owned co-op based in New Zealand. It’s part of the Enspiral network: a cooperative of entrepreneurs with a deep commitment to decentralising money, information and power in pursuit of radical social change. Join some of the worker-owners of the Loomio co-op for an inside look at some of the more mature experiments under the “Platform Cooperativism” umbrella. Together we’ll examine the lived experiences from Enspiral and Loomio, discovering lessons, challenges and opportunities for the Platform Cooperativism movement.
 

More about featured guests below

Richard D. Bartlett is one of the cofounders of Loomio, an open source software tool for collective decision-making. He's also a Catalyst at Enspiral: a decentralised network of freelancers that have been evolving their practice of commons-oriented peer-production since 2010. His background is in creative activism and DIY open source hardware. He's passionate about co-ownership, self-management, collaborative governance, and other ways of sneaking anarchism into respectable places. He writes at richdecibels.com
 
MJ Kaplan is a social entrepreneur and consultant who weaves across sectors to enable groups to align purpose and operationalize innovative collaborative practices.  She splits her time working with Loomio, Kaplan Consulting, teaching/coaching at Brown University and serving on Social Enterprise Greenhouse and Commerce RI boards.  She founded Kaplan Consulting in 2000, a networked consulting group that works globally with groups to gain clarity about shared purpose and to design innovative approaches to work that are deeply human-centered, agile and adaptive.   
In 2013 MJ was Ian Axford Fulbright Fellow in New Zealand.  MJ  was awarded the Cordes Innovation Fellowship by Asoka U and honored as The Outstanding Mentor for RI Business Women Awards. MJ earned her M.Ed. from Harvard University and B.A. Brown University. 
 
Natalia Lombardo is a co-owner of Loomio, a co-operative social enterprise building tools for collective decision-making. She helps groups to cultivate collaborative culture through values-driven behaviours. Her background is in community development through local action, permaculture, and creative activism. Born in Argentina, living in New Zealand: she’s a bilingual translator that loves to bridge cultures. 

Links

Loading...

by candersen at April 12, 2017 09:52 AM

April 11, 2017

Berkman Center front page
AI & Society

Subtitle

featuring Joi Ito and Iyad Rahwan of the MIT Media Lab

Teaser

ISIS. Trump. Uber. The 1%. What if all these phenomena reflect the same forces? What if you could understand those forces?

Parent Event

Berkman Klein Luncheon Series

Event Date

Apr 11 2017 12:00pm to Apr 11 2017 12:00pm
Thumbnail Image: 

Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 12:00 pm
Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University

AI technologies have the potential to vastly enhance the performance of many systems and institutions, from making transportation safer, to enhancing the accuracy of medical diagnosis, to improving the efficiency of food safety inspections. However, AI systems can also create moral hazards, by potentially diminishing human accountability, perpetuating biases that are inherent to the AI's training data, or optimizing for one performance measure at the expense of others. These challenges require new kinds of "user interfaces" between machines and society. We will explore these issues, and how they would interface with existing institutions.

About Joi Ito

Joi Ito is the director of the MIT Media Lab, Professor of the Practice at MIT and the author, with Jeff Howe, of Whiplash: How to Survive Our Faster Future (Grand Central Publishing, 2016). 

Ito is chairman of the board of PureTech Health and serves on several other boards, including The New York Times Company, Sony Corporation, the MacArthur Foundation and the Knight Foundation. He is also the former chairman and CEO of Creative Commons, and a former board member of ICANN, The Open Source Initiative, and The Mozilla Foundation. 

Ito is a serial entrepreneur who helped start and run numerous companies including one of the first web companies in Japan, Digital Garage, and the first commercial Internet service provider in Japan, PSINet Japan/IIKK. He has been an early-stage investor in many companies, including Formlabs, Flickr, Kickstarter, littleBits, and Twitter.

Ito has received numerous awards, including the Lifetime Achievement Award from the Oxford Internet Institute and the Golden Plate Award from the Academy of Achievement, and he was inducted into the SXSW Interactive Festival Hall of Fame in 2014. 

Ito has been awarded honorary doctorates from The New School and Tufts University.

About Iyad Rahwan

Iyad Rahwan is the AT&T Career Development Professor and an Associate Professor of Media Arts & Sciences at the MIT Media Lab, where he leads the Scalable Cooperation group. A native of Aleppo, Syria, Rahwan holds a PhD from the University of Melbourne, Australia, and is an affiliate faculty at the MIT Institute of Data, Systems and Society (IDSS). Rahwan's work lies at the intersection of the computer and social sciences, with a focus on collective intelligence, large-scale cooperation, and the social aspects of Artificial Intelligence. His team built the Moral Machine, which has collected 28 million decisions to-date about how autonomous cars should prioritize risk. Rahwan's work appeared in major academic journals, including Science and PNAS, and was featured in major media outlets, including the New York Times, The Economist, Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post.

Download original audio and video from this event.

Subscribe to the Berkman Klein events podcast to have audio from all our events delivered straight to you!

by candersen at April 11, 2017 04:00 PM

David Weinberger
There goes that paradox!

“There is nothing that has not already been said on the Internet” has zero hits at Google. Until now.

For I am the Destroyer of Paradoxes.

The post There goes that paradox! appeared first on Joho the Blog.

by davidw at April 11, 2017 02:43 PM

Juan Carlos De Martin
Mons. Galantino sul Sole24ore: "La "triplice missione" dell'Università"
Mons. Nunzio Galantino (Segretario Generale della CEI) è intervenuto sul Sole24ore dell'8 aprile 2017 (p. 14) con un articolo dedicato alla triplice missione dell'Università, che cita anche "Università futura".

by Juan Carlos De Martin at April 11, 2017 10:43 AM

La recensione di Pier Luigi Sacco per "Domenica" (Sole24ore)
Domenica 9 aprile, in concomitanza con la presentazione di "Università futura" al Festival Internazionale del Giornalismo a Perugia, "Domenica" del Sole 24 ore ha pubblicato la bella recensione scritta dal prof. Pier Luigi Sacco.

by Juan Carlos De Martin at April 11, 2017 10:38 AM

April 10, 2017

Harry Lewis
Tip of the hat to Dave Fahrenthold!
Harvard, the Crimson, and my family are all proud that Dave Fahrenthold '00 of the Washington Post has just been awarded the Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting, for his work investigating Donald Trump's charitable donations and for breaking the "Access Hollywood" video story. Dave is married to my daughter Elizabeth (see family photo). Before he met her, he covered me for the Crimson while I was dean. See this early example of his thorough, fair-minded work covering an uncooperative subject!

by Harry Lewis (noreply@blogger.com) at April 10, 2017 08:04 PM

April 07, 2017

MediaBerkman
Algorithmic Consumers
Hate shopping? The next generation of e-commerce will be conducted by digital agents, based on algorithms that will not only make purchase recommendations, but will also predict what we want, make purchase decisions, negotiate and execute the transaction for the consumers, and even automatically form coalitions of buyers to enjoy better terms, thereby replacing human decision-making. Algorithmic consumers have the potential to change dramatically the way we conduct business, raising new conceptual and regulatory challenges. This game-changing technological development has significant implications for regulation, which should be adjusted to a reality of consumers making their purchase decisions via algorithms. Despite this challenge, scholarship addressing commercial algorithms focused primarily on the use of algorithms by suppliers. In this presentation Michal Gal and Niva Elkin-Koren explore the technological advances which are shaping algorithmic consumers, and analyze how these advances affect the competitive dynamic in the market. They analyze the implications of such technological advances on regulation, identifying three main challenges. They further discuss some of the challenges to human autonomous choice that arise from these developments, and examine whether the existing legal framework is adequate to address them. For more on this event visit: https://cyber.harvard.edu/events/luncheons/2017/04/AlgorithmicConsumers

by the Berkman Klein Center at April 07, 2017 02:29 PM

April 06, 2017

David Weinberger
Not everything broken is in beta


CC-BY Kevin Gessner https://www.flickr.com/
photos/kevingessner/3379877300

A White House official has blamed the bumpiness of the ride so far on the White House being in “beta.” This has provoked Jennifer Pahlka — the founder and Executive Director of Code for America and a US Deputy Chief Technology under President Obama — to respond with heartfelt despair, worried that the tools she and her cohort brought to the Obama White House are now being used against all that that cohort accomplished.

It pains me to think that Pahlka, who is a hero of mine, has any regrets or fears about the after-effects what she has done for this country. For the foreseeable future, I think she need not worry about how the Trump administration is using the tools and mindset her cohort introduced to the White House. “This new administration lacks the understanding, competency, and value system to use those tools.”This new administration lacks the understanding, competency, and value system to use those tools.

Here’s the passage she cites from a New Yorker article
:

But, on Friday morning, Mike Allen, Axios’s editor-in-chief, reported that one of the officials in the meeting “views the Trump White House in terms that could be applied to the iterative process of designing software. It’s a beta White House.”

Allen went on, “The senior official . . . said the White House was operating on similar principles to the Trump campaign: ‘We rode something until it didn’t work any more,’ the official said. ‘We recognized it didn’t work, we changed it, we adjusted it and then we kind of got better . . . [T]his was much more entrepreneurial.’ In the White House, he said, ‘we’re going to keep adjusting until we get it right.’ ”
— John Cassidy, “The Keystone Kops in the White House” The New Yorker

“Beta” means “We rode something until it didn’t work any more”?? No, this official is describing what happens when you wake up one day and find out that your DVD burner is no longer supported by the latest upgrade to your operating system. That’s the opposite of “beta.”

The White House isn’t in beta. It’s in freefall.

Nevertheless, this passage bothers Jen because she and her colleagues used to say the same things about making incremental improvements when they were in the White House working to fix Healthcare.gov, the student loan process, and so much more. She writes:

Trump’s team is using the language of agile development to describe how they will strand millions of Americans without healthcare and ban Muslims from entering the country….

What are agile methods without the moral core of the movement for 21st century government, a commitment to users, aka the American people? My heart hurts so much I’m not sure my head is working quite right, and I don’t know if this bizarre application of agile methodologies is a farce or frighteningly effective.

Yes, agile programming can be used for evil purposes, but I don’t think Jen’s cohort should feel they carelessly left a weapon lying around the White House. The Trump administration lacks agile programming’s implicit understanding of how the future works, its theory or change, and its implied values. That’s why, at least so far, “the Trump White House is so non-agile that it’s not even the opposite of agile”the Trump White House is so non-agile that it’s not even the opposite of agile.

Agile software development is characterized by at least two relevant ideas: First, big projects can be chopped into smaller units that can be developed independently and often simultaneously. Second, agile projects are iterative, proceeding by small steps forward, with occasional small steps backwards. Both of these points stand in opposition to the prior “waterfall” approach?—?so-called because he project diagram looks like a series of cascading waterfalls?—?in which the steps for the entire project are carefully mapped out in advance.

To paint the differences too starkly, waterfall development is about command and control. Somebody maps out the flow, dates are assigned to the major phases, and managers make sure the project is “on track.” An agile project is instead about trust and collaboration. It breaks the software product into functional units — modules — each with an owner. The owner is trusted to build a module that takes in data in an agreed-upon format, operates on it, and outputs the result in an agreed-upon format. These independent module developers have to work closely with all the others who are relying upon their work, whether a module figures out what permissions a user has, determines if an arrow has hit its target in a game, or confirms that landing gear have been fully extended.

Agile development therefore cedes control from the Big Boss to the people most directly responsible for what they’re building. It needs a team — more exactly, a collaborative community?—?in which each person:

  • Understands precisely she needs to do

  • Understands how what she produces will serve everyone else’s input and output requirements

  • Can be trusted to get the job done well?—?which means getting it right for everyone else

  • Is in close communication with everyone relying upon her module and upon which hers relies

  • Understands the overall goal of the project

As far as anyone can tell from the outside, exactly none of this applies to the current White House.

Second, agile development is iterative?—?a series of small changes because it assumes that you cannot fully predict how exactly the end product will work, or even what exact functionality it’s going to provide. That is, agile development assumes that life, the universe, and all that are so complex that precisely planning a project from beginning to end requires an act of arrogance that borders on stupidity. And measuring the success of a project by its micro-adherence to a fixed schedule in a world that is changing around it rewards stubbornness over serving end-users as well as possible.

Now, Donald Trump’s preference for deal-making over policy
aligns with iteration’s acceptance that “the future is not the next card in the deck but is what we make of our hand”the future is not the next card in the deck but is what we make of our hand. But Trump’s style of deal-making is based on the superior skill of the individual (Donald), a ruthless commitment to “winning,” and is all about one big step?—?the end result?—?not a series of small changes. Ultimatums of the sort that Trump issued once he saw he was losing the health care battle are the opposite of the incrementalism of iteration. An iterative approach is exemplified by the Democrats’ approach: Let’s tinker with Obamacare to fix what needs fixing.

So, Trump’s White House is anything but agile.

But neither is it proceeding through a waterfall approach, for that requires a commitment to an end result, a rational and realistic understanding of the steps necessary to get there, and well-coordinated managers who are all on the same page. The Trump White House does have a commitment to end results, expressed as mob-inciting campaign promises that are often at the sweet spot where delusion and heartlessness intersect on the Venn diagram of policy-making. Beyond that, this White House exhibits none of the processes, commitments, or accountability that are the hallmark of waterfall development.

Jen’s cohort left tools the White House can’t use because it lacks agile development’s understanding of how change happens and agile’s fundamental trust in its community of practitioners. In short, Jen’s cohort brought a community to a knife fight.

Posted also at Medium.

The post Not everything broken is in beta appeared first on Joho the Blog.

by davidw at April 06, 2017 06:47 PM

Center for Research on Computation and Society (Harvard SEAS)
Paper Co-Authored by CRCS Postdoc Thomas Pasquier Wins University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory's Paper of the Year Award
April 6, 2017

A paper co-authored by CRCS Postdoc Thomas Pasquier has been awarded the University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory's Paper of the Year Award! The winning paper is "Big Ideas Paper: Policy-Driven Middleware for a Legally-Compliant Internet of Things," by Jatinder Singh, Thomas F. J.-M. Pasquier, Jean Bacon, Julia Powles, Raluca Diaconu, and David Eyers. 

Abstract: 

by Gabriella Fee at April 06, 2017 05:32 PM

April 05, 2017

MediaBerkman
Haiti, Machine Learning, and Ankle Holsters: Reflections on the U.S. Treasury Department
In 1997, as a freshly-minted lawyer, Mariano-Florentino (Tino) Cuéllar joined the staff of the Treasury Department’s Office of Enforcement. Almost immediately, he was drawn into some of the fascinating issues that Treasury confronted at the time, from the regulation of electronic money to international policing and anti-corruption initiatives. In this talk, he reflected on his years at Treasury and discussed some of the connections between the challenges he encountered at Treasury then and some of the dilemmas facing the world today. For more about this event, visit: https://cyber.harvard.edu/events/luncheons/2016/01/Cuellar

by the Berkman Klein Center at April 05, 2017 09:06 PM

April 04, 2017

MediaBerkman
Using Mobile Phone Data to Map Migration and Disease: Politics, Privacy, and Public Health
Mobile phone data is passively collected in real-time by operators, producing enormous data sets that can be used to map human populations and migration accurately. These data hold enormous promise for infectious disease control and other public health interventions, as well as for response to emergencies. However, the privacy implications and complex political and regulatory environment surrounding their use have yet to be addressed systematically. In this talk Dr. Caroline Buckee discusses her work to use these records to model and forecast disease outbreaks, as well as the potential pitfalls and ethical issues associated with the increasingly routine use of these data in the public realm. About Dr. Buckee Dr. Caroline Buckee joined Harvard School of Public Health in the summer of 2010 as an Assistant Professor of Epidemiology. In 2013, Dr. Buckee was named the Associate Director of the Center for Communicable Disease Dynamics. Her focus is on elucidating the mechanisms driving the dynamics and evolution of the malaria parasite and other genetically diverse pathogens. After receiving a D.Phil from the University of Oxford, Caroline worked at the Kenya Medical Research Institute to analyze clinical and epidemiological aspects of malaria as a Sir Henry Wellcome Postdoctoral Fellow. Her work led to an Omidyar Fellowship at the Santa Fe Institute, where she developed theoretical approaches to understanding malaria parasite evolution and ecology. Dr. Buckee’s work at Harvard extends these approaches using mathematical models to bridge the biological scales underlying malaria epidemiology; she works with experimental researchers to understand the molecular mechanisms within the host that underlie disease and infection, and uses genomic and mobile phone data to link these individual-level processes to understand population level patterns of transmission. Her work has appeared in high profile scientific journals such as Science and PNAS, as well as being featured in the popular press, including CNN, The New Scientist, Voice of America, NPR, and ABC. For more about this event visit: https://cyber.harvard.edu/events/digitalhealth/2017/03/Buckee

by the Berkman Klein Center at April 04, 2017 06:32 PM

Berkman Center front page
Algorithmic Consumers

Subtitle

with Professors Michal Gal, University of Haifa, and Niva Elkin-Koren, Visting Professor of Law at HLS

Teaser

Hate shopping? The next generation of e-commerce will be conducted by digital agents, based on algorithms that will not only make purchase recommendations, but will also predict what we want, make purchase decisions, negotiate and execute the transaction for the consumers...

Parent Event

Berkman Klein Luncheon Series

Event Date

Apr 4 2017 12:00pm to Apr 4 2017 12:00pm
Thumbnail Image: 

Tuesday, April 4, 2017 at 12:00 pm
Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University

Hate shopping? The next generation of e-commerce will be conducted by digital agents, based on algorithms that will not only make purchase recommendations, but will also predict what we want, make purchase decisions, negotiate and execute the transaction for the consumers, and even automatically form coalitions of buyers to enjoy better terms, thereby replacing human decision-making. Algorithmic consumers have the potential to change dramatically the way we conduct business, raising new conceptual and regulatory challenges. 

This game-changing technological development has significant implications for regulation, which should be adjusted to a reality of consumers making their purchase decisions via algorithms. Despite this challenge, scholarship addressing commercial algorithms focused primarily on the use of algorithms by suppliers. In this presentation we explore the technological advances which are shaping algorithmic consumers, and analyze how these advances affect the competitive dynamic in the market. We analyze the implications of such technological advances on regulation, identifying three main challenges. We further discuss some of the challenges to human autonomous choice that arise from these developments, and examine whether the existing legal framework is adequate to address them.

Forthcoming Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, Vol. 30, 2017

About Michal

Michal Gal (LL.B., LL.M., S.J.D.) is Professor and Director of the Forum on Law and Markets at the Faculty of Law, University of Haifa, Israel. She was a Visiting Professor at NYU, Columbia, Georgetown, Melbourne and Lisbon. Prof. Gal is the author of  several books, including  Competition Policy for Small Market Economies  (Harvard University Press, 2003). She also published scholarly articles on competition law issues and has won prizes for her research and for her teaching. Inter alia, she was chosen as one of the ten most promising young legal scholars in Israel (Globes, 2007) and as one of the leading women in competition law around the world (Global Competition Review). Her paper, "Merger Policy for Small and Micro Economies", won the Antitrust Writings Award for best paper on merger policy in 2013, and her paper on "Access to Big Data" (with Daniel Rubinfeld) is short-listed for this year's prize. Prof. Gal is the President of the International Academic Society for Competition Law Scholars (ASCOLA). She served as a consultant to several international organizations (including OECD, UNCTAD) on issues of competition law and was a non-governmental advisor of the International Competition Network (ICN). She also advised several small economies and regiional organizations on the framing of their competition laws. She is a board member of several international antitrust organizations, including the American Antitrust Institute (AAI), The Antitrust Consumer Institute, the Asian Competition Law and Economics Center (ACLEC). She clerked at the Israeli Supreme Court, and her work is often cited in the decisions of the Court on competition matters.

About Niva

Niva Elkin-Koren is a Visiting Professor of Law at HLS, where she teaches Digital Copyright, and a Faculty Associate at the Berkman Klein Center .  She is the founding director of the Haifa Center for Law & Technology (HCLT) and the former dean of the University of Haifa, Faculty of Law. Her research focuses on the legal institutions that facilitate private and public control over the production and dissemination of knowledge. She has written and spoken extensively about digital governance, legal oversight of algorithmic decision-making, liability of online intermediaries, the privatization of information policy, private ordering, the economic analysis of intellectual property, and legal strategies for enhancing the public domain. She is the Chair of the Scientific Advisory Council, of the Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society in Berlin, a member of the Executive Committee of Association for the Advancement of Teaching and Research in Intellectual Property (ATRIP), and an Advisory Board Member in the Information Program of the Open Society Foundation. She is also a member of the editorial boards of the Journal of the Copyright Society (since 2009) the Journal of Information Policy (since 2010) and the Internet Policy Review (since 2016). Prof. Elkin-Koren received her LL.B from Tel-Aviv University Faculty of Law in 1989, her LL.M from Harvard Law School in 1991, and her S.J.D from Stanford Law School in 1995.

Download original audio or video from this event.

Subscribe to the Berkman Klein events series podcast.

by candersen at April 04, 2017 05:00 PM

Juan Carlos De Martin
"Università futura" tour (fase 2)
Dopo i primi tre incontri a Roma (CRS), Boston (Harvard) e Torino (Unione Culturale), oggi 4 aprile alle ore 17:00 discuteremo di "Università futura" al Politecnico di Torino, sala di lettura della Biblioteca Centrale di Ingegneria (v. qui l'annuncio). I relatori saranno i colleghi Marco Masoero, Carlo Olmo, Giovanni Durbiano, Mario Calderini e Aldo Tommasin.

Domani 5 aprile alle ore 17:30, in aula 7, si replica ma questa volta con gli studenti del Politecnico, tra cui Marco Rondina e Andrea Torti.

Giovedì 6 aprile alle ore 17:00, invece, all'Istituto Svizzero di Roma con, tra gli altri, la Ministro Fedeli e il suo omologo svizzero, qui il programma.

Infine a Perugia alle ore 12, con Pier Luigi Sacco, nel contesto del Festival Internazionale del Giornalismo.

by Juan Carlos De Martin at April 04, 2017 09:44 AM

April 02, 2017

Miriam Meckel
Jammern im Abschwung

Wahlergebnisse und Wirtschaftsdaten zeigen: Wir können dem Frust ein Schnippchen schlagen – ein echtes Aufschwungrezept.

Donald Trump hat der Bundeskanzlerin zum Wahlergebnis im Saarland gratuliert. Huch? Optische Verwechslung? Gratulations-Tourette? Oder schlicht mangelnde Kenntnis des deutschen Staats- und Regierungssystems?

Vielleicht hat der US-Präsident vielmehr etwas verstanden, gestützt durch weise Berater, die es doch irgendwo im Dunstkreis des Weißen Hauses geben muss. Er hat verstanden, dass das kleine Saarland große Bedeutung haben könnte. Insofern nämlich, als nicht nur die Umfragen auf einen Abstieg der Mehrheitspartei CDU und einen Aufstieg der SPD hindeuteten. Es lag auch fest verankert in der anekdotischen Evidenz eines jeden Gesprächspartners, dass sich die allgemeine Unzufriedenheit in dieser Wahl Bahn brechen würde.

So lässt sich das Wahlergebnis im Saarland sicher nicht interpretieren. Das ist komisch, denn über nichts wird öffentlich auf Veranstaltungen, in Politik und Medien so viel lamentiert wie über die schwierigen Zeiten. Die sind vielleicht doch nicht so schwierig, wie ständig behauptet wird. Denn trotz des in dieser Woche formell erklärten Brexits, trotz der protektionistischen Töne von Donald Trump, trotz der Unsicherheit im Blick auf die bevorstehende Präsidentschaftswahl in Frankreich und trotz der akustischen Amokläufe des türkischen Staatspräsidenten ist etwas verblieben, das uns zuversichtlich stimmen kann.

Neudeutsch nennt man das Resilienz. Die Widerstandsfähigkeit, die einen Organismus, eine Person oder auch einen Staat und eine Gesellschaft in die Lage versetzt, mit Veränderungen umzugehen, Widersprüche auszuhalten und doch zuversichtlich in die Zukunft zu schauen. Resilienz ist ein Pfund, mit dem sich gerade in unübersichtlichen Zeiten wuchern lässt. Nur haben die Deutschen dafür eigentlich kein ausgeprägtes Talent.

Umso erfreulicher, dass der ifo-Geschäftsklimaindex diese Haltung auch für die Wirtschaft mit Zahlen unterfüttert. War die Stimmung bei den 7000 befragten Unternehmen ohnehin schon gut, so ist sie nun blendend. Der neuerliche Anstieg gilt sowohl der aktuellen Lage als auch den Erwartungen für das kommende Halbjahr. ifo-Präsident Clemens Fuest hat recht, wenn er folgert: „Der Aufschwung gewinnt an Kraft.“ Das ist eine schöne Botschaft und auch Messlatte für all die Zukunftsstänkerer, die immer schon Böses im Satz des Kaffees lesen, bevor den überhaupt jemand aufgebrüht hat. Oder wie Erich Kästner in „Emil und die Detektive“ schreibt: „Die Leute gehörten bloß zu der Sorte, die nicht zufrieden sein wollen, weil sie sonst zufrieden wären.“ Manchmal sagen Kinderbücher mehr als alle Statistiken.

wiwo.de

by Miriam Meckel at April 02, 2017 07:02 AM

April 01, 2017

Harry Lewis
This week's developments in USGSO policy
The Crimsonreported a confusing development this week in the battle over “Unrecognized Single Gender Social Organizations” at Harvard.

Traditionally all-female final clubs and sororities will be allowed to retain their “gender focus” for the next few years—and potentially beyond that period—while complying with the College’s policy penalizing single-gender social groups, according to Associate Dean of Student Life David R. Friedrich.

This fulfills the Implementation Committee’s recommendation that it “supports the idea of continuing to allow the female final clubs and sororities to operate with gender focused missions, with the understanding that the positive contributions of those organizations to the campus community would be assessed in three to five years.” There is a catch, however.

Friedrich clarified, however, that any groups’ gender-focused mission should exist simultaneously with “substantive advancement toward full inclusion,” including gender inclusivity.

This development brings two thoughts to mind.

First, when I referred in my original remarks before the Faculty to an Indexof Prohibited Organizations, I was half joking. I didn’t think anyone would actually have to keep a list, because everybody knew which organizations were covered: The men’s and women’s Final Clubs, and the fraternities and sororities that were restricted to Harvard students. Targeting that constellation of clubs may not make a lot of ethical sense (seems odd that Lambda Upsilon stays off it by having MIT and Wellesley members), but at least it’s pretty well defined.

But now a published list really will have to exist. Someone in University Hall will have to make judgments about which groups have a “gender focus” and which are just women’s groups. Which groups are making “substantive advancement” and which groups’ advancement is less substantive. Which groups are making “positive” contributions and which groups’ contributions are neutral or negative. The keeper of the Indexwill move groups onto and off the list in accordance with periodic audits—another new concept introduced recently, which seems to mesh with the Implementation Committee’s recommendation that student groups submit their “demographic breakdown” to University Hall.

In the absence of a published Index, a student affirming her compliance with the USGSO policy could not know whether the organization of which she was a member was prohibited or not.

(At this point I was going to write a sentence or two explaining what was wrong with having a dean keeping the Index and deciding which organizations to move onto it on the basis that they are utterly without redeeming social value. I couldn’t make myself do it. If you don’t see anything wrong with this, probably nothing I could say would convince you.)

That was one thought. The other was surprise that the University would adopt an implementation plan that so plainly discriminated against men’s organizations. We have only the Implementation Committee report and the Crimson interview to go on, but it seems that what is described as a “gender focus” loophole is in fact strictly for women’s groups, and no men’s group can escape the Index on the basis that it makes positive contributions to the experience of its members.

Whatever the asymmetry between the experience of men and women at Harvard, I am surprised that the University would so starkly state that all men’s organizations are worthless and intolerable but women’s organizations can be useful and will be tolerated, having in its recent pronouncements focused exclusively on nondiscrimination as the rationale for the policy. It’s a very odd idea—gender discrimination in furtherance of gender nondiscrimination.

I have to wonder if this implementation plan meets President Faust’s minimum requirement.

“I hope that, and trust that, during the process things that might concern me would be communicated during the process,” Faust said. “Ultimately, I want to be able to ensure that this policy is not going to get us sued instantly, is legal, is something that the governing boards feel is acceptable to implement.”


by Harry Lewis (noreply@blogger.com) at April 01, 2017 07:59 PM

March 31, 2017

Cyberlaw Clinic - blog
HR Journal, Panel on Technology and Law Enforcement — April 1st

Join Masonharvard-human-rights Kortz from the Cyberlaw Clinic along with an all-star roster of speakers on April 1, 2017, at Harvard Law School about technology and law enforcement — “Over-Policed and Under Protected: Technology, Law Enforcement and Minorities.” Sponsored by our friends at the Harvard Human Rights Journal, the panelists will address the extent to which use of technology in law enforcement exacerbates problems faced by minority groups in the United States. A reception will follow. Panelists include Sahar F. Aziz of Texas A&M School of Law and Harlan Yu of Upturn, with moderator Elana Fogel from the Massachusetts Committee for Public Counsel Services.

by Clinic Staff at March 31, 2017 01:18 PM

March 30, 2017

Justin Reich
To Build Computational Thinking Skills - Harness the Power of Play
To create a culture of iteration and experimentation while developing broader computational thinking and technology literacy skills, students and teachers need to harness the power of play.

by Beth Holland at March 30, 2017 07:13 PM

Berkman Center front page
Digital Health @ Harvard, March 2017 – Using Mobile Phone Data to Map Migration and Disease: Politics, Privacy, and Public Health

Subtitle

featuring Dr. Caroline Buckee

Teaser

Mobile phone data are providing unprecedented insights into human migration and behavior with relevance for containment of epidemics and response to natural disasters, but what are the implications for individual privacy and the prospects for routine use of this data in public health?

Parent Event

Digital Health @ Harvard | Brown Bag Lunch Series

Event Date

Mar 30 2017 12:00pm to Mar 30 2017 12:00pm
Thumbnail Image: 

This is a talk in the monthly Digital Health @ Harvard Brown Bag Lunch Series, which is co-hosted by the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics and the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University.
 

Thursday, March 30, 2017 at 12:00 pm
Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University


Mobile phone data is passively collected in real-time by operators, producing enormous data sets that can be used to map human populations and migration accurately. These data hold enormous promise for infectious disease control and other public health interventions, as well as for response to emergencies. However, the privacy implications and complex political and regulatory environment surrounding their use have yet to be addressed systematically. Here, I will discuss the work we have been doing to use these records to model and forecast disease outbreaks, as well as the potential pitfalls and ethical issues associated with the increasingly routine use of these data in the public realm.

About Dr. Buckee

Dr. Caroline Buckee joined Harvard School of Public Health in the summer of 2010 as an Assistant Professor of Epidemiology. In 2013, Dr. Buckee was named the Associate Director of the Center for Communicable Disease Dynamics. Her focus is on elucidating the mechanisms driving the dynamics and evolution of the malaria parasite and other genetically diverse pathogens. After receiving a D.Phil from the University of Oxford, Caroline worked at the Kenya Medical Research Institute to analyze clinical and epidemiological aspects of malaria as a Sir Henry Wellcome Postdoctoral Fellow. Her work led to an Omidyar Fellowship at the Santa Fe Institute, where she developed theoretical approaches to understanding malaria parasite evolution and ecology.

Dr. Buckee’s work at Harvard extends these approaches using mathematical models to bridge the biological scales underlying malaria epidemiology; she works with experimental researchers to understand the molecular mechanisms within the host that underlie disease and infection, and uses genomic and mobile phone data to link these individual-level processes to understand population level patterns of transmission. Her work has appeared in high profile scientific journals such as Science and PNAS, as well as being featured in the popular press, including CNN, The New Scientist, Voice of America, NPR, and ABC.

Download original audio or video from this event.

Subscribe to the Berkman Klein events series podcast.

by ahancock at March 30, 2017 04:00 PM

Berkman Klein Center Welcomes Three New Directors

Teaser

The Berkman Klein Center announces the addition of three new members to its Board of Directors, enhancing the Center’s expertise on subjects ranging from computer systems research to the policies governing intellectual property in developing countries.

Ruth Okediji

Photo: Robins Kaplan LLP/Dan Owen & Travis Wilhelmi


Margo Seltzer

Photo: Harvard John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences

Rebecca Tushnet

Photo: Georgetown University Law Center

March 30, 2017

Cambridge, Massachusetts — The Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University today announced the addition of three new members to its Board of Directors, enhancing the Center’s expertise on subjects ranging from computer systems research to the policies governing intellectual property in developing countries.

The new Directors are Ruth Okediji, a professor at the University of Minnesota Law School who will join the Harvard Law School faculty in July; Margo Seltzer, the Herchel Smith Professor of Computer Science at Harvard’s John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, and Director of its Center for Research on Computation and Society; and Rebecca Tushnet, a professor at Georgetown Law School, who also joins the Harvard Law School faculty this July.

Professor Okediji, who was the Heiken Visiting Professor in Patent Law at Harvard Law School in 2015-2016, is an expert in innovation policy, intellectual property, and economic development in the context of international institutions and public international law. Her scholarship has influenced intellectual property law and policies throughout Africa, the Caribbean, and the Americas. She also serves on the boards of Creative Commons and IP-Watch.

Professor Seltzer, an accomplished computer scientist and software entrepreneur, was co-founder and CTO of Sleepycat Software, the makers of Berkeley DB, and is an Architect for Oracle Corporation. Among her many professional affiliations, Professor Seltzer serves on the Computer Science and Telecommunications Board of the National Academies. She has long been a Berkman Klein Center collaborator and in addition to her Directorship will spend the 2017-2018 academic year as a Faculty Fellow on sabbatical at the Center.

Professor Tushnet is a leading First Amendment scholar who focuses on copyright, trademark, and false advertising law. In her spare time she is a member of the legal team of the Organization for Transformative Works, which advocates for the rights of remixers and makers of fanworks.

“We are thrilled to welcome Professors Okediji, Seltzer, and Tushnet on our Board of Directors at such an important moment in our history,” said Urs Gasser, Executive Director of the Berkman Klein Center. “They are outstanding scholars and wonderful colleagues who will add unique expertise and new perspectives to our community, and will inspire and help guiding the Center’s work for the years to come.”

“The addition of Professors Okediji, Seltzer, and Tushnet to our leadership team will expand and refresh our bases of institutional expertise, and lead to productive debates that in turn will produce new work and projects to illuminate and improve the world’s digital environment,” said Jonathan Zittrain, the George Bemis Professor of International Law at Harvard Law School and Berkman Klein Center Chair.

The Berkman Klein Center’s mission is to explore and understand cyberspace; study its development, dynamics, norms, and standards; and assess the need or lack thereof for laws and sanctions. Its Board of Directors shapes the Center’s organizational direction. Continuing as Directors are Christopher Bavitz, Yochai Benkler, John Deighton, William “Terry” Fisher, Urs Gasser (Executive Director), Charles Nesson, Felix Oberholzer-Gee, John Palfrey, Jeffrey Schnapp, Stuart Shieber, Mark Wu, and Jonathan Zittrain (Chair). 

Founded in 1997 through a generous gift from Jack N. and Lillian R. Berkman and expanded in 2016 in recognition of a major gift from Michael R. Klein, the Berkman Klein Center to date has welcomed more than 500 people into its community of fellows, staff, faculty, and affiliates from more than 40 countries; hosted more than 1,000 events, workshops and conferences; produced more than 700 videos and podcasts; contributed more than 10 million lines of code to GitHub; and published more than 250 reports, papers, and books in its publication series.

More information about the Center is available here.

by djones at March 30, 2017 01:15 PM

March 29, 2017

David Weinberger
[liveblog] Ed tech hackathon

I’m at an education technology hackathon — “Shaping the Future” — put on by MindCET, an ed tech accelerator created by the Center for Educational Technology in Israel. MindCET’s headquarters are in Yeruham in the Negev, a small-ish town that’s been growing as tech companies migrate there.

NOTE: Live-blogging. Getting things wrong. Missing points. Omitting key information. Introducing artificial choppiness. Over-emphasizing small matters. Paraphrasing badly. Not running a spellpchecker. Mangling other people’s ideas and words. You are warned, people.

Our group created — in a demo hackathon-ish way — a tool that helps teachers create workgroups for collaborative learning based on information gleaned from machine learning about learning capabilities. The judges are four young people who are prodigiously talented computer developers. We named it Sort_ed because my team did not appreciate the sheer (shear?) genius of Zissorz. (My team was awesome.)

“Our business plan: Mexico will pay for it.”Our business plan: Mexico will pay for it.

Here are some of the projects presented at the end of the 36 hours of development. Each group has two minutes to present, ruthlessly enforced.

Interest In: A platform for students sharing their interests by learning or teaching. They can create tutorials and list them. They get badges.

Escape the classroom “Classrooms are so boring”Classrooms are so boring. Escape the Classroom uses the power of whatsApp and escape rooms (i.e., the puzzle rooms you try to get out of collaboratively, using educational clues.

Rope. Team-based learning.”Rope Team” is a course format for Moodle that implements a unique workflow for learning a set number of topics.” There are roles and responsibilities, and a workflow with automation. (The creator of Moodle, Martin Dougiamas, is on that team.)

Snippy. Every child has a passion for something. Snippy lets students create content, share it, and share the content of others. A chatbot interviews you and presents relevant materials from what other students have uploaded. You can create a multimedia object to share your passion.

Clash of Brains. No one (hardly) likes tests. This team wants to bring fun and sociality into assessments. Teachers create a quiz and the app sends a code to students. Students can “duel” other students.

Edventure — a tailor-made education adventure. In the example, a friendly monster asks for help with a question. It’s a collaborative RPG for 3-5 players.

Playful — “promoting education through play.” “They introduce RRS: Robot Rewards System.”They introduce RRS: Robot Rewards System. You get real-world rewards from a robot: perhaps art, maybe it does a dance, etc. You can also be challenged to hack the robot.

Disruptive text. “For students who hate to read.” For 7-9th graders who struggle to read long texts. The text becomes a riddle they need to decode. They use several techniques to challenge the reader: Difficult fonts. Blurred text until you click. Mirrored words that reverse when clicked.

The Words and Image Challenge. “Students from a local Bedouin school are wearing a word and a drawing of an object.”Students from a local Bedouin school (unfairly adorable) are wearing a word and a drawing of an object. They throw a ball to the person with the name of the object on her or his shirt. You have to throw the ball as quickly as you can, in “hot potato” style.

ReflectMe. A team from the Israeli army has created an app that enables students to give one another feedback. (They contrast this with top-down military structure.) It has a simple, intuitive UI. In the example, students can leave feedback on a video, tied to the time code.

Peerz. Standardization misses individual passion. The future is individualized passion-based learning. But teachers can’t scale for this. A student asks Peerz a question, with hashtags. Other students can respond. The system suggests resources, better questions, etc. The questions are rated. “Peerz monetizes talent discovery.” “Co-creative learning in your pocket.”

EdMarket. “The Amazon of Education.” It gives teachers the ability to choose the best products. EdMarket is a marketplace of learning resources, sponsored by the govt (or so their business plan says). The students and teachers can reference the market.

Owie. “An AI best friend.” It will help students talk about emotions, especially when the situation is stressful. Owie is a chatbot that lets 8-12 year olds communicate with other friends and play emotionally-supportive games.

Shape on You. A virtual reality experience that teaches geometric figures. It aims at making it easier to grasp abstract concepts. You can manipulate figures, see the dimensions, alter them, and see the results. You can share your figure with other students.

Action Learning. They show a robot (a bit Lego-like) that models a robot for delivering water in the desert. They programmed this with the Creative Learning Lab. They created a space, physical and digital, where you can meet others and learn life lessons. “Solving problems that you couldn’t solve in school.”

Who Am I?. How to encourage creation within children, and how to motivate them to be interactive and really invest in the process. Who Am I? is a mini-quest game where you try to discover who is hidden in the room. It’s a mobile app that you navigate by moving the phone. You find clues. Students can make their own puzzles.

DPlay — “Democracy Playground.” “How do you liberate learning for self-reflection.” They created a platform for debating issues and reflecting on one’s own positions. Students fill out a little survey about the opposing positions, reflecting on why they react against it. These surveys are compiled over time. Is a student changing her vote often? Is she always voting with her friends?

OwnEd. They created an app that takes away the stress from students (12-13yr old) who are unsure what subjects they should be taking. It lets them design their own learning program. How do they want to learn? When do they want to learn? An “intuitive app” visually stimulates them to say that they’re most interested in. The backend uses this to suggest areas. The app suggests a time structure for their program. “Breaking the rules around space and time.”

Imagibate.com “Free learners’ mind from the old structures by engaging them in debate.” They use imaginary worlds to make sure the issues are not personally sensitive. The debates will be put up on line. E.g., “a world of unicorns and coffee beans”a world of unicorns and coffee beans, two tribes that have gotten along until the coffee beans learn to make a scent they find pleasurable, but it makes the unicorns sick. The team models a live debate, complete with a unicorn hat.

The winner was Who Am I?. We came in second, by one vote.

The post [liveblog] Ed tech hackathon appeared first on Joho the Blog.

by davidw at March 29, 2017 02:30 PM

March 28, 2017

Berkman Center front page
Virtual Competition: The Promise and Perils of the Algorithm-Driven Economy

Subtitle

Featuring author Maurice Stucke

Teaser

The changing market reality is already shifting power into the hands of the few. Join us to explore the resulting risks to competition, our democratic ideals, and our economic and overall well-being.

Parent Event

Berkman Klein Luncheon Series

Event Date

Mar 28 2017 12:00pm to Mar 28 2017 12:00pm
Thumbnail Image: 

Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 12:00 pm
Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University

This event is co-sponsored by the Harvard Law Entrepreneurship Project at Harvard Law School, the Journal of Law and Technology at Harvard Law School, and the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University.

Maurice Stucke discusses his book, Virtual Competition: The Promise and Perils of the Algorithm-Driven Economy.

Shoppers with Internet access and a bargain-hunting impulse can find a universe of products at their fingertips. In this thought-provoking exposé, Maurice Stucke and Ariel Ezrachi invite us to take a harder look at today’s app-assisted paradise of digital shopping. While consumers reap many benefits from online purchasing, the sophisticated algorithms and data-crunching that make browsing so convenient are also changing the nature of market competition, and not always for the better.

Computers colluding is one danger. Although long-standing laws prevent companies from fixing prices, data-driven algorithms can now quickly monitor competitors’ prices and adjust their own prices accordingly. So what is seemingly beneficial—increased price transparency—ironically can end up harming consumers. A second danger is behavioral discrimination. Here, companies track and profile consumers to get them to buy goods at the highest price they are willing to pay. The rise of super-platforms and their “frenemy” relationship with independent app developers raises a third danger. By controlling key platforms (such as the operating system of smartphones), data-driven monopolies dictate the flow of personal data and determine who gets to exploit potential buyers.

Virtual Competition raises timely questions. To what extent does the “invisible hand” still hold sway? In markets continually manipulated by bots and algorithms, is competitive pricing an illusion? Can our current laws protect consumers? The changing market reality is already shifting power into the hands of the few. Ezrachi and Stucke explore the resulting risks to competition, our democratic ideals, and our economic and overall well-being.

About Maurice

Professor Stucke brought 13 years of litigation experience when he joined the UT College of Law faculty in 2007. As a trial attorney at the U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, he successfully challenged anticompetitive mergers and restraints in numerous industries, and focused on policy issues involving antitrust and the media. As a Special Assistant U.S. Attorney, he prosecuted a variety of felony and misdemeanor offenses, including running a weekly docket before the Honorable Thomas Rawles Jones, Jr. As an associate at Sullivan & Cromwell, Professor Stucke assisted in defending Goldman Sachs, CS First Boston, and Microsoft in civil antitrust litigation. The Legal Aid Society presented him two awards for his criminal appellate and defense work.

Since coming to UT, Professor Stucke has been a prolific legal scholar. His scholarship re-examines much of the conventional wisdom in competition policy in light of the empirical findings from behavioral economics and psychology. In re-evaluating the goals and assumptions of competition law, he seeks to provide policymakers with a more empirical approach to competition policy. Professor Stucke’s scholarship, which has been cited by the U.S. federal courts, the OECD, the United Nations, competition agencies and policymakers, is already impacting competition policy. He was invited by the OECD and competition authorities from the European Union, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, South Korea, United States, and United Kingdom to discuss his research, and has been invited to present his research at over 60 conferences in Australia, Belgium, China, England, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Turkey, United Kingdom, and United States.

Professor Stucke serves as a Senior Fellow at the American Antitrust Institute, an independent Washington, D.C.-based non-profit education, research, and advocacy organization devoted to competition policy.  Professor Stucke chaired a committee on the media industry that drafted a transition report for the incoming Obama administration.  In 2009, Professor Stucke was elected as a member to the Academic Society for Competition Law, appointed to the advisory board of the Institute for Consumer Antitrust Studies, and was asked to serve as one of the United States’ non-governmental advisors to the International Competition Network, the only international body devoted exclusively to competition law enforcement and whose members represent national and multinational governmental competition authorities in over 100 jurisdictions.

He has co-authored two books, Big Data and Competition Policy (Oxford University Press 2016) and Virtual Competition (Harvard University Press 2016), which has been featured in The New YorkerWall Street JournalGuardianNew York Review of BooksHarvard Business Review, and Wired.

Professor Stucke received a Fulbright Scholar grant to lecture in 2010-2011 in the People’s Republic of China.  He also received several awards for his scholarship, including the Carden Award for Outstanding Scholarship, the 2016 Antitrust Writing Award by Concurrences Review and George Washington University, the Jerry S. Cohen Memorial Award, presented annually for the best antitrust scholarship, the College’s W. Allen Separk Faculty Scholarship Award, the Marilyn V. Yarbrough Award for Writing Excellence, and the Chancellor’s Honors Award for Research and Creative Achievement—Professional Promise.

Links

Reviews of Virtual Competition, The Promise and Perils of the Algorithm-Driven Economy:

by candersen at March 28, 2017 05:00 PM

Cyberlaw Clinic - blog
Clinic Students and Staff Release Working Paper on Online Content Takedown Orders

here-there-or-everywhere-2017-03-27In areas ranging from the so-called “right to be forgotten” to intellectual property to defamation, there is an ongoing debate over how legitimate national laws and preferences should be applied and enforced online in the content takedown context. At the core of this dispute is whether public international law doctrines of territoriality extend to digital spaces, or whether different presumptions should govern online.

In a new working paper released today entitled “Here, There, or Everywhere?”, Cyberlaw Clinic students Alicia Solow-Niederman (J.D. ’17) and Javier Careaga Franco (LL.M ’17), along with the Clinic’s Assistant Director Vivek Krishnamurthy and Clinic Advisor Nani Jansen Reventlow, offer a descriptive perspective on this debate. Using a case study method, the paper seeks to answer the question of what formal legal process determines whether objectionable online content remains accessible or removed and what territorial principles are emerging on the ground as courts tackle these questions.

By so doing, the paper develops a a taxonomy of global content takedown orders. Within the observed sample, the intended territorial scope of courts’ orders predominantly aligns with geographic boundaries, with this trend especially dominant in copyright disputes. This descriptive finding sets the stage for both further empirical work and policy prescriptions about the ideal role of the legal system in this domain.

Nani Jansen Reventlow and Vivek Krishnamurthy will be presenting the key findings of the paper at RightsCon in Brussels on March 30, 2017. More details on the event can be found here.

by vkrishnamurthy at March 28, 2017 12:26 PM

March 25, 2017

David Weinberger
How a little bit of data ruined my morning run

Since I was 21 years old, I’ve gone through long stretches where I have “run” outside for exercise — in quotation marks because I am passed by people who are running so slowly that I feel bad for them until I remember that they passed me. I’ve gone years running infrequently, and then other years I’ll run 3-6 days a week. But three things have been consistent throughout this: I don’t like running, I always run the same set route, and I have always run for distance, not for time: I set a course and don’t care how quickly I complete it.

That’s almost true. I care enough that I time my runs, but I don’t try to run faster in order to beat yesterday’s time. It’s just a little bit of long-term quantified knowledge that gives me a rough indication of what sort of shape I’m in as a jogger.

Beyond that smidge of data, I have gone out of my way to be data-free about my route. I don’t know how long it is. I therefore don’t know how long it takes me to run a mile. I therefore don’t know where the halfway point is, or the quarter markers. (My route’s a loop, so the halfway point is not obvious.)

Until today.

My Pebble smartwatch is declining, so I looked for a running app on my phone. The one I rather randomly chose gathers info beyond the duration of the run, but I just wasn’t thinking well about it when I plugged in my my headset, picked some upbeat music, and set off this morning.

“You’ve run one mile,” said the woman’s voice in my ear when I was a block away from the pond. I cannot unhear where the first mile marker is. And because I didn’t want to stop to fiddle with the app, I also know where the second mile marker is. And I know my home is 0.03 miles short of being the third mile marker. I also know how fast I run.

I don’t want to know any of this, although the distance and my speed are both a little better than I would have guessed. So, yay for being marginally less pathetic than I’d thought?

The real problem is knowing where those mile markers are.

I’ve tried lots of other sorts of exercise, and I haven’t stuck with any of them. They’re too boring, they take too long to get to, or — this is the crucial one — they involve counting. How many laps? How many reps? Am I at the twenty minute mark yet? It’s not the numbers that bother me. It’s knowing that there’s some knowable quantity I have to complete in order to be done. Doing a countable exercise is like watching a clock tick. You want to slow down time? Pay attention to it.

Running wasn’t like that. Now it will be. I’ll know when I’m at the one-third mark, and, more to the point, I’ll know when I haven’t even reached the one-third part. This little bit of data turns the entire run into a set of tasks that must be accomplished in sequence — a set of tasks that at any moment during the run I know have not yet fully accomplished.

For the past forty-five years, I’ve managed to run with some regularity by running through space. Now I’m running through time, and that takes much longer.

The post How a little bit of data ruined my morning run appeared first on Joho the Blog.

by davidw at March 25, 2017 05:19 PM

Jeffrey Schnapp
FuturPiaggio (film+gif)

A celebration of the Piaggio Group’s 130 years of history was held on March 23rd in Milan’s Teatro Vetra with an emphasis on its present and future plans. Speakers included Roberto Colaninno, president and CEO of the IMMSI holding company, to which the Piaggio Group belongs, and Stefano Belisari (“Elio” of the Italian band Elio e le Storie Tese). The centerpiece of the celebration was the limited edition volume FuturPiaggio (though the tantalizing presence of some first-rate historical machinery–the Guzzi V8 racer and the very first Vespa–made for some serious competition). One of the highlights of the event was a film, produced for the occasion, developed by 72andSunny.

The book is now available via Rizzoli International.

Want to read the book fast? No… really fast? Here’s something for the speed readers among you (thank you Daniele Ledda).

by jeffrey at March 25, 2017 11:06 AM

March 24, 2017

Miriam Meckel
Mehr Licht

Martin Schulz könnte populistische Politik neu aufladen. Dafür bräuchte er Themen. Bislang ist der Mann die Botschaft.

Es lebe Frankreich. Denn Frankreich lebt. Mit Neid lässt sich in diesen Tagen auf ein Land blicken, das gerade von den Deutschen seit einiger Zeit bevorzugt gescholten wird ob seiner mangelhaften Wirtschaftspolitik, eines erschlafften Präsidenten und eines womöglich bevorstehenden Rechtsrucks bei der Präsidentschaftswahl, der ganz Europa erschüttern könnte. Und doch entwickelt sich dort ein Wahlkampf um politische Positionen, den kaum jemand mehr den Franzosen zugetraut hätte. In einer Fernsehdebatte lieferten sich Marine Le Pen, Emmanuel Macron und die drei weiteren Kandidaten eine Diskussion um die Zukunft des Euro, der Migration, den Umgang mit Wladimir Putin und die Gefahren des Terrors.

Themen im Wahlkampf? Ein Hammer!

Wenn man betonen muss, dass sich die politische Auseinandersetzung um Inhalte dreht, liegt schon etwas quer. So ist das im deutschen Wahlkampf, der bislang im Wesentlichen darin besteht, dass alle Beteiligten darauf verweisen, er habe noch nicht begonnen.

Das ist auch eine Umkehr in der politischen Systemlogik: Das französische Präsidialsystem entzündet politischen Wettbewerb, während die parlamentarische Demokratie Deutschlands sich auf ein Personenduell reduziert.

Auf der einen Seite die Bundeskanzlerin, nach elf Regierungsjahren gefangen in einer nahezu präsidialen Rolle. Jeder Ausbruch daraus wird als Aktivismus, jeder Angriff als Verteidigung gegen einen plötzlich erstarkten, gefürchteten Gegner interpretiert. Der heißt Martin Schulz. Gewählt zum SPD-Vorsitzenden am vergangenen Sonntag mit einem Ergebnis, auf das manch ein sozialistischer Staatenlenker noch neidisch gewesen wäre. Die 100 Prozent Zustimmung sind Ausdruck des Parteiwillens, alles auf eine Karte zu setzen.

Der kanadische Philosoph Marshall McLuhan hat Mitte der Sechzigerjahre eine Medientheorie vorgelegt, die in dem Satz gipfelt: „Das Medium ist die Botschaft.“ Damit beschreibt er die Folgen neuer Techniken oder Dienste in einer Weise, die heute unter anderen Vorzeichen wieder besondere Bedeutung bekommt: Es geht nicht um die Inhalte, sondern um die Form. Martin Schulz ist ein Medium. Zumindest für seine Partei. Ohne sich inhaltlich zu positionieren, verändert er die politische Welt. Das ist erst einmal ein erfreulicher Schubs in einer erstarrten Politik der großkoalitionären Kompromisse. Und es könnte sogar mehr daraus werden, wenn Schulz den Mut hätte, Personenkult mit Inhalten zu verbinden.

Schulz könnte Populismus aus den fernen Ecken des politischen Raums wieder in eine gesellschaftliche Mitte führen. Gegen populistische Politik ist nichts zu sagen, wenn sie das tut, was der Name sagt: sich an die Bevölkerung richten und persönliche Überzeugung mit klaren Positionen verbinden.

Marshall McLuhan hat übrigens auch die Glühbirne als Medium beschrieben. Ihr Licht verändert unseren Blick auf die Welt. Wenn es hell wird, sieht man vieles klarer. Sogar das Nichts.

wiwo.de

by Miriam Meckel at March 24, 2017 07:37 AM

March 23, 2017

PRX
Five Local Podcasts to Try for #TryPod

We’re big fans of the simple idea behind the #TryPod campaign: share a podcast you love with someone you love.

At PRX, we work with talented indie producers all over the world, but this month we want to share five podcasts made in our own Boston backyard. Each show tells stories in a unique way and belongs to our growing PRX Podcast Garage community.

In this blog, Podcast Garage Community Manager Alex Braunstein gives you her take on each show and asks their hosts about an episode you should try.

Show: Hiding in the Bathroom, a show for those of us in business who want to embrace our introverted selves.

Episode to Try: How to Do Powerful Work

Alex says: I’m insanely jealous of how at home Morra looks in front of a microphone. As a host, she oozes warmth and a desire to take on the world. It’s no surprise that by day, she runs digital campaigns for mission-driven clients like Planned Parenthood. Her Forbes podcast engages women in frank conversations about introversion, self-care, and feminism in the workplace. Count me in.

Host Morra Aarons-Mele says: “Meighan is humble in the face of a really big life, and she has incredible advice to give those of us who want our work to have meaning. She took Malala Fund from an organization with no logo to a globally-recognized leader in helping educate the world’s girls. And I’ve felt her sacrifices, and admired her fortitude even as she made some really hard decisions and missed her son greatly. Meighan believes she doesn’t choose her work; it chooses her. She wants to serve, she has great skills, and the job finds her. I think this episode is essential listening to anyone who feels like the work they want to do eludes them.”

Show: Soonish, a show about our technological future, and how our choices today will shape that future, though often in ways we can’t predict.

Episode to Try: Meat Without the Moo

Alex says: Wade’s storytelling is so precise and thoughtful that you can just tell the guy has a PhD from MIT. I love his ambitious approach to the show, which is remarkably produced by a team of one. It truly feels like he’s on an epic quest to discover the future and I’m along for the ride. You will literally be smarter just by listening!

Host Wade Roush says: “One of the places this episode ends up is an old automobile factory in San Leandro, CA where a startup called Tiny Farms has built a huge cricket farm. So as the CEO is walking me around the place, I’m trying not to step on any loose crickets, and then I’m trying to stick my mic into their nest to get some cricket-song on tape without scaring them. I’m being so careful! And then the CEO explains that pretty soon they’ll knock out these crickets with carbon dioxide and freeze them and grind them up for cricket flour. And I realize I’m totally okay with that. It’s funny, because I’m vegetarian, so I’m largely against eating animals. But I’d eat crickets all day if it would save a few cows and chickens. I guess we all have our own moral thresholds – and our own choices to make about the future.”

Show: One in a Billion, a show about China, through the voices of Chinese millennials in America.

Episode to Try: Finding Love in America: Reality Bites

Alex says: Being in Mable’s presence is electrifying. She talks fast and dreams big. It’s no wonder she’s put the word “billion” into her show’s title and is personally chasing down the untold stories of Chinese millennials living in America. A former producer for Good Morning America and Dateline, Mable is a seasoned pro exploring a new medium. She’s currently searching for other producers to join her and I can’t wait to hear what they do next.

Host Mable Chan says: “I love Qinghua’s character – adventurous, dutiful and defiant. I find it intriguing that a young woman from the middle of China came alone to America to get her PhD in Engineering. She quickly earned her degree by age 25 and landed her dream job as a data scientist at Silicon Valley! But just as everything seemed to be going well, she was getting bored at work while her 7-year relationship with her boyfriend was suddenly over. How did she turn things around – not only for herself but also for thousands other Chinese looking for love in America? You gotta listen.”

Show: Caught Up, a show with the latest and greatest scoop about South Boston and beyond.

Episode to Try: Losing My Religion

Alex says: The makers of the magazine Caught in Southie have captured my heart with a show about all-things-South-Boston. Even though I’ve never been to Southie (gimme a break, I just moved here), I love eavesdropping on Heather and Maureen’s local take on their neighborhood. They claim to know nothing about podcasting, but they’re clearly naturals when it comes to something pretty unteachable: chemistry. I laugh out loud when they’re recording in our studio and somehow feel nostalgia for a place I’ve never lived.

Hosts Maureen Dahill and Heather Foley say: “In this episode, you get a sense of how we grew up in South Boston. The majority of the kids growing up in Southie went to Catholic School which was taught by nuns. Needless to say, those nuns shaped who we are today – good, bad or otherwise i.e. our love of wine lightening the load of Catholic guilt.”

Show: The Courage to Listen, a show that explores issues of police community relationships, gang violence and race in America.

Episode to Try: Commissioner Ed Davis

Alex says: I crave compassionate leaders like Reverend Brown who know how to listen. It’s a privilege just to be a fly on the wall for his conversations about violence prevention, community mobilization, and policing. He’s credited as “an architect of The Boston Miracle,” in which a group of local preachers cut youth violence in the city by 79%… by listening. I find this show’s straightforward interview style totally gripping.

Host Reverend Jeffrey Brown says: “Ed led the police department for the city of Boston, and was featured in Mark Wahlberg’s film ‘Patriot’s Day.’ We had a fascinating discussion about the Marathon bombing, his personal transformation from traditional to community-oriented policing, and his thoughts on the future of police reform today. Oh, and we asked him how he felt about John Goodman playing him in the movie!”

Learn more about our membership at the Podcast Garage, schedule a session in the studio, or swing by during our open hours for a tour of the space.

The post Five Local Podcasts to Try for #TryPod appeared first on PRX.

by Alex Braunstein at March 23, 2017 08:50 PM

Berkman Center front page
Fake News, Concrete Responses: At the Nexus of Law, Technology, and Social Narratives

Subtitle

A special Harvard Law School-Berkman Klein Center panel moderated Martha Minow, Dean of Harvard Law School

Teaser

Join us for a special Harvard Law School-Berkman Klein Fake News Lunch Panel moderated by Martha Minow, Dean of Harvard Law School

Event Date

Mar 23 2017 12:00pm to Mar 23 2017 12:00pm
Thumbnail Image: 
Photo provided by [Josh Koonce]

Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 12:00 pm
Harvard Law School and the 
Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University

Join panelists Sandra Cortesi, Nathan Matias, An Xiao Mina, and Jonathan Zittrain with moderation by Martha Minow.

The propagation of misinformation, “fake news,” or propaganda has sparked much investigation into its causes and a thorough mapping of the surrounding problem space. Solutions, however, have been in short supply. The human predilection towards conspiratorial thinking, the “stickiness” of rumors, and the largely ineffective efforts to educate or debunk due to the fact that repetition engenders familiarity and confidence in accuracy, which ultimately foment more extreme views, indicate that a purely technological “silver bullet” solution is unlikely.

Harvard Law School and the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University are pleased to convene a lunch panel that draws from our interdisciplinary ecosystem of experts to discuss the ways in which we might craft tools and solutions at the nexus of law, technology, and the social sciences. Panelists will explore issues such as the normative roles of platforms in the dissemination of “fake news,” the role of law in regulating or influencing policies and practices to mitigate this phenomenon, and tools that may chip away at certain challenges within the broader context of problems within the media ecosystem and broader trends in digital media.

About Dean Minow

Martha Minow, the Morgan and Helen Chu Dean and Professor of Law, has taught at Harvard Law School since 1981, where her courses include civil procedure, constitutional law, family law, international criminal justice, jurisprudence, law and education, nonprofit organizations, and the public law workshop. An expert in human rights and advocacy for members of racial and religious minorities and for women, children, and persons with disabilities, she also writes and teaches about privatization, military justice, and ethnic and religious conflict.

Besides her many scholarly articles published in journals of law, history, and philosophy, her books include The First Global Prosecutor: Promise and Constraints (co-edited, 2015); In Brown’s Wake: Legacies of America’s Constitutional Landmark(2010); Government by Contract (co-edited, 2009); Just Schools: Pursuing Equality in Societies of Difference (co-edited, 2008); Breaking the Cycles of Hatred: Memory, Law and Repair (edited by Nancy Rosenblum with commentary by other authors, 2003); Partners, Not Rivals: Privatization and the Public Good (2002); Engaging Cultural Differences: The Multicultural Challenge in Liberal Democracies (co-edited 2002); Between Vengeance and Forgiveness: Facing History After Genocide and Mass Violence(1998); Not Only for Myself: Identity, Politics and Law (1997); Law Stories (co-edited 1996); Narrative, Violence and the Law: The Essays of Robert M. Cover (co-edited 1992); and Making All the Difference: Inclusion, Exclusion, and American Law (1990). She is the co-editor of two law school casebooks, Civil Procedure: Doctrine, Practice and Context (3rd. edition 2008) and Women and the Law (4th edition 2007), and a reader, Family Matters: Readings in Family Lives and the Law (1993).

Minow serves on the Center for Strategic and International Studies Commission on Countering Violent Extremism.  She served on the Independent International Commission Kosovo and helped to launch Imagine Co-existence, a program of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, to promote peaceful development in post-conflict societies. Her five-year partnership with the federal Department of Education and the Center for Applied Special Technology worked to increase access to the curriculum for students with disabilities and resulted in both legislative initiatives and a voluntary national standard opening access to curricular materials for individuals with disabilities.   Her honors include: the Sargent Shriver Equal Justice Award (2016), Joseph B. and Toby Gittler Prize, Brandeis University (2016); nine honorary degrees (in law, education, and humane letters) from schools on three continents; the Gold Medal for Outstanding Contribution to Public Discourse, awarded by the College Historical Society of Trinity College, Dublin, in recognition of efforts to promote discourse and intellectualism on a world stage; the Holocaust Center Award; and the Sacks-Freund Teaching Award, awarded by the Harvard Law School graduating class.

In August 2009, President Barack Obama nominated Minow to the board of the Legal Services Corporation, a bi-partisan, government-sponsored organization that provides civil legal assistance to low-income Americans. The U.S. Senate confirmed her appointment on March 19, 2010 and she now serves as Vice-Chair. She co-chaired its Pro Bono Task Force. She also served as the inaugural chair of the Deans Steering Committee of the Association of American Law Schools and as a member of the American Bar Association Diversity and Inclusion 360 Commission.  She previously chaired the board of directors for the Revson Foundation (New York) and now serves on the boards of the MacArthur Foundation and other nonprofit organizations. She is a former member of the board of the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, the Iranian Human Rights Documentation Center, and former chair of the Scholar’s Board of Facing History and Ourselves. A fellow of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences since 1992, Minow has also been a senior fellow of Harvard’s Society of Fellows, a member of Harvard University Press Board of Syndics, a senior fellow and twice acting director of what is now Harvard’s Safra Foundation Center on Ethics, a fellow of the American Bar Foundation and a Fellow of the American Philosophical Society. She has delivered more than 70 named or endowed lectures and keynote addresses, including most recently the 2016 George W. Gay Lecture at Harvard Medical School’s Center for Bioethics.

Minow co-chaired the Law School’s curricular reform committee from 2003 to 2006, an effort that led to significant innovation in the first-year curriculum as well as new programs of study for second- and third-year J.D. students.

After completing her undergraduate studies at the University of Michigan, Minow received a master’s degree in education from Harvard and her law degree from Yale. She clerked for Judge David Bazelon of the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and then for Justice Thurgood Marshall of the Supreme Court of the United States. She joined the Harvard Law faculty as an assistant professor in 1981, was promoted to professor in 1986, was named the William Henry Bloomberg Professor of Law in 2003, became the Jeremiah Smith Jr., Professor of Law in 2005, and became the inaugural Morgan and Helen Chu Dean and Professor in 2013. She is also a lecturer in the Harvard Graduate School of Education. Her husband, Joseph W. Singer, is the Bussey Professor of Law at Harvard Law School and their daughter, Mira Singer, is a writer and artist.  Minow enjoys watching and discussing movies and keeping in touch with current and former students.

About Sandra Cortesi

Sandra Cortesi is a Fellow at the Berkman Center and the Director of Youth and Media. She is responsible for coordinating the Youth and Media’s policy, research, and educational initiatives, and is leading the collaboration between the Berkman Center and UNICEF. At Youth and Media Sandra works closely with talented young people and lead researchers in the field as they look into innovative ways to approach social challenges in the digital world. Together with Berkman Center’s Executive Director Urs Gasser and the Youth and Media team, she focuses on topics such as inequitable access, information quality, risks to safety and privacy, skills and digital literacy, and spaces for participation, civic engagement, and innovation.

See publications here.

Sandra supports the following Berkman projects and initiatives: Youth and MediaStudent Privacy InitiativeDigital Problem-Solving Initiative, and Coding for All.

About Nathan Matias

Nathan Matias, a PhD student at the MIT Media Lab, designs and researches civic technologies for cooperation across diversity. At the Berkman Center, he will be applying data analysis and design to the topics of peer-based social technologies, creative learning, civic engagement, journalism, gender diversity, and creative learning.

Nathan's current projects include Open Gender TrackerThanks.fmNewsPad, and Sambyuki Watts. A full project list is at natematias.com.

At Texperts, Nathan was on the startup team that scaled microwork systems to reach customers and workers on four continents. At SwiftKey, he helped develop one of the premier text entry systems for mobile, currently used by millions of people. At Microsoft Fuse Labs, he developed novel systems for collaborative neighborhood journalism. Nathan was also the founding Chief Technical Advisor of the Ministry of Stories, a creative writing center in London.

Nathan regularly liveblogs talks and events. He also publishes data journalism with the Guardian Datablog and PBS IdeaLab. He also facilitates #1book140, The Atlantic's Twitter book club, and frequently hosts live Twitter Q&As with prominent writers. He coordinated the Media Lab Festival of Learning in 2012 and 2013.

Before MIT, Nathan completed an MA in English literature at the University of Cambridge, where he was a Davies Jackson scholar and wrote two theses on African literature and the psychology of interactive fiction. In earlier years, he was Riddick Scholar and Hugh Cannon Memorial Scholar at the American Institute of Parliamentarians. He won the Ted Nelson award at ACM Hypertext 2005 with a work of tangible scholarly hypermedia. He was made a fellow of the Royal Society for the Arts, Sciences, and Manufacturing in 2013.

About An Xiao Mina

 

An Xiao” Mina is a technologist and writer who looks at issues of the global internet and networked creativity. As a Berkman Klein Fellow, she has been studying the impact of language barriers in our technology stack as the internet extends into diverse communities around the world, and she is building on her ongoing research on global internet meme culture and its role in politics and culture.

Mina serves as director of product at Meedan, who are building Check, a platform for collaborative verification of digital media. Check has been used by organizations like ProPublica, First Draft News, Amnesty International and the University of Hong Kong to verify, analyze and debunk content on online videos, social media reports and private messaging apps. The tool played a key role in Electionland, a 600-person project that covered access to the ballot and problems that prevent people from exercising their right to vote during the 2016 election. Meedan is also a founding member of First Draft News, an organization dedicated to improving skills and standards in the reporting and sharing of information that emerges online.

She has spoken at venues like the Personal Democracy Forum, ACM SIGCHI, Creative Mornings, the Aspen Institute, the International Journalism Festival, RightsCon and the Institute for the Future, and she has contributed writing to publications like the Los Angeles Review of Books, Fusion, the New Inquiry, Nieman Journalism Lab, the Atlantic and others.

Recently a 2016 Knight Visiting Nieman Fellow, where she studied online language barriers and their impact on journalism, Mina is currently working on a book about internet memes and global social movements  titled “From Memes to Movements,” publishing in 2018 with Beacon Press.

About Jonathan Zittrain

Jonathan Zittrain is the George Bemis Professor of International Law at Harvard Law School and the Harvard Kennedy School of Government, Professor of Computer Science at the Harvard School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Vice Dean for Library and Information Resources at the Harvard Law School Library, and co-founder of the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society.  His research interests include battles for control of digital property and content, cryptography, electronic privacy, the roles of intermediaries within Internet architecture, human computing, and the useful and unobtrusive deployment of technology in education.

He performed the first large-scale tests of Internet filtering in China and Saudi Arabia, and as part of the OpenNet Initiative co-edited a series of studies of Internet filtering by national governments: Access Denied: The Practice and Policy of Global Internet FilteringAccess Controlled: The Shaping of Power, Rights, and Rule in Cyberspace; and Access Contested: Security, Identity, and Resistance in Asian Cyberspace.

He is a member of the Board of Directors of the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the Board of Advisors for Scientific American.  He has served as a Trustee of the Internet Society and as a Forum Fellow of the World Economic Forum, which named him a Young Global Leader. He was a Distinguished Scholar-in-Residence at the Federal Communications Commission, and previously chaired the FCC’s Open Internet Advisory Committee. His book The Future of the Internet -- And How to Stop It predicted the end of general purpose client computing and the corresponding rise of new gatekeepers.  That and other works may be found at <http://www.jz.org>.

 

Photo provided by [Josh Koonce]

by candersen at March 23, 2017 06:00 PM

March 22, 2017

Berkman Center front page
Organization & Structure of Open Source Software Development Initiatives

Subtitle

Challenges & Opportunities Concerning Corporate Formation, Nonprofit Status, & Governance for Open Source Projects

Teaser

A collection of case studies and organizational models for those who manage and participate in open source development initiatives to actively think about the communities they hope to create.

Publication Date

22 Mar 2017

Author(s)

Thumbnail Image: 

Freely available and open to anyone to contribute to or use, open source software is regularly at the heart of exciting and impactful innovation. Much of this innovation is a result of the ethos of the open source community and its dispersed structure. At the same time, some of the attributes that give open source projects their flexibility and spark passion in open source development communities can hinder a project’s success in the long term.

To help open source projects navigate these foundational questions, this report addresses a number of key considerations that those managing open source software development initiatives should take into account when thinking about structure, organization, and governance. The guide elucidates reasons why institutional structure and internal governance processes are important and walks the reader through several models of each, explaining how they might benefit or impact the open source development initiative, and is also replete with case studies and diagrams to illustrate these ideas in practice.

More than prescribing one solution to answer open source projects’ questions or treating the “open source community” as a monolithic whole, the authors seek to offer a range of possibilities and encourage those who manage and participate in open source development initiatives to actively think about available models and consciously adopt approaches that support the work they aim to do and the communities they hope to create.

Producer Intro

Authored by

by djones at March 22, 2017 02:00 PM

David Weinberger
Four-pound fountain pen?

I’m thinking that this Lamy 2000 pen on Amazon

lamy 2000 pen


isn’t really a one-inch cube…

pen details

…that weighs 4.2lbs.

The post Four-pound fountain pen? appeared first on Joho the Blog.

by davidw at March 22, 2017 04:41 AM

Joseph Reagle
FOMO Interview

I was recently interviewed by Luciana Lima for an story about FOMO in Brazil's Você S/A ("Tudo ao mesmo tempo agora," March 2017). The story is print only, and in Portuguese, so I asked to include the original interview here; we are discussing my article "Following the Joneses: FOMO and Conspicuous Sociality."


In your article you say that the FOMO is a new word for an old concept and that the media has an important role in the construction of this terminology. Why does it happen?

"Social comparison" is a core feature of human behavior: we look to others to discern how we are doing and what we should do. Popular media changed the scope of our social comparison from our neighborhood to images on pages and screens. It's hard to compare yourself to the polished images seen in ads and among celebrities. Social media amplifies this.

You also state that FOMO and FOBO are opposing forces that can drive the person into a state called FODA. Could you explain a little more about what this third stage would be?

Patrick McGinnis coined all these terms in 2004 in response to the intense social and professional networking scene at Harvard Business School. Whereas FOMO ("Fear of Missing Out") leads to anxiety about missing something, FOBO ("Fear of Better Options") is the fear of committing to something in case something better came along. McGinnis lamented that all of this ultimately leads to FODA ("Fear of Doing Anything").

You claim that people mistakenly associate FOMO exclusively with social networks. Could we say that there is a human predisposition to blame technology for their bad behavior?

Social comparison is innate to being human; media and technology can lead to distortions, but FOMO is a very human phenomenon.

You also affirm that in the contemporary eye wanting what we see and being seen has fused. Would that not be pure vanity? And are they not two things that have always completed each other?

I believe the term FOMO conflates two distinct feelings: missed experiences (fear of missing out) and belonging (fear of being left out): to want what we see and to be seen have fused. Lone envy and social exclusion are both facilitated by ubiquitous screens.

Don't you believe that having more access to the other's daily life (trips, parties, restaurants, relationships) intensifies the envy we already felt? And that maybe this was a new modality, different from the one our parents could feel, for example?

I think the feeling is the same, media simply changes its circumstances, like its intensity and how often it occurs.

Is FOMO also just related to envy? Or is there a correlation with low self-esteem, for example?

You are right, social comparison, the behavior that drives envy, is also a factor in self-esteem.

Finally you say that the FOMO is related to a fear of "disappearing" and that it should be understood as a continuation of centenary issues. What would this "disappear" be and what are the issues that are closely related to it?

Here I was speaking about the term "FOMO" itself. Fear and envy have always been around; but, in the past two centuries, things like the telegraph and television led to people to speak about the malady of neurasthenia and the anxiety of "keeping up with the Joneses." So I wonder how long "FOMO" will stick around, or will it one day disappear and be replaced by a new term or expression?

by Joseph Reagle at March 22, 2017 04:00 AM

March 21, 2017

Berkman Center front page
The Things of the Internet

Subtitle

with Berkman Klein Fellow, An Xiao” Mina

Teaser

What sorts of objects do new forms of hardware culture enable, and what role does the internet now play in all steps along the way, from ideation to sales to manufacturing to shipping? How might we now incorporate physical objects into our notions of internet memes? And what does this suggest about the future of object culture more generally?

Parent Event

Berkman Klein Luncheon Series

Event Date

Mar 21 2017 12:00pm to Mar 21 2017 12:00pm
Thumbnail Image: 

Tuesday, March 21, 2017 at 12:00 pm
Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
Harvard Law School campus, Wasserstein Hall

As the internet connects makers, manufacturers and shippers across supply chains, a new form of producing and distributing global objects is arising, one that relies more on bottom up networks than top down oversight. When you look carefully, you see the signs of them: in the US, they might be t-shirts with hashtags on them, pussyhats at marches, and creative protest signs, and in Shenzhen, China, we see a plethora of hardware objects, such as selfie sticks, hoverboards and e-cigarettes, that rapidly reach global markets. What sorts of objects do new forms of hardware culture enable, and what role does the internet now play in all steps along the way, from ideation to sales to manufacturing to shipping? How might we now incorporate physical objects into our notions of internet memes? And what does this suggest about the future of object culture more generally?

About An

An Xiao” Mina is a technologist and writer who looks at issues of the global internet and networked creativity. As a Berkman Klein Fellow, she has been studying the impact of language barriers in our technology stack as the internet extends into diverse communities around the world, and she is building on her ongoing research on global internet meme culture and its role in politics and culture.

Mina leads the product team at Meedan, where they are building digital tools for journalists and translators, and she is co-founder of The Civic Beat, a research collective focused on the creative side of civic technology. She serves as a contributing editor to Civicist, an advisory editor to Hyperallergic, and a governing board member at China Residencies.

She has spoken at venues like the Personal Democracy Forum, ACM SIGCHI, Creative Mornings, the Aspen Institute, the International Journalism Festival, RightsCon and the Institute for the Future, and she has contributed writing to publications like the Los Angeles Review of Books, Fusion, the New Inquiry, Nieman Journalism Lab, the Atlantic and others.

Recently a 2016 Knight Visiting Nieman Fellow, where she studied online language barriers and their impact on journalism, Mina is currently working on a book about internet memes and global social movements  titled “From Memes to Movements,” publishing in 2018 with Beacon Press.

by candersen at March 21, 2017 05:00 PM

March 18, 2017

David Weinberger
How a thirteen-year-old interprets what's been given

“Of course what I’ve just said may not be right,” concluded the thirteen year old girl, “but what’s important is to engage in the interpretation and to participate in the discussion that has been going on for thousands of years.”

So said the bas mitzvah girl at an orthodox Jewish synagogue this afternoon. She is the daughter of friends, so I went. And because it is an orthodox synagogue, I didn’t violate the Sabbath by taking notes. Thus that quote isn’t even close enough to count as a paraphrase. But that is the thought that she ended her D’var Torah with. (I’m sure as heck violating the Sabbath now by writing this, but I am not an observant Jew.)

The D’var Torah is a talk on that week’s portion of the Torah. Presenting one before the congregation is a mark of one’s coming of age. The bas mitzvah girl (or bar mitzvah boy) labors for months on the talk, which at least in the orthodox world is a work of scholarship that shows command of the Hebrew sources, that interprets the words of the Torah to find some relevant meaning and frequently some surprising insight, and that follows the carefully worked out rules that guide this interpretation as a fundamental practice of the religion.

While the Torah’s words themselves are taken as sacred and as given by G-d, they are understood to have been given to us human beings to be interpreted and applied. Further, that interpretation requires one to consult the most revered teachers (rabbis) in the tradition. An interpretation that does not present the interpretations of revered rabbis who disagree about the topic is likely to be flawed. An interpretation that writes off prior interpretations with which one disagrees is not listening carefully enough and is likely to be flawed. An interpretation that declares that it is unequivocally the correct interpretation is wrong in that certainty and is likely to be flawed in its stance.

It seems to me — and of course I’m biased — that these principles could be very helpful regardless of one’s religion or discipline. Jewish interpretation takes the Word as the given. Secular fields take facts as the given. The given is not given unless it is taken, and taking is an act of interpretation. Always.

If that taking is assumed to be subjective and without boundaries, then we end up living in fantasy worlds, shouting at those bastards who believe different fantasies. But if there are established principles that guide the interpretations, then we can talk and learn from one another.

If we interpret without consulting prior interpretations, then we’re missing the chance to reflect on the history that has shaped our ideas. This is not just arrogance but stupidity.

If we fail to consult interpretations that disagree with one another, we not only will likely miss the truth, but we will emerge from the darkness certain that we are right.

If we consult prior interpretations that disagree but insist that we must declare one right and the other wrong, we are being so arrogant that we think we can stand in unequivocal judgment of the greatest minds in our history.

If we come out of the interpretation certain that we are right, then we are far more foolish than the thirteen year old I heard speak this morning.

The post How a thirteen-year-old interprets what's been given appeared first on Joho the Blog.

by davidw at March 18, 2017 09:44 PM

March 17, 2017

Miriam Meckel
Der nächste Maschinensturm

Roboter werden nicht massenhaft Arbeitsplätze in den Industrieländern vernichten. Die Ungleichheit könnten sie dennoch befördern.

Gleiches muss gleich behandelt werden. Das ist die Maßgabe, die gute Wirtschaftspolitik leiten sollte, um allen dieselben Entwicklungs- und Aufstiegschancen zu eröffnen. Vielleicht war es dieser Gedanke, der Microsoft-Gründer Bill Gates zu der Forderung veranlasst hat, Roboter müssten besteuert werden. „Wenn der Roboter das Gleiche macht wie ein Mensch, muss er auch genauso besteuert werden“, sagte Gates in einem Interview. In Deutschland wurde er dafür gefeiert und erntete ansonsten eine Welle des Widerstands.

Es ist gängige Meinung, dass Roboter bald Millionen von Arbeitsplätzen weltweit verschwinden lassen werden. Das selbstfahrende Auto macht Lkw-, Taxi- und Lieferdienstfahrer arbeitslos, der operierende Roboter den Arzt und der Bot den Mitarbeiter im Callcenter. Die Annahme ist eingängig und doch grundfalsch. Mit dem technologischen Fortschritt werden sich Tätigkeiten und Berufsbilder verändern, aber sie werden nicht gleich verschwinden. Ist es denn ein Traumberuf, tagelang am Steuer zu sitzen und auf die Straße zu starren, stundenlang mit nörgeligen Kunden am Telefon über Gebrauchsanweisungen zu diskutieren? Kaum auszudenken, was man alles erledigen könnte, wenn diese Tätigkeiten weitgehend automatisiert vonstatten gingen.

In jedem Fall kann intelligente Technik menschliche Arbeitsbedingungen verbessern. Besteuern wir sie, geschieht das langsamer oder gar nicht. Längst gibt es auf der Welt ein Überangebot an Arbeitskraft. Werden die Roboter besteuert, beginnt damit ein Rattenrennen zwischen Mensch und Maschine, das sich langfristig negativ auf die Entlohnung menschlicher Arbeit auswirken wird.

Technologische Innovation ist kein Nullsummenspiel. Nicht jeder Job wird erhalten werden oder sich gleichermaßen weiterentwickeln. Aber kann denn das überhaupt das Ziel sein? Dann säßen wir heute noch an Webstuhl und Dampfmaschine. Deutschland setzt dreimal so viele Roboter pro Arbeitsstunde ein wie die USA. Und dennoch hat Deutschland in 15 Jahren nur 19 Prozent seiner Industriearbeitsplätze verloren, die USA hingegen 33 Prozent. Die Gleichung mehr Roboter gleich weniger Industriearbeitsplätze geht also nicht auf.

Zugegeben: Hier spielen viele Faktoren hinein, die Kurzschlüsse verbieten. Es gibt beispielsweise gute Gründe für die Befürchtung, durch Roboter könnte die Ungleichheit wachsen. Das geschieht, wenn – kurz gesagt – durch billige Arbeitskraft der Automaten die Lohnquote sinkt und die Kapitalquote steigt. Will man dagegen etwas tun, muss man Kapitaleinkünfte höher, Lohneinkünfte niedriger besteuern. Roboter sollen uns nicht ersetzen, sondern die menschlichen Fähigkeiten unterstützen und erweitern. Sie sind Hilfsmittel zur Verbesserung menschlicher Arbeitskraft und können so für den lang ersehnten Produktivitätszuwachs sorgen. Als Mittel, nicht als Zweck. Ungleiches muss also ungleich behandelt werden. Menschen sollten Roboter steuern, nicht besteuern.

wiwo.de

by Miriam Meckel at March 17, 2017 09:01 AM

March 16, 2017

ProjectVRM
Pictures Unpack 20,669 Words

rsiskoryak-image

That’s a small sample of some great work by the artist R. Siskoryak, who (Wikipedia tells us), usually “specializes in making comic adaptations of literature classics”, but has now graphically adapted the complete text of what Joe Coscarelli (@JoeCoscarelli) of The New York Times (in Artist Helps iTunes’ User Agreement Go Down Easy), calls “the complete text of Apple’s mind-numbing corporate boilerplate” one must agree to before using iTunes.

The adaptation has its own Tumblr site, where it says, “@rsikoryak is on tour to promote the new color edition of Terms and Conditions: The Graphic Novel, out now from @drawnandquarterly.” Hence the image above. His  well-illustrated bio there is fun too. You can also read the original Tumblr version from the beginning here.

He’ll be appearing (and, presumably speaking and showing) at the Strand Bookstore, 828 Broadway, 10003, with Kenneth Goldsmith, at 7pm this evening (Thursday, March 9). He’s already been in Baltimore. Next up:

  • Pittsburgh, PA, Friday, March 17, 2017 – 6:00pm, ToonSeum with Copacetic Comics. 945 Liberty Ave, 15222
  • Cincinnati, OH, Tuesday, March 21, 2017 – 7:00pm, Joseph-Beth Booksellers, 2692 Madison Ave., 45208 with Carol Tyler
  • New York, NY, Friday, March 24, 2017 – 4:00pm, Spring Symposium, Cardozo Law Journal, moderated by Brett Frischmann
  • Rochester, NY, Wednesday, April 12, 2017 – 4:00pm, Rochester Institute of Technology, Bamboo Room in the Student Alumni Union, 1 Lomb Memorial Dr, 14623
  • Toronto, ON, Toronto Comic Arts Festival, Friday, May 12, 2017 – 9:00am to Sunday, May 14, 2017 – 5:00pm, Toronto Reference Library, 789 Yonge

Meanwhile, here are a few things we’ve been doing (both through ProjectVRM and CustomerCommons, which is working with the Consent & Information Sharing Working Group at Kantara) on terms and conditions you, the individual formerly known as “the user” (as if you’re on drugs) can assert as the first party. In other words, ways companies such as Apple can click “agree” to what you bring to the level table between you both. Four reasons they would do that:

  1. We have the Internet now. It’s a flat place. We don’t need to drag industrial age defaults that give companies scale across many customers, but don’t give individuals scale across many companies.
  2. Ours can have scale too. This is what Cluetrain promised in 1999 when it said we are not seats or eyeballs or end users or consumers. we are human beings and our reach exceeds your grasp. deal with it. Sure, companies haven’t heard of customer boilerplate before; but they do like consistency, simplicity, predictability, standardization and saving money and time. Customers’ scalable terms will bring them all.
  3. Our terms can be as friendly online as they are off. First example: #NoStalking, which can save the asses of publishers and advertisers, and maybe save journalism too.
  4. GDPR compliance. No need to worry about Europe’s new General Data Protection Regulation and its scary penalties when agreeing to friendly GDPR-compliant terms proffered by individuals obviates the whole thing.

Bonus links:

We will also be visiting all of these—on both the first and second party sides—at VRM Day, and then at the 24th Internet Identity Workshop, which happen together the first week of May at the Computer History Museum in Silicon Valley.

by Doc Searls at March 16, 2017 11:47 PM

Harry Lewis
I know it's a dumb question, but
… what does it mean when it says that USGSOs seeking to be recognized are expected to maintain “in both policy and practice … Publication of the demographic breakdown of the organization’s membership”? (2(d) on page 16 of the Report.)

At a minimum, “demographic breakdown” must mean by gender, in which case this is a way of walking back from the promisepreviously made to the Seneca that it would suffice to change the club’s bylaws without changing its actual membership.

But “demographic breakdown” must mean more than that, or else the demand would simply have been for the gender breakdown.

 It must include ethnic breakdown, since the parallel between gender discrimination and racial discrimination is cited so often. No all-white clubs need apply for recognition. Fair enough.

But that raises an interesting question. There is a Harvard chapter of the Jewish fraternity, A E Pi. I imagine it has a negligible number of Christian members. Suppose it decided to go co-ed and applied for recognition.

Would someone in University Hall check the “demographic breakdown” of the newly reformed A E Pi to make sure there weren’t too many Jewish members? 

Perhaps some descendant of President Lowell could be found for that unsavory job.


by Harry Lewis (noreply@blogger.com) at March 16, 2017 02:11 AM

March 14, 2017

Berkman Center front page
[POSTPONED] An Introduction to Media Cloud: Mapping the attention and influence of news

Subtitle

with Natalie Gyenes and Anushka Shah

Teaser

The recent US election, and related conversations about misinformation, have brought questions about media influence to the forefront of internet research and communications agendas. We use the Media Cloud suite of tools to ask the following question: How can we deconstruct the topic of media influence to reconstruct better narratives?

Parent Event

Berkman Klein Luncheon Series

Event Date

Mar 14 2017 12:00pm to Mar 14 2017 12:00pm
Thumbnail Image: 

Tuesday, March 14, 2017 at 12:00 pm
Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
[POSTPONED] new date information forthcoming
RSVP required to attend in person
 

Media Cloud is a web-based, open-source tool that tracks media conversations across the globe. A project hosted by the MIT Center for Civic Media and the Harvard Berkman Klein Center, the platform uses big data to aggregate and analyze news content from over 50,000 digital sources. The Media Cloud research team has used this suite of tools to explore a number of issues, from how gender based violence is covered in different media ecosystems, and the presence of public health echo chambers online, to understanding coverage around free basics in India. This conversation will begin with an introduction to Media Cloud and an overview of some of our research findings. We will then move into a use-case demonstration and workshop to explore how Media Cloud may be useful for your own research. 

About Natalie

Natalie is a researcher working at the intersection of health and human rights, and will conduct research with the Berkman Klein Center and the MIT Media Lab Center for Civic Media. She will focus on how digital media portrays and influences issues of global health equity and access, human rights and social norms, and will explore how Media Cloud can be more useful for non-profits and intergovernmental organizations.

About Anushka

Anushka has a background in data science and media research, and is currently based in Cambridge at the Media Lab. Her primary focus at Civic Media is applying these disciplines to Indian and African media as part of the Media Cloud project.
Anushka's interest is understanding how the news covers specific topics and the effect of different narratives on civic engagement. The long term objective of such analysis is to aid the reverse engineering of both non-fiction and fiction media content to better affect citizen knowledge and participation.
Anushka grew up in India and has previously worked with various non-profits, development agencies, and political parties on ground in rural and urban India.

Links

Media Cloud blog for more information about their research projects: http://mediacloud.org/category/research/

 

Loading...

by candersen at March 14, 2017 10:06 PM

Justin Reich
The Future of Education Reform - Lessons Learned at SXSWedu
To prepare students for the demands of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, the system of education needs to undergo a revolution and at lightening speed.

by Beth Holland at March 14, 2017 07:56 PM

Harry Lewis
More about the Implementation
I hadn’t noticed Section 2 of Appendix H of the Implementation Committee Report until a student asked me about it. This section makes various recommendations about how Harvard space could be repurposed for undergraduate social life. Some of these ideas seem good, but I wonder how much thought has gone into them since they all seem to have problems.

Renew the Queen’s Head Pub. Great idea, but will Harvard really do a third major renovation of this space in barely twenty years? The original, very expensive Loker Commons was overbuilt architecturally, indeterminate socially, and a failure operationally. Then (after some more modest tweaks) the space was turned into a pub—an odd choice for a space close to freshman housing. The Report dismissively says it’s popular mainly with graduate students, as though graduate students are, if anything, overprovisioned and it wouldn’t hurt to give their space to undergraduates. Really? (What happened to One Harvard?) And with the FAS budget under pressure from the costs of renovating the Houses, would it make sense to undertake another renovation of the Memorial Hall basement?

Loeb House as event space. This is a fabulous idea. Loeb House has a beautiful, stately ballroom, often empty but occasionally used, at very high cost, for receptions after funerals. When I was dean I tried to get it for the Ballroom Dance Club and Team (not a hard-partying group). No, was the answer—they would scratch the floor. This is a great proposal, not just because it is a natural use for this space, but because it presents an opportunity for the Corporation (whose offices occupy the building) to address in deed as well as in word the problem of undergraduate social life.

The Smith Campus center.  Couldn’t this have been thought through just a few years ago when the Center was being planned? Or shall we embark on an immediate renovation to make it an “Agora” for undergraduates, to use the Report’s term, instead of whatever it is actually going to be?

Phillips Brooks House.A seductive idea which is never going to happen. First, it would surprise me greatly if the public service groups went along with it. But more importantly, that building has not just a history but a deed of gift. It was built thanks to a gift from the Randall Charities Corporation. As the 1896-97 Harvard President’s Report states, the gift was applied “to the construction of the Phillips Brooks House to insure in that building suitable accommodations for the charitable work of the organization known as the Student Volunteer Committee so long as the said organization retain the approval of the President and Fellows, or in case this work should be given up, for kindred work at the discretion of said President and Fellows ….” IANAL, but I wonder if this idea was checked out before it was put in the Report.

SOCH as party central. That is Hilles Library, for earlier generations of readers. Might work great for students in the Quad. It’s never worked as planned as the complex for student offices and extracurricular clubs since it was decommissioned as a library. (Was that even a good idea, in retrospect?)

Transition administrative offices into student space. Send offices like the Office of International Education and the Office of Undergraduate Research and Fellowships from their “impressive frame wood houses on Dunster Street” to somewhere less central. Repurpose these buildings as “a quasi-student union, with accessible study and hang-out spaces during the day and bookable space for student organizations and perhaps the dining societies to book for meetings and social gatherings in the evenings and/or on weekends.” This seems at odds with what we have heard at other times about the need to restore the centrality of the academic experience. It seems a little odd in particular to send fellowship applicants, who would have sworn not to be members of the nearby final clubs, off to some more distant location for conversations about fellowships, so that the fellowships office building could be used as a Harvard-banded club.

These are all details, of course. The biggest question, the one about the policy itself that lay behind the motion I made about nine months ago and then withdrew after the new committee was promised, remains on the table, awaiting the work of that committee.


But another big question remains after reading the Implementation Committee report in full. One of the complaints about off-campus social clubs has always been that they draw social life out of the Houses. Making them go co-ed would do nothing to change that, or to make them less exclusive, or elitist. (Vide The Hasty Pudding Club— the social club, not the Theatricals.) Won’t all these efforts to create social space outside the Houses compete with House social life rather than enhance it? The other two sections of Appendix H describe House-based activities. Does the whole picture really hold together—better social life in the Houses, and also better social life on campus outside the Houses?

by Harry Lewis (noreply@blogger.com) at March 14, 2017 06:16 PM

Feeds In This Planet