Yes, this is amusing. It also reiterates the possibility of an individual making an attack that could be mistaken for the start of a cyber war.

https://www.databreaches.net/north-korea-hacked-him-so-he-took-down-its-internet/

North Korea Hacked Him. So He Took Down Its Internet

What a great — and thought-provoking — story by Andy Greenberg:

For the past two weeks, observers of North Korea’s strange and tightly restricted corner of the internet began to notice that the country seemed to be dealing with some serious connectivity problems. On several different days, practically all of its websites—the notoriously isolated nation only has a few dozen—intermittently dropped offline en masse, from the booking site for its Air Koryo airline to Naenara, a page that serves as the official portal for dictator Kim Jong-un’s government. At least one of the central routers that allow access to the country’s networks appeared at one point to be paralyzed, crippling the Hermit Kingdom’s digital connections to the outside world.

Some North Korea watchers pointed out that the country had just carried out a series of missile tests, implying that a foreign government’s hackers might have launched a cyberattack against the rogue state to tell it to stop saber-rattling.

But responsibility for North Korea’s ongoing internet outages doesn’t lie with US Cyber Command or any other state-sponsored hacking agency. In fact, it was the work of one American man in a T-shirt, pajama pants, and slippers, sitting in his living room night after night, watching Alien movies and eating spicy corn snacks—and periodically walking over to his home office to check on the progress of the programs he was running to disrupt the internet of an entire country.

Read more at Wired about why and how a security researcher known as P4x sought revenge on North Korea. The story will make some people cheer but it should also raise questions as to whether our government did enough when security researchers were attacked by a foreign government — and what our government will do now. Will it sit back and let vigilantes strike back or what? Is our government going to put its cyberskills where its mouth is or not?

If individuals are the target of a hacking campaign and the government doesn’t show up to help them in meaningful ways, and doesn’t say to them, “Look, we’ve got something going on right now so sit tight for a while please,” then why shouldn’t individuals take matters into their own hands to protect themselves?

Perhaps we are not inclined to think of TikTok as a real threat?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/tiktok-security-risk-china-biden-11643807751?mod=djemalertNEWS

U.S. Moving—Some Say Too Slowly—to Address TikTok Security Risk

The Biden administration is moving to revise federal rules to address potential security risks from TikTok and other foreign-owned apps, eight months after opting not to pursue a forced shutdown of the Chinese-owned video-sharing platform.

The Commerce Department recently concluded a public-comment period on the proposed rule change, which would expand federal oversight to explicitly include apps that could be used by “foreign adversaries to steal or otherwise obtain data,” according to a filing in the Federal Register.

Under the rule, the commerce secretary could effectively bar foreign apps deemed unacceptable security risks. That could force social-media platforms such as TikTok and other software applications connected to the internet to submit to third-party auditing, source-code examination and monitoring of the logs that show user data, according to the proposed rule.

The future of Colorado privacy?

https://www.databreaches.net/prepared-remarks-attorney-general-phil-weiser-on-the-way-forward-on-data-privacy-and-data-security-jan-28-2022/

Prepared remarks: Attorney General Phil Weiser on the way forward on data privacy and data security (Jan. 28, 2022)

Colorado’s Attorney General, Phil Weiser, gave a speech for Data Privacy Day that talks about Colorado’s Privacy Act and its provisions with respect to both privacy and data security.

It is a speech worth reading, especially if you want an overview of what is coming your way in Colorado.

With three states now having state laws, you’d think Congress would be under more pressure to have one federal law, but given how dysfunctional Congress is and how much money is spent — including by data brokers and media outlets — lobbying them not to seriously protect our privacy and data security, I’m not holding my breath. Thank goodness some states keep pushing forward to protect consumers and to hold entities accountable.

Read AG Weiser’s speech here.

(Related)

https://www.huntonprivacyblog.com/2022/02/02/colorado-ag-publishes-guidance-on-data-security-practices-and-announces-upcoming-rulemaking-under-the-colorado-privacy-act/

Colorado AG Publishes Guidance on Data Security Practices and Announces Upcoming Rulemaking Under the Colorado Privacy Act

… The “Data Security Best Practices” guidance document outlined nine key steps companies should take to protect their data, including:

Perspective.

https://www.bespacific.com/divergent-global-views-on-social-media-free-speech-and-platform-regulation/

Divergent Global Views on Social Media, Free Speech, and Platform Regulation: Findings from the United Kingdom, South Korea, Mexico, and the United States

Wihbey, John and Chung, Myojung and Peacey, Mike and Morrow, Garrett and Tian, Yushu and Vitacco, Lauren and Rincon Reyes, Daniela and Clavijo, Melissa, Divergent Global Views on Social Media, Free Speech, and Platform Regulation: Findings from the United Kingdom, South Korea, Mexico, and the United States (January 3, 2022). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=

“Citizens and policymakers in many countries are voicing frustration with social media platform companies, which are, increasingly, host to much of the world’s public discourse. Many societies have considered regulation to address issues such as misinformation and hate speech. However, there is relatively little data on how countries compare precisely in terms of public attitudes toward social media regulation. This report provides an overview of public opinion across four diverse democracies – the United Kingdom, South Korea, Mexico, and the United States – furnishing comparative perspectives on issues such as online censorship, free speech, and social media regulation. We gathered nationally representative samples of 1,758 (South Korea), 1,415 (U.S.), 1,435 (U.K.), and 784 (Mexico) adults in the respective countries. Across multiple measures, respondents from the United States and Mexico are, on the face of it, more supportive of freedoms of expression than respondents from the United Kingdom and South Korea. Additionally, the United Kingdom, South Korea, and Mexico are more supportive of stricter content moderation than the United States, particularly if the content causes harm or distress for others. The data add to our understanding of the global dynamics of content moderation policy and speak to civil society efforts, such as the Santa Clara Principles, to articulate standards for companies that are fair to users and their communities. The findings underscore how different democracies may have varying needs and translate and apply their values in nuanced ways.”

Demonstrating an ability to grasp the obvious. Perhaps there is hope for DHS yet.

https://www.cpomagazine.com/cyber-security/dhs-bulletin-warns-of-russian-cyber-attacks-in-retaliation-if-us-responds-to-a-ukraine-invasion/

DHS Bulletin Warns of Russian Cyber Attacks in Retaliation if US Responds to a Ukraine Invasion

As the great “will they or won’t they” continues to play out in the news, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has issued a bulletin to law enforcement agencies warning that Russian cyber attacks in the US are possible if Ukraine is invaded.

(Related) If they are saying amateurs can successfully attack the pros, they have it right. But can amateurs survive retaliation?

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2022/02/01/cascading-chaos-nonstate-actors-and-ai-on-the-battlefield/

Editor's Note: This piece is part of a series titled "Nonstate armed actors and illicit economies in 2022” from Brookings's Initiative on Nonstate Armed Actors.

Stay current.

https://www.isaca.org/resources/news-and-trends/newsletters/atisaca/2022/volume-5/report-provides-insights-on-evolving-privacy-landscape?cid=edmi_3000861&Appeal=edmi&utm_source=sfmc&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=AtISACA_20220202&utm_term=evol-privacy-land&utm_id=172072&sfmc_id=97787913

Report Provides Insights on Evolving Privacy Landscape

New research from ISACA explores the latest trends in enterprise privacy—from privacy workforce and privacy by design to privacy challenges and the future of privacy—in its new Privacy in Practice 2022 survey report, sponsored by OneTrust.

… The survey report was discussed in depth in the free webinar, “The State of Privacy: 2022,” available on demand at https://store.isaca.org/s/community-event?id=a334w000004cmroAAA. A complimentary copy of the Privacy in Practice 2022 survey report and additional privacy resources and articles can be accessed at www.isaca.org/dataprivacy. Additional information on ISACA’s privacy resources, including the Certified Data Privacy Solutions Engineer™ (CDPSE™) certification, is available at www.isaca.org/cdpse. ISACA also hosts a Privacy group in its Engage online forums to discuss the topic and share best practices.

This could also be viewed as a “Things managers should never do” manual.

https://www.bespacific.com/cias-simple-sabotage-field-manual-a-timeless-guide-to-subverting-any-organization-with-purposeful-stupidity-1944/

Read the CIA’s Simple Sabotage Field Manual: A Timeless Guide to Subverting Any Organization with “Purposeful Stupidity” (1944)

Open Culture: “…Now declassified and freely available on the Homeland Security website, the manual the agency describes as “surprisingly relevant” was once distributed to OSS officers abroad to assist them in training “citizen-saboteurs” in occupied countries like Norway and France. Such people, writes Rebecca Onion at Slate, “might already be sabotaging materials, machinery, or operations of their own initiative,” but may have lacked the devious talent for sowing chaos that only an intelligence agency can properly master. Genuine laziness, arrogance, and mindlessness may surely be endemic. But the Field Manual asserts that “purposeful stupidity is contrary to human nature” and requires a particular set of skills. The citizen-saboteur “frequently needs pressure, stimulation or assurance, and information and suggestions regarding feasible methods of simple sabotage.”…

Managers

• In making work assignments, always sign out the unimportant jobs first. See that important jobs are assigned to inefficient workers.

• Insist on perfect work in relatively unimportant products; send back for refinishing those which have the least flaw.

• To lower morale and with it, production, be pleasant to inefficient workers; give them undeserved promotions.

• Hold conferences when there is more critical work to be done.

• Multiply the procedures and clearances involved in issuing instructions, pay checks, and so on. See that three people have to approve everything where one would do...”

Perspective. Why are tech companies ignoring math?

https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/02/01/1044561/meet-the-nsa-spies-shaping-the-future/

Meet the NSA spies shaping the future

For someone with a deeply scientific job, Gil Herrera has a nearly mystical mandate: Look into the future and then shape it, at the level of strange quantum physics and inextricable math theorems, to the advantage of the United States.

Herrera is the newly minted leader of the National Security Agency’s Research Directorate.

Might be an interesting perspective on our Supremes.

https://www.bespacific.com/uk-supreme-court-has-launched-its-first-free-online-course-for-the-public/

UK Supreme Court has launched its first, free, online course for the public

Paul Sandles, Librarian and Departmental Records Officer: “The Supreme Court has launched its first, free, online course for the public. https://www.futurelearn.com/courses/inside-the-supreme-court We have worked in partnership with Royal Holloway, University of London, to create the course. Our aim is to give people a behind the scenes look at the work of the Supreme Court and Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC). The course is designed to increase awareness and understanding of the role and work of the Court.

• The course is highly interactive. Content takes the form of articles, case studies, video interviews, quizzes, and mini lectures. Hosted on the social learning platform FutureLearn, everything is presented by academic experts from Royal Holloway, present and former Supreme Court Justices, and a range of people who work at the Court.

• Registration is open now. The course will begin on Monday 21 February and learners can complete it in their own time, within the two-week window. We estimate that it will take four hours a week.

• Further information is provided on the programme syllabus and on our website…”

Don’t count on it.

https://www.databreaches.net/can-data-breaches-be-good-for-some-corporate-brands/

Can Data Breaches Be Good For Some Corporate Brands?

Christos Makridis writes:

Surprisingly, data breaches can be good for some corporate brands, a new study shows.

When hackers pirate their way past corporate firewalls and publicize the private lives of consumers, the betrayal of consumer trust and the aura of corporate incompetence should sink a company’s reputation. But the real world is more complicated.

Certainly large data breaches – such as the Crypto.com breach earlier this month or the June 2021 breach of LinkedIn that impacted 100 million users — can hurt a company’s brand power, at least for a time. But, strangely, smaller data breaches can actually boost a brand, according to a recent study in the Journal of Cybersecurity.

So does this mean that SMBs should laugh at ransomware operators and tell them, “Hell no, we aren’t interested in covering up your breach of our system — a little bad press won’t really hurt us and may actually help our brand recognition!”

Sounds…. odd…. doesn’t it?

Read more at Forbes.

This is not ‘outsmarting AI,’ this is ‘undue reliance.’

https://www.geekwire.com/2022/commentary-how-homeowners-defeated-zillows-ai-ultimately-leading-to-zillow-offers-demise/

Commentary: How homeowners defeated Zillow’s AI, which led to Zillow Offers’ demise

Now that the dust has settled, we can ask how could the smart and savvy team at Zillow Group, armed with cutting-edge AI methods and mountains of data, lose half a billion dollars buying homes in the second half of 2021. This post identifies two Achilles’ heels that led to this debacle: the “inside information” advantage of homeowners coupled with unanticipated changes in home prices over time.

… Simulated success on historical data does not imply success in buying from homeowners for a simple reason: many homeowners have a better sense of the value of their own home due to variables outside of Zillow’s model (e.g., the house has a strong odor or other idiosyncratic characteristics that repel would-be buyers).

… When Zillow’s offer is too low, homeowners are likely to reject it, but when Zillow’s offer is too high, they are likely to accept it — capitalizing on Zillow’s errors. As a result, even when historical backtesting of a pricing algorithm indicates a profit, the results in the real marketplace could be quite different.

The technical term for this situation is “adversarial machine learning. When a machine-learned model is trained and tested on a historical distribution of data, but used on a different distribution, errors can result, particularly when that different distribution is defined by homeowners (who are Zillow’s adversaries in this case).

So, King Soopers would be guilty under any similar law.

https://www.huntonprivacyblog.com/2022/01/31/california-ag-issues-ccpa-non-compliance-notices-to-businesses-operating-loyalty-programs/

California AG Issues CCPA Non-Compliance Notices to Businesses Operating Loyalty Programs

On January 28, 2022, California Attorney General Rob Bonta published a statement regarding recent investigations conducted by the California Office of Attorney General (“AG”) with respect to businesses operating loyalty programs and their compliance with the California Consumer Privacy Act’s (“CCPA’s”) financial incentive requirements. As a result of the investigations, the AG’s Office sent non-compliance notices to major corporations across multiple sectors, including retail, food services, travel and home improvement. The businesses have 30 days to cure the alleged CCPA violations and bring their loyalty programs into compliance with the CCPA. Otherwise, enforcement action can be initiated.

Under the CCPA, a business may offer financial incentives to consumers for the collection of personal information, including through loyalty programs. Such businesses must, in compliance with the CCPA and CCPA Regulations, provide notice of the financial incentive, clearly describe the material terms of the financial incentive program, and obtain prior opt-in consent for participation in the program.

No rest for the wicked? (Meaning, someone with data.)

https://www.insideprivacy.com/eu-data-protection/edpb-publishes-draft-guidelines-on-the-right-of-access/

EDPB Publishes Draft Guidelines on the Right of Access

On January 28, 2022, the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB”) initiated a public consultation on its draft Guidelines 01/2022 on data subject rights – Right of access (“draft Guidelines”). Running to 60 pages, the draft Guidelines cover a range of topics relating to the right of access, including analyzing a request; establishing the identity of the requesting data subject; assessing the scope of the right of access; guidance on how controllers can comply with a request; and limitations on the right of access. The draft Guidelines provide important clarifications as to how EU supervisory authorities interpret the GDPR’s access right, which we set out below.

Start ‘em young. Teach them what ‘normal’ is.

https://www.wired.com/story/video-games-data-privacy-artificial-intelligence/

The Unnerving Rise of Video Games that Spy on You

TECH CONGLOMERATE TENCENT caused a stir last year with the announcement that it would comply with China’s directive to incorporate facial recognition technology into its games in the country. The move was in line with China’s strict gaming regulation policies, which impose limits on how much time minors can spend playing video games—an effort to curb addictive behavior, since gaming is labeled by the state as “spiritual opium.”

The state’s use of biometric data to police its population is, of course, invasive, and especially undermines the privacy of underage users—but Tencent is not the only video game company to track its players, nor is this recent case an altogether new phenomenon. All over the world, video games, one of the most widely adopted digital media forms, are installing networks of surveillance and control.

You can do it, old timer.

https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/leading-disruption-in-a-legacy-business/

Leading Disruption in a Legacy Business

Few doubt that something extraordinary has happened at Nvidia, as its share price has risen by more than 8,000% over the past decade. It now ranks in the top 10 of the most valuable companies globally, thanks to its transformation from the world’s leading provider of graphic processors to a leader in computing for artificial intelligence and autonomous driving.1 CEO Jensen Huang has confounded the conventional wisdom that established companies cannot reinvent themselves and their industries through radical innovation.

Nvidia isn’t an outlier — rather, we see it as one of the more eye-catching examples of the developing trend of large corporations leading radical innovation. Among them is LexisNexis, which became an early leader in big data analytics by creating a multibillion-dollar business that is larger than the original legal information firm. Another, Deloitte Consulting, is challenging the hundred-year-old management consulting model with Deloitte Pixel, a new open-talent model. Best Buy has broken out of its pure-play retail box to create a health tech and services company for the elderly. And MasterCard has moved from a focus on processing credit card transactions to creating new digital payment solutions.

AI: Ask your question, I’ll learn the language and give you an answer. (Humans can do this too, it just takes a hell of a lot longer.)

https://www.c4isrnet.com/intel-geoint/2022/01/31/heres-how-intelligence-agencies-can-search-foreign-documents-without-learning-the-language/

Here’s how intelligence agencies can search foreign documents without learning the language

… Essentially, once English-speaking users enter a search query in English, the program looks through foreign language documents and recordings to find relevant results, translating those phrases back into English before presenting results back to the user. It’s an “English-in, English-out” tool, and the company claims its system allows operators to search foreign documents, find results and understand their context and meaning without having to speak the language, according to a Jan. 31 announcement.

A collection of articles.

https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2022/february/information-warfare-ai-cyber-and-maneuver

Information Warfare: AI, Cyber, and Maneuver

We have all come to understand that every month is cyber month. Unless you live off the grid, it is hard to avoid news about information warfare, cryptocurrency, online safety, and cyber vulnerabilities. As the magazine went to the printers, Russia had not physically invaded Ukraine, but a cyberattack looked like a possible precursor to invasion. This issue features the winners of the 2021 Information Warfare Essay Contest, sponsored by Booz Allen Hamilton.

Not bad for something simple you dash off in your spare time. I have spare time. I better start dashing…

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-60208463

Wordle inventor 'overwhelmed' as New York Times buys game

The inventor of word game sensation Wordle has spoken of being overwhelmed by its success, following a sale to the New York Times (NYT).

Software engineer Josh Wardle released the free simple online game in October, and has now sold it for an undisclosed seven-figure sum.

He said the game, which has millions of players, "has gotten bigger than I ever imagined. It has been incredible."

The NYT wants to use the game to boost its online subscriptions.

The media group said it will "initially remain free" to play, raising questions that the intention in the long term is to charge.

Resource.

https://www.makeuseof.com/discover-best-newsletters/

5 Ways to Discover the Best Newsletters Worth Reading

The best writing on the internet is now hidden away in the inbox. These sites give you different ways to find the best newsletters worth reading.

It was always a risk. Now you can be notified when the risk becomes real.

https://www.makeuseof.com/screenshot-notification-messenger/

How to Get Notified When Someone Screenshots Disappearing Messages on Messenger

Meta has announced updates for end-to-end encrypted chats on Facebook Messenger. Default end-to-end encryption won't arrive on Messenger until sometime in 2023, but now you can opt-in and take advantage of the added features.

The most noteworthy development is the addition of a control to its disappearing messages that notifies you if your chat partner takes a screenshot of your conversation. Here's what you need to know.

If I copy a “selfie” taken by my friend the Colonel, could I use that to establish his/my identity? (The selfie as ‘something we have’ rather than ‘something we are’)

https://www.bespacific.com/its-not-just-the-irs-the-us-government-wants-your-selfies/

It’s Not Just the IRS—the US Government Wants Your Selfies

Wired: “…More than 20 federal agencies, including the Social Security Administration, use a digital identity system called Login.gov run by the General Services Administration. It’s built on services from LexisNexis and can use selfies for account verification. The GSA’s director of technology transformation services Dave Zvenyach says facial recognition is being tested for fairness and accessibility and not yet used when people access government services through Login.gov. The GSA’s administrator said last year that 30 million citizens have Login.gov accounts and that it expects the number to grow significantly as more agencies adopt the system. “ID.me is supplying something many governments ask for and require companies to do,” says Elizabeth Goodman, who previously worked on Login.gov and is now senior director of design at federal contractor A1M Solutions. Countries including the UK, New Zealand, and Denmark use similar processes to ID.me’s to establish digital identities used to access government services. Many international security standards are broadly in line with those of the US, written by the National Institute of Standards and Technology…”

Privacy by geography.

https://www.csoonline.com/article/3648417/crazy-quilt-of-state-privacy-laws-could-cost-businesses-1-trillion.html#tk.rss_all

Crazy quilt of state privacy laws could cost businesses $1 trillion

Allowing the states to regulate data privacy could cost businesses more than $1 trillion in the next 10 years, according to a new study by the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation.

So far, the report noted, only a handful of states have enacted privacy laws, including California, Colorado, and Virginia, but more states are likely to pass laws in the coming years. Since 2018, 34 states have passed or introduced 72 privacy bills regulating the commercial collection and use of personal data. However, as more laws are passed, they will create significant compliance costs for both in- and out-of-state businesses and confusion for consumers.

The ITIF estimates that, without a federal law governing data privacy, a patchwork of laws in 50 states could impose out-of-state costs of between $98 billion and $112 billion annually, with small businesses picking up from $20 billion to $23 billion of that tab annually.

Imagine that. My AI is governed by the GDPR.

https://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/opinions/gdpr-compliance-artificial/

#DataPrivacyDay: Key GDPR Compliance Issues to Watch in the Artificial Intelligence Space

Organizations increasingly use artificial intelligence (AI) driven solutions in their day-to-day business operations. For example, many organizations rely on AI to continuously train algorithms and improve their products and services, using so-called machine learning (ML) models. Generally, these AI-driven solutions require the processing of significant amounts of personal data for the model’s own training, which is often not the purpose for which the personal data was originally collected. There is a clear tension between such further use of vast amounts of personal data and some of the key data protection principles outlined in privacy regulation.

Laws like the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) aim to minimize the processing of individuals’ personal data to what is strictly necessary to achieve a specific, well-defined purpose. While the GDPR does not rule out the further use of personal data in connection with AI-driven solutions, businesses should consider a number of key GDPR compliance considerations when relying on AI-driven solutions.

Will ‘belief systems’ (religions) impact the algorithms used in AI? (How could they not?)

https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/469628/Iran-plans-to-become-a-leading-country-in-AI

Iran plans to become a leading country in AI

… Iran is in 13th place among the top countries in artificial intelligence by the total number of publications in 2021, according to the Nature Index database.

The SCImago ranking database at the University of Granada, Spain, ranks countries and universities based on the number of scholarly articles from higher education institutions in the Scopus database. This ranking uses three indicators of research, innovation, and society in combination.

Resources. The website launches in February 2022

https://www.bespacific.com/massive-open-index-of-scholarly-papers-launches/

Massive open index of scholarly papers launches

Nature: “An ambitious free index of more than 200 million scientific documents that catalogues publication sources, author information and research topics, has been launched. The index, called OpenAlex after the ancient Library of Alexandria in Egypt, also aims to chart connections between these data points to create a comprehensive, interlinked database of the global research system, say its founders. The database, which launched on 3 January, is a replacement for Microsoft Academic Graph (MAG), a free alternative to subscription-based platforms such as Scopus, Dimensions and Web of Science that was discontinued at the end of 2021. “It’s just pulling lots of databases together in a clever way,” says Euan Adie, founder of Overton, a London-based firm that tracks the research cited in policy documents. Overton had been getting its data from various sources, including MAG, ORCID, Crossref and directly from publishers, but has now switched to using only OpenAlex, in the hope of making the process easier…”

We can, therefore we must. Would Airtags automatically fall into the surveillance/stalking category? If so, why didn’t Apple recognize it?

https://www.pogowasright.org/apple-creates-personal-safety-guide-as-airtag-concerns-mount-not-good-enough-says-privacy-group/

Apple creates personal safety guide as AirTag concerns mount — not good enough, says privacy group

Victoria Song reports:

On Tuesday, Apple quietly launched a Personal Safety User Guide to help “anyone who is concerned about or experience technology-enabled abuse, stalking or harassment.” The guide is a resource hub to help people figure out what their options are if they wish to remove someone’s access to shared information, as well as personal safety features available across the Apple ecosystem. Most notably, it includes a “Stay safe with AirTag and other Find My accessories” page at a time when an increasing number of people have come forward about being stalked with the devices.

Read more at The Verge.

On Wednesday, S.T.O.P. issued a press release demanding Apple stop selling air tags altogether:

(New York, NY, 1/26/2022) – Today, the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project (S.T.O.P.), a New York-based privacy group, demands Apple, Inc. halt the sale of AirTags, wireless tracking devices first sold by the tech giant last April. The small, light-weight trackers have been discovered by everyone from survivors of intimate partner violence (who are targeted by their abusers) to celebrities targeted by fans. The civil rights group noted that Apple’s safeguards had failed to prevent precisely the sort of stalking it warned about last year.

Read more at StopSpying.org

A duty to use AI?

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s43681-022-00139-7

Ethical issues deriving from the delayed adoption of artificial intelligence in medical imaging

Medical imaging (MI) has assumed a central role in medicine. Artificial intelligence (AI) has revolutionized computer vision and it is also approaching to impact deeply MI. Fundamental ethical matters have raised and teams of experts around the world are involved in defining ethical borders for AI in MI. However, reading the extremely detailed proposals, it is clear that the treated ethical arguments have been completely redefined and specifically structured for AI in MI. Instead, many of them should be inherited from other technologies already in use in MI. The complete re-definition of ethical principles could produce contradictions and delays for AI adoption in MI, thus arising important ethical concerns. In this paper, potential ethical issues related to AI delay are presented: the objective is to contribute to reuse some concepts from other technologies to streamline the arguments and avoid these concerns.

AI as a “legal Terminator?”

https://repository.usta.edu.co/handle/11634/42429

Assessment of the insertion of artificial intelligence in the legal field: an analysis of the prosecuting entity in the investigation stage

This article addresses the relationship that may exist between artificial intelligence (AI) and the accusatory criminal system, specifically as an assistant for the Prosecutor’s Office, claiming that, through the facts and the probative material collected by the judicial police, the latter is analyzed by a software, which can determine the criminal conduct through the information obtained. This through a qualitative research with the application of a theoretical deductive method, consisting of the review of databases, bibliography and statistics, beginning with the presentation of the function of the prosecutor’s office in the investigation phase. It continues with a statistical analysis, legal informatics and the location of artificial intelligence among its branches, a study of comparative law with Mexico, Argentina, United States, Canada, and Australia, to respond to the legal problem identified in the face of the inadequate classification of punishable conducts, which in turn violates the different procedural guarantees. The above, by generating recommendations for the implementation of a software that manages and analyzes the factual and legal circumstances to determine more easily the conduct.

Will AI ever be a person?

https://repository.usta.edu.co/handle/11634/42427

Ethics in Artificial Intelligence from the perspective of Law

This article is the product of a study that aims to demonstrate the relevance of ethics in the development of artificial intelligence, for which it will present an exploration of the positions of experts and different international organizations, including the European Union, which coincide in establishing similar paradigms on the potential scope of the autonomy of AI as a being endowed with cognitive capacity or intelligence, but not with conscience or reason, so the right to freedom plays a transcendental role in defining the category of AI as an individual. In order to bring the reader closer to the object of study, the objectives and categories of the conceptualization of the purposes of AI, the confrontation between autonomy and automation and intelligence and reasoning, will be presented, so that the reader can make a critical analysis that allows him to have his own position on the generation of legal responsibilities of the AI as a legal person and its programmers. Similarly, issues such as transhumanism, understood as a mechanism to improve human life and performance, bioethics, which should be based on respect for human dignity and the protection of fundamental rights, will be addressed, to finally, specify the positions of experts and the European Commission on the adaptation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights to achieve a reliable and ethical AI.

Does asking this question a lot suggest a direction in legal thought?

https://repository.uchastings.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1110&context=hastings_science_technology_law_journal

Artificial Intelligence and Inventorship – Does the Patent Inventor Have to be Human?

Artificial intelligence (“AI”) is ubiquitous; our smartphones help us navigate around town, virtual digital assistants such as Alexa and Siri respond to our questions, and social media channels such as Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter help us remain connected. Furthermore, financial institutions, pharmaceutical companies, and insurance companies all utilize AI to their advantage and to obtain leverage over their competitors. In particular, in the case of the COVID-19 pandemic, the role of AI has never been so crucial.1 AI continues to be at the forefront of technological development. Similar to coping with changes brought by the Industrial Revolution, legislatures need to embrace AI and be mindful of the challenges and effects that AI has on different laws, in particular patent laws.

Artificial Intelligence is directly related to innovation, the protection of which in turn is partly governed by patent laws. This innovation leads to questions regarding the ramifications on patent inventorship in the AI arena. One key question is whether an AI system or device can be considered an “inventor” of a patent application. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) has provided its answer by clearly rejecting AI as an “inventor,” since AI cannot meet certain statutory definitions for an inventor or the relevant tests for determining inventorship.2 Importantly, the Patent Act does not expressly limit inventorship rights to humans, but it does suggest that each inventor must have a name and be an “individual.”3

Here’s where I need help. The definition of Antitrust is changing. If we force “Big Tech” to benefit sellers, will we automatically harm consumers?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-the-ftc-is-reshaping-the-antitrust-argument-against-tech-giants-11643432448?mod=djemalertNEWS

How the FTC Is Reshaping the Antitrust Argument Against Tech Giants

Federal Trade Commission chief Lina Khan has developed an innovative way to frame the issue. Whether she has the tools to see it through remains to be seen.

For years, activists, lawmakers, lobbying groups, think tanks and most Americans have agreed something should be done [With what strategic goal? Bob] about giant tech companies’ power. With minor exceptions, no one has figured out how to do it.

Now, U.S. competition regulators at the Federal Trade Commission are getting creative. They’re zeroing in on an issue that has been less prominent in the past: how Big Tech dominance harms not consumers, but the businesses that sell goods and services on those tech platforms.

Since mid-1980s Reagan-era reforms of antitrust law, the test for whether a company is a monopolist has been whether its dominance harms consumers —usually through higher prices or shoddy goods. It has been hard to make that charge stick against companies that offer many of their services free, like Google and Meta Platforms (née Facebook), or at (usually) competitive prices, like Amazon; or that take a cut of what seems to be a big, competitive market, like Apple does with apps.

… To understand, we have to look at an unusual word the FTC has used of late: “monopsony.” If a monopoly is a market with one dominant seller, a monopsony is its inverse, a market where one buyer is pre-eminent. Monopolists can gouge consumers. A monopsonist has the same power over sellers.