Does this mean Clearview was right to claim it could ‘scrape’ faces from social media?
https://www.databreaches.net/web-scraping-is-legal-us-appeals-court-reaffirms/
Web scraping is legal, US appeals court reaffirms
Zack Whittaker reports:
Good news for archivists, academics, researchers and journalists: Scraping publicly accessible data is legal, according to a U.S. appeals court ruling.
The landmark ruling by the U.S. Ninth Circuit of Appeals is the latest in a long-running legal battle brougcht by LinkedIn aimed at stopping a rival company from web scraping personal information from users’ public profiles. The case reached the U.S. Supreme Court last year but was sent back to the Ninth Circuit for the original appeals court to re-review the case.
Read more at TechCrunch.
[From the article:
The Ninth Circuit, in referencing the Supreme Court’s “gate-up, gate-down” analogy, ruled that “the concept of ‘without authorization’ does not apply to public websites.”
(Completely unrelated)
https://www.bespacific.com/how-democracies-spy-on-their-citizens/
How Democracies Spy on Their Citizens
The New Yorker: “The inside story of the world’s most notorious commercial spyware and the big tech companies waging war against it.” By Ronan Farrow – April 18, 2022. “…Commercial spyware has grown into an industry estimated to be worth twelve billion dollars. It is largely unregulated and increasingly controversial. In recent years, investigations by the Citizen Lab and Amnesty International have revealed the presence of Pegasus on the phones of politicians, activists, and dissidents under repressive regimes. An analysis by Forensic Architecture, a research group at the University of London, has linked Pegasus to three hundred acts of physical violence. It has been used to target members of Rwanda’s opposition party and journalists exposing corruption in El Salvador. In Mexico, it appeared on the phones of several people close to the reporter Javier Valdez Cárdenas, who was murdered after investigating drug cartels. Around the time that Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia approved the murder of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi, a longtime critic, Pegasus was allegedly used to monitor phones belonging to Khashoggi’s associates, possibly facilitating the killing, in 2018. (Bin Salman has denied involvement, and NSO said, in a statement, “Our technology was not associated in any way with the heinous murder.”) Further reporting through a collaboration of news outlets known as the Pegasus Project has reinforced the links between NSO Group and anti-democratic states. But there is evidence that Pegasus is being used in at least forty-five countries, and it and similar tools have been purchased by law-enforcement agencies in the United States and across Europe. Cristin Flynn Goodwin, a Microsoft executive who has led the company’s efforts to fight spyware, told me, “The big, dirty secret is that governments are buying this stuff—not just authoritarian governments but all types of governments…”
Not everyone will agree, but it’s a start.
Cybersecurity litigation risks: 4 top concerns for CISOs
… According to Norton Rose Fulbright’s latest Annual Litigation Trends Survey of more than 250 general counsel and in-house litigation practitioners, cybersecurity and data protection will be among the top drivers of new legal disputes for the next several years. Two-thirds of survey respondents said they felt more exposed to these types of disputes in 2021, up from less than half in 2020, while more sophisticated attacks, less oversight of employees/contractors in remote environments, and concerns about the amount of client data were all cited as mitigating factors.
Clearly, the risks of litigation are very real for CISOs and their organizations, but what are the greatest areas of concern and what can they do about it?
Should you “adjust” results to reflect what you think they should be?
https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/22916602/ai-bias-fairness-tradeoffs-artificial-intelligence
Why it’s so damn hard to make AI fair and unbiased
Let’s play a little game. Imagine that you’re a computer scientist. Your company wants you to design a search engine that will show users a bunch of pictures corresponding to their keywords — something akin to Google Images.
On a technical level, that’s a piece of cake. You’re a great computer scientist, and this is basic stuff! But say you live in a world where 90 percent of CEOs are male. (Sort of like our world.) Should you design your search engine so that it accurately mirrors that reality, yielding images of man after man after man when a user types in “CEO”? Or, since that risks reinforcing gender stereotypes that help keep women out of the C-suite, should you create a search engine that deliberately shows a more balanced mix, even if it’s not a mix that reflects reality as it is today?
This is the type of quandary that bedevils the artificial intelligence community, and increasingly the rest of us — and tackling it will be a lot tougher than just designing a better search engine.
Is this really a better legal system?
https://www.jpost.com/business-and-innovation/banking-and-finance/article-704511
Israeli start-up Darrow aims to fix justice system using data
… Every day, corporations violate basic rights with environmental pollutants, unfair wages, privacy breaches, misuse of consumer information and more. While publications and advocacy groups report on many such cases, the violations themselves often go undetected and unchallenged, according to a study from the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. Users typically don’t notice when their rights are being infringed upon, and sometimes the corporations themselves aren’t aware they are in the wrong.
In cases where a user does recognize a violation, they likely won’t know how to proceed. Staggering volumes of data, unintelligible legal jargon and legal teams leave victims feeling powerless in the face of large corporations.
… Darrow implements machine-learning algorithms and natural language processing to expose harmful legal violations that would otherwise go undetected.
Eight percent false negatives, what percent false positives? “You look sick, cough into my phone!”
Worried you have Covid? Cough at your PHONE! Scientists develop an app that can detect whether you've been infected with 92 per cent accuracy
Scientists have developed a smartphone app that can detect whether you've been infected with Covid-19.
The app, called ResApp, uses machine learning to analyse the sounds of your cough.
During testing, the app was found to correctly detect Covid-19 in 92 per cent of people with the infection.
No comments:
Post a Comment