Net Neutrality as Global Principle for Internet Governance

This paper discusses the concept of network neutrality (NN) and explores its relevance to global Internet governance. The paper identifies three distinct ways in which the concept of network neutrality might attain a status as a globally applicable principle for Internet governance. The paper concludes that the concept of a "neutral" Internet has global applicability in a variety of contexts relevant to Internet governance

Taming the Golden Goose: Private Companies, Consumer Geolocation Data, and the Need for a Class Action Regime for Privacy Protection

With the implementation of new geolocation technologies, the boundaries between private versus commercial and secret versus easily ascertainable have vanished. Consumer information that was once very difficult and prohibitively expensive to ascertain, catalogue, and recall is available to companies at the click of a button. Not only that, but the collecting company can share consumer information with other companies even more easily than it can initially collect the information. Today, with the widespread use of smartphone and location-enabled tablet devices, it is possible for location services to determine and plot the location and travel of the device and thereby the travel and habits of the owner. Companies can use the collected customer information to sell products, and they can sell the information to third parties for a variety of both benign and malicious purposes. Meanwhile, skilled hackers can steal consumer information. After analyzing the current legal landscape of consumer privacy law as it relates to geolocation services, this Note argues that US and global consumers need the United States to act. In order to foster trust in corporations and the market, Congress should enact a framework that assures consumers of sufficient protection of those details that consumers hold intrinsically private, such as their personal locations. This Note concludes by examining the bills currently under consideration by Congress and their respective deficiencies

Review Study on some topics related to Cyber Security

Internet and wireless network standards such as Bluetooth and Wi-Fi, and due to the growth of smart devices, including smartphones, televisions, and the various devices constitute the Internet of things (IoT). Cybersecurity is also one of the significant challenges in the contemporary world, due to the complexity of information systems, both in terms of political usage and technology. Its primary goal is to ensure the system's dependability, integrity, and data privac

Information Outlook, September 2004

Volume 8, Issue 9https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/sla_io_2004/1008/thumbnail.jp

Information Outlook, September 2004

Volume 8, Issue 9https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/sla_io_2004/1008/thumbnail.jp

Cyberspace and governance - a primer

"This working paper has a threefold purpose: first, it proposes a better understanding of the difference between the Internet (interconnecting computers) and the World Wide Web (managing information). Against this background, a four-layer model of cyberspace is presented including a physical, logical, informational, and social layer. Second, the paper splits the national cybersecurity debate in five distinct subject areas,or mandates. These include Military Cyberactivities, Counter-Cybercrime, Intelligence and Counter-Intelligence, Critical Infrastructure Protection and National Crisis Management, and Cyberdiplomacy and Internet Governance, each of which is typically covered by a distinct government department. Third, as one of the most understated and least understood mandates on this list, Internet Governance is described at more length in the final section." (author's abstract)"Die Zielsetzung dieses Arbeitspapiers gliedert sich in drei Kernpunkte: Erstens wird versucht, den Unterschied zwischen dem Internet (Vernetzung von Computern) und dem World Wide Web (Informationsverwaltung) herauszuarbeiten. Vor diesem Hintergrund soll der Cyberspace als ein Vierschichtenmodell aufgespannt werden, das eine physische, logische, informationelle und soziale Schicht beinhaltet. Zweitens teilt dieses Papier die nationale Debatte zur Cybersicherheit in fünf unterschiedliche Themenbereiche, oder auch Mandate. Diese umfassen Militärische Cyberaktivitäten; Bekämpfung von Cyberkriminalität; Nachrichtendienstliche Aktivitäten; Schutz Kritischer Infrastrukturen und Nationales Krisenmanagement; sowie Cyberdiplomatie und Internet Governance. Im Allgemeinen kann jedes dieser fünf Mandate von unterschiedlichen Ministerien abgedeckt werden. Drittens soll in einem abschließenden Teil Internet Governance, als eines der am wenigsten beachteten Mandate in diesem Zusammenhang, ausführlicher betrachtet werden." (Autorenreferat

Slave to the Algorithm? Why a \u27Right to an Explanation\u27 Is Probably Not the Remedy You Are Looking For

Algorithms, particularly machine learning (ML) algorithms, are increasingly important to individuals’ lives, but have caused a range of concerns revolving mainly around unfairness, discrimination and opacity. Transparency in the form of a “right to an explanation” has emerged as a compellingly attractive remedy since it intuitively promises to open the algorithmic “black box” to promote challenge, redress, and hopefully heightened accountability. Amidst the general furore over algorithmic bias we describe, any remedy in a storm has looked attractive. However, we argue that a right to an explanation in the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is unlikely to present a complete remedy to algorithmic harms, particularly in some of the core “algorithmic war stories” that have shaped recent attitudes in this domain. Firstly, the law is restrictive, unclear, or even paradoxical concerning when any explanation-related right can be triggered. Secondly, even navigating this, the legal conception of explanations as “meaningful information about the logic of processing” may not be provided by the kind of ML “explanations” computer scientists have developed, partially in response. ML explanations are restricted both by the type of explanation sought, the dimensionality of the domain and the type of user seeking an explanation. However, “subject-centric explanations (SCEs) focussing on particular regions of a model around a query show promise for interactive exploration, as do explanation systems based on learning a model from outside rather than taking it apart (pedagogical versus decompositional explanations) in dodging developers\u27 worries of intellectual property or trade secrets disclosure. Based on our analysis, we fear that the search for a “right to an explanation” in the GDPR may be at best distracting, and at worst nurture a new kind of “transparency fallacy.” But all is not lost. We argue that other parts of the GDPR related (i) to the right to erasure ( right to be forgotten ) and the right to data portability; and (ii) to privacy by design, Data Protection Impact Assessments and certification and privacy seals, may have the seeds we can use to make algorithms more responsible, explicable, and human-centered

Information Outlook, September 2004

Volume 8, Issue 9https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/sla_io_2004/1008/thumbnail.jp