Urbanism Under Google: Lessons from Sidewalk Toronto

Cities around the world are rapidly adopting digital technologies, data analytics, and the trappings of “smart” infrastructure. These innovations are touted as solutions to help rationalize services and address rising urban challenges, whether in housing, transit, energy, law enforcement, health care, waste management, or population flow. Promises of urban innovation unite cities’ need for help with technology firms’ need for markets and are rarely subject to evidentiary burdens about projected benefits (let alone costs). For the city, being smart is about functioning better and attracting tech plaudits. For the technology company, the smart city is a way to capture the value of data flows—either by directly monetizing behavioral insights or by using those insights to design or acquire services—and then realizing the network effects and monopoly rents that have characterized information technology platforms. No company is more ambitious about exploring data flows and seeking to create and dominate networks of information than Google. In October 2017, Google affiliate Sidewalk Labs embarked on its first prototype smart city in Toronto, Canada, through a collaboration with the public development authority Waterfront Toronto. Together, the project partners are planning a new kind of data-driven urban environment: “the world’s first neighborhood built from the internet up.” The vision is for a neighborhood featuring state-of-the-art sustainable architecture, autonomous vehicles, sensor-based surveillance, and data-driven “responsive” services. Much of the vision draws from leading city planning ideas and foregrounds progressive ideals of inclusivity and sustainability. However, for the crucial first eighteen months of the venture, many of the most consequential features of the Sidewalk Toronto project were hidden from view and unavailable for serious scrutiny. On basic questions about the proposed set of innovations, the players defied public accountability: questions about data collection, data control, privacy, competition, and procurement. Even more basic questions about the use of public space went unanswered: privatized services, land ownership, infrastructure ownership, and, in all cases, the question of who is in control. The net result is that there can be no confidence that the Sidewalk Toronto vision is compatible with democratic processes, sustained public governance, or the public interest. This Article analyzes the Sidewalk Toronto project as it took shape in its first phase, prior to the release of the Master Innovation and Development Plan, and explores three major governance challenges posed by the imagined “city of the future”: privatization, platformization, and domination. The significance of this case study applies well beyond Toronto. Google and related companies are modeling future business growth embedded in cities and using projects like Sidewalk Toronto as test beds. What happens in Toronto is designed to be replicated. We conclude with some lessons highlighting the precarity of civic stewardship and public accountability when cities are confronted with tantalizing visions of privatized urban innovation

United Kingdom Patent Decisions 2015

This report highlights the main UK patent decisions from 2017, including a major Supreme Court infringement case introducing a doctrine of equivalents, the first ruling on FRAND royalty rates and injunctions, compensation for employee inventors, legal priority, patentable subject matter, and a novel, unsuccessful attempt by the State to sue a pharmaceutical company whose invalid patents delayed the entry of generics

Why choice of metric matters in public health analyses: a case study of the attribution of credit for the decline in coronary heart disease mortality in the US and other populations

RIGHTS : This article is licensed under the BioMed Central licence at http://www.biomedcentral.com/about/license which is similar to the 'Creative Commons Attribution Licence'. In brief you may : copy, distribute, and display the work; make derivative works; or make commercial use of the work - under the following conditions: the original author must be given credit; for any reuse or distribution, it must be made clear to others what the license terms of this work are.Abstract Background Reasons for the widespread declines in coronary heart disease (CHD) mortality in high income countries are controversial. Here we explore how the type of metric chosen for the analyses of these declines affects the answer obtained. Methods The analyses we reviewed were performed using IMPACT, a large Excel based model of the determinants of temporal change in mortality from CHD. Assessments of the decline in CHD mortality in the USA between 1980 and 2000 served as the central case study. Results Analyses based in the metric of number of deaths prevented attributed about half the decline to treatments (including preventive medications) and half to favourable shifts in risk factors. However, when mortality change was expressed in the metric of life-years-gained, the share attributed to risk factor change rose to 65%. This happened because risk factor changes were modelled as slowing disease progression, such that the hypothetical deaths averted resulted in longer average remaining lifetimes gained than the deaths averted by better treatments. This result was robust to a range of plausible assumptions on the relative effect sizes of changes in treatments and risk factors. Conclusions Time-based metrics (such as life years) are generally preferable because they direct attention to the changes in the natural history of disease that are produced by changes in key health determinants. The life-years attached to each death averted will also weight deaths in a way that better reflects social preferences.Peer Reviewe

Big Ideas paper: Policy-driven middleware for a legally-compliant Internet of Things.

Internet of Things (IoT) applications, systems and services are subject to law. We argue that for the IoT to develop lawfully, there must be technical mechanisms that allow the enforcement of speci ed policy, such that systems align with legal realities. The audit of policy enforcement must assist the apportionment of liability, demonstrate compliance with regulation, and indicate whether policy correctly captures le- gal responsibilities. As both systems and obligations evolve dynamically, this cycle must be continuously maintained. This poses a huge challenge given the global scale of the IoT vision. The IoT entails dynamically creating new ser- vices through managed and exible data exchange . Data management is complex in this dynamic environment, given the need to both control and share information, often across federated domains of administration. We see middleware playing a key role in managing the IoT. Our vision is for a middleware-enforced, uni ed policy model that applies end-to-end, throughout the IoT. This is because policy cannot be bound to things, applications, or administrative domains, since functionality is the result of composition, with dynamically formed chains of data ows. We have investigated the use of Information Flow Control (IFC) to manage and audit data ows in cloud computing; a domain where trust can be well-founded, regulations are more mature and associated responsibilities clearer. We feel that IFC has great potential in the broader IoT context. However, the sheer scale and the dynamic, federated nature of the IoT pose a number of signi cant research challenges

Big Ideas paper: Policy-driven middleware for a legally-compliant Internet of Things.

Internet of Things (IoT) applications, systems and services are subject to law. We argue that for the IoT to develop lawfully, there must be technical mechanisms that allow the enforcement of speci ed policy, such that systems align with legal realities. The audit of policy enforcement must assist the apportionment of liability, demonstrate compliance with regulation, and indicate whether policy correctly captures le- gal responsibilities. As both systems and obligations evolve dynamically, this cycle must be continuously maintained. This poses a huge challenge given the global scale of the IoT vision. The IoT entails dynamically creating new ser- vices through managed and exible data exchange . Data management is complex in this dynamic environment, given the need to both control and share information, often across federated domains of administration. We see middleware playing a key role in managing the IoT. Our vision is for a middleware-enforced, uni ed policy model that applies end-to-end, throughout the IoT. This is because policy cannot be bound to things, applications, or administrative domains, since functionality is the result of composition, with dynamically formed chains of data ows. We have investigated the use of Information Flow Control (IFC) to manage and audit data ows in cloud computing; a domain where trust can be well-founded, regulations are more mature and associated responsibilities clearer. We feel that IFC has great potential in the broader IoT context. However, the sheer scale and the dynamic, federated nature of the IoT pose a number of signi cant research challenges.Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (Grant ID: EP/K011510 CloudSafetyNet: End-to-End Application Security in the Cloud), Microsoft (through the Microsoft Cloud Computing Research Centre

Application of Focal Conflict Theory to Psychoeducational Groups: Implications for Process, Content, and Leadership

Group psychoeducation is a common group type used for a range of purposes. The literature presents balancing content and process as a challenge for psychoeducational group leaders. While the significance of group psychoeducation is supported, practitioners are given little direction for addressing process in these groups. Focal Conflict Theory (FCT) is a model for conceptualizing and intervening in group process that has been applied to therapy and work groups. This article presents the challenges of psychoeducational groups, describes FCT, and discusses its application to psychoeducational groups using case examples. Implications for leaders of psychoeducation groups are discussed