Van der Sar, Ernesto. "TorrentFreak". weblog. 14 July 2009 .

Begun in Germany by "Ernesto Van der Sar" (pseudonym), TorrentFreak is a weblog devoted to all things having to do with filesharing. Included in the top 100 blogs by Technorati, it is the home of the most recent news relevant to filesharing and everything involving the BitTorrent protocol. It's content is under the Creative Commons Attribution_Share Alike license. In August of 2007 TorrentFreak was the first to report that Comcast was manipulating the bandwidth available to BitTorrent users. TorrentFreak is frequently quoted for their "Top 10 Most Downloaded Torrents of the Week" by many newspapers reporting on filesharing. 

The site's homepage is simple, with the most recent entries listed on the left and a few advertisements aimed at BitTorrent users on the right, including ads from Frostwire, Wyzo and MP3Rocket, all open source Gnutella clients. Also a right is a list of most popular articles (TorrentFreak's top ten list is usually at the top) and then a list of categories including "DRM and Other Evil" and "Tutorial & How-to." At the very top right of the page are tabs navigating, among other things, to "About" and the "Forum."

TorrentFreak will be useful for my paper because of its thorough coverage of the Pirate Party's ascent into Parliament. It also keeps track of other Pirate Parties as they show up across Europe and the world. Their most recent political entry being the Pirate Party's gaining of a seat in the German Parliament just two weeks after the same thing happened in Sweden. Other articles include, "Pirate Parties to Conquer Europe," "International Umbrella for Pirate Parties," and a US Pirate Party Interview. Each article runs from 300-500 words. TorrentFreak to date has 898 active members contributing to the Forum.

TankGirl. "Pirate leader Falkvinge: 'Our enemy has no intellectual capital to bring to the battle'.” P2P Consortium Interview. 12 January 2008. 20 July 2009.  

P2P Consortium member going by the avatar of TankGirl, interviews Rickard Falkvinge, chairman of the Swedish Pirate Party. At the point of this interview, the Pirate Party has yet to gain a seat in the EU Parliament, but many of his responses predict the Party's later success. The questions are consistent with the Pirate Party's primary issues including the filesharing debate, privacy issues, and the spread of IPR revolution across Europe. In the first question, TankGirl mentions the adoption of the PP's principles by the Moderate Party and whether Falkvinge thinks that this is productive. He agrees that it is productive in applying pressure to larger parties, but he explains that the MP is "technophobically luddite" and does not understand the issues as well as he would like them to. The second question is about whether Falkvinge's vision of the IPR revolution, why is has its beginnings in Sweden, and will it eventually infect other countries in Europe and the world? Falkvinge explains that file-sharing issues seem to be strongest in Sweden today, which might be because they were slightly ahead in high-speed broadband access. He no longer gets asked questions about monetary compensation of artists in Sweden, meaning that they already understand that the debate goes beyond that. He is hoping that Sweden will set an example in Europe. He is less optimistic about the Pirate Party in the US noting that the party has much less influence on the political system. In response to the third question about privacy and integrity, Falkvinge explains again that file-sharing cannot be stopped, eventually it will be completely anonymous and that cell phone file-sharing would soon be ubiquitous. The last question addresses personal integrity and surveillance being instituted for "anti-terrorism reasons." Falkvinge gives a brief lexical definition of fascism and says to remember that we have brought the cameras into our homes ourselves. The best thing to do against the Big Brother Society is to be constantly vigilant of the government. Turn the eye onto them.

In this interview with P2P Consortium, Falkvinge answers more specific questions about the filesharing debate, most significantly the idea of an impending Big Brother Society that could potentially sweep across Europe. Falkvinge's thoughtful responses have a hint of the revolutionary, something that doesn't come out in his speeches and the Swedish Pirate Party blog.

Falkvinge, Rickard. "www.piratpartiet.se". The Pirate Party. 11 July, 2009 .

The Declaration of Principles was first conceived on February 2006, three months before the Pirate Bay raid. It outlines the three core beliefs of the party: The need for the protection of citizen rights, the will to free culture and the abolishment of the patent system. The introduction notes that Trademarks are not an issue and that the party has no recommendations there. The first section of the declaration focuses on the Swedish constitution and the citizens' right to privacy. The Party is firmly against any kind of surveillance and takes a stand against any anti-terrorist legislation beyond what is already instituted by the Swedish government. Postal Secrets (the idea that any kind of "post" is private) should legally extend into all communication including email and SMS regardless of technology. Access of personal information is only okay under the strong suspicion of a crime and specific work-related duties. It is also mentioned in this section, that though the party is not entirely against the EU, it will not accept the constitution as is (it has already been rejected by France and the Netherlands). Any Swedish representatives should also fight to bring the Union closer to the Swedish principle of Public Access to Records (offentlighetprincipen) where anyone can access any government document anonymously. An example would be of a minor being able to view a censored video by the Cinema Administration Board without showing identification. The next section is devoted to freeing culture. The party promotes the sharing and open availability of all works, especially for non-profit use. Non-commercial distribution should not be limited or punished. Another key belief is noted in this section, that commercial copyright be shortened to five years after publication. The Party also believes that DRM should be banned. The final section is devoted to patents as monopolies that harm society. The party supports open access formats and encourages open source.

Finally the closing words explains the strategic goal of the party. The Party does not strive to be a part of the administration, instead they would rather be a tie breaker in Parliament. Anyone who is willing to take on the Pirate Party's beliefs (I have interprested this as a whole rather than partially), will get their vote.

The Declaration of Principles is key to my paper because it explains what exactly Pirate Party would like to achieve leading me in my analysis of the party. Though the entire declaration is usefuly, I am least likely to explore the idea of patents as monopolies.

Falkvinge, Rickard. "Copyright Regime vs. Civil Liberties." Google Tech Talks, Google Headquarters Mountain View, CA. 31 July 2007.

Falkvinge begins this tech talk by noting that the strength of the Pirate Party comes from the youth today. He predicted that with the 35,000 votes coming of voting age by 2009 might just place someone in Parliament in the EU elections. Falkvinge's presentation is broken down into three parts and ends with questions from the audience. The first part is an introduction to who he is and what the Pirate Party's agenda is all about. He outlines what is already noted in the Declaration of Principles, but adds to this comments that filesharing vs. copyright is like trench warfare and that it is not about the money anymore but about civil liberties. The second part is a history of copyright beginning with the Catholic Church (this is much like the outline of the Steal this Film documentary series). He emphasizes that copyright has always been for the benfit of the distributors and not the creators. The final party of the presentation is on his vision of the future. Again, he reiterates the Party's core beliefs about copyright for commerical use early, reducing the term to five years, enouraging non-commercial collection, use, derivation and uploading. He expresses the opinion that file sharing and open access to all culture and knowledge through technology will be as significant as libraries. Falkvinge then turns to the political strategy of the party. He notes that politicians are too preoccupied with other issues to pay attention to copyright reform, but should the party gain enough influence, that they might begin to pay attention. The Pirate Party is satisfied not taking on any other political stances outside of IP reform and as just existing as a tie breaker. Finally, Falkvinge brings up the fact that Swedish copyright law cannot be changed by the EU, but at the same time, the EU will need to protect Sweden from any trade sanctions from the US.

Falkvinge's presentation is useful because it is a more organic representation of the beliefs of the Party. The party at this point feels less "rebellious" than its image in the public media. Falkvinge is extremely thoughtful in his opinions and is clearly an expert on how to promote the party from the bottom up, raising awareness all over Europe.

Gershowitz, Adam.  "The iPhone Meets the Fourth Amendment."  UCLA Law Review.  Vol. 56 (2008) 27-58.

 

Daniel J. Solove, "I've Got Nothing to Hide' and Other Misunderstandings of Privacy."

description here

analysis here

 

Book on internet privacy.

analysis here

Gershowitz, Adam.  "The iPhone Meets the Fourth Amendment."  UCLA Law Review.  Vol. 56 (2008) 27-58.

Gershowitz's article interprets the role that the iPhone plays in our understanding of the Fourth Amendment.  This article from the UCLA Law School Journal emphasizes that under the current provisions of the Fourth Ammendment, a police officer can search the entire body and grabbing space of an arrestee without probable cause.  In this past, this might have seemed trivial; however, the iPhone has made this a pressing issue because it allows the contents and applications to be searched.  The first part of the article offers history and background related to this exemption from the Fourth Amendment.  Next, the author reflects on previous cases that have dealt with searches of cell phones and how this doctrine is complicated by the iPhone.  It becomes clear that applications such as the iPhoto one differentiate the iPhone from its predecessors.  Finally, Gershowitz offers suggestions to courts and lawmakers for policies that they might adopt to secure greater protection for iPhones.

This article interestingly acknowledges a possible negative side effect of the iPhone's mobility and accessibility.  One would be inclined to believe that having all of our resources and personal information just a click away at all times would be beneficial.  However, as this article reveals, this is not necessarily always the case.  Users must realize that having all of their personal information, e-mails, private data and more could possibly hurt them.  The quick link to the internet via the wed applications could release incriminating information in some cases.  For instance, an officer could search the web browser or photos of an iPhone user and find child pornography.  This document is yet another reminder of the fact that the information stored within our technological devices is never truly private.  Additionally, this text speaks to the fact that the law has not been able to keep up with developments in technology.  With respect to privacy and copyright especially, technological developments like the iPhone are forcing lawmakers to reassess the application of policies to these devices.

In Britain there is no advertising on radio or television, there is only 1 major domain of public space left in Britain that is commercial free, BBC television. In America, everything around us is designed to persuade someone to buy something or to recall a logo, a name, a clothing line. Advertisements include clothes, boxes, cans, bottles, everything. The article goes on to explain how America has advertising is every aspect of life including the internet, where ads pop up on every website; movies, the previews are ads and the ads that pay before the previews, telling you to go buy popcorn or go shopping at this mall; buses are moving billboards; sport events, the uniforms have logos on them, the stadium has advertisements in the bathrooms, on the walls, on the big screens, on the media coverage on television.

His friend calls it “an invasion of privacy.” He argues that he has no right to control what his neighbor puts on their wall so he has no right to complain about what is on a movie screen, what’s on a website or what’s on the uniform of a sports player. However, he says advertising may appear in three kinds of spaces: private (home, body, car), public (streets, sidewalks, parks), and commercial (businesses, stores, offices, movies, arenas).  People hate telemarketers because they are uninvited advertisers in private space. It is expected; however, to be advertised to in public space. He does think that public space should be off limits to advertising because public space is owned and operated by the people and should not be managed by private interests.

I am not 100% certain that public space should be off limits to advertisers. I feel like they have to make money and advertising is the best way to get your product noticed. The problem with advertising develops when the advertisers take their advertising methods one step too far and actually do ‘invade privacy.’ I do however agree that advertisements really are everywhere. You cannot walk 1 block without seeing some form of advertising.

The Federal Trade Commission thinks that Congress should require the fair information practice principles despite the challenges that profiling by network advertisers presents. Some of the challenges include the existence of the non-visible, third-party relationship between network advertisers and consumers, meaning consumers do not know that their information and activity is being monitored by network advertising companies. Consumers only see the website that they are visiting, unless the website informs them of the advertising networks presence and that they are collecting data. Another challenge comes from having multiple network advertisers on one particular website.

In November 1999, the Network Advertising Initiative (NAI) was formed. It is made up of the leading Internet Network Advertisers including 24/7 Media, Avenue A, Engage and MatchLogic. They created a blueprint for the self-regulation of the online profiling industry. The point of implementing fair information practices to online profiling is to attain transparency (the collection and use of both non-personally identifiable information and personally identifiable information) when the consumer is unaware that they are being profiled. A consumer cannot say whether or not they want their information given out unless they know it is being collected. It would be ideal for each website to provide a notice and the choice options to consumers when a network advertiser is placing cookies on their files or is collecting other information. This way, consumers can choose not to partake in profiling. For non-personally identifiable data, network advertisers cannot link what they have already collected to personally identifiable information without the consent of the consumer. Consumers will be given access to their personally identifiable information that is retained for profiling by a network advertiser. Network Advertisers must take notable precautions for protecting consumer information from being loss, misused, altered, and destroyed. To enforce the rules, all industry members must submit themselves for monitoring of compliance by an independent third party and are subject to sanctions for non-compliance. The Commission believes the NAI Principles tackle the privacy concerns most consumers have about online profiling. The Commission believes self-regulation to be really important and they think the NAI presents a concrete self-regulatory method.

I agree with the Federal Trade Commission and believe that fair information practice principles should be required. If consumers are unaware they are being watched, they cannot voice their opinion about how they feel about being watched. As of now, network advertisers can take personally identifiable information and combine it with the profiles that were created by cookies. This is not fair to me. I think the network advertisers have way too much non-consented, private information. By putting requirements on how much information they can take and requiring them to ask for permission before taking certain types of information, they are giving privacy back to the consumer. Even though the consumer never knew it was gone and some could argue, therefore, it didn’t matter anyway, but I believe that it is still their personal information and no one should be able to just take it without authorized consent.

This project is about advertising and privacy and whether or not companies should have access to consumer personal information without consent and then personalizing advertisements back to the consumer. It will also look at actual consumer response to advertising and privacy and how actual consumers feel about receiving personalized advertisements.

 Though not so recent, this article highlights the importance of the Electronic Frontier Foundation and it’s preliminary role in defending privacy against lawmakers. The article reports that the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry, a music-industry based group, attempted to block filtration devices that were used to transfer copyrighted material illegally. The EFF claimed that this move was an “ineffective measure that will do little to practically address the concerns of major rights holders while imposing serious costs on the individual rights of European citizens.” Recording industry groups further asked filtering technology makers, such as Audible Magic, to block users’ access to specific peer-to-peer file-sharing services.

This article targets yet another example of the entertainment industry (and the ACTA by extension) pretending to tailor the Internet to what it wants as opposed to operating with the way the Internet actually works. Developments like this also demonstrate that defenses, such as the EFF, actually do exist and strongly advocate the privacy of Internet users. This relates specifically to my thesis in that it shows the early steps toward the formation of a defense against global control of file sharing.

cf:
SenseCam:
http://research.microsoft.com/sendev/projects/sensecam/?0sr=a

Articles about the MyLifeBits Project and Gordon Bell:
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3084
http://research.microsoft.com/~gbell/bio.htm
http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id;363346268;pp;1

Annotation

Gordon Bell has a distinguished career in the IT industry.  He's also decided to catalogue his life.  This brings up interesting questions as to why keep all this stuff?  Is there some purpose to being able to forget some or most of it?

Bell is refining his technique to store everything about himself on one terrabyte of data.  He wants to get it all on his Dell laptop.  He started out motivated by Bill Gates' book and decided to scan all the paper he owned.  Co-conspirator Jim Gray helped him set-up a database for searching and archival purposes, but when Jim went sailing and never came back, Bell's quest became personal.  Now he captures all web sites he goes to, he wears a sensecam to capture photos whenever light or heat changes (or in timed intervals).  He works for Microsoft's research arm and can leverage Microsoft's power to create technology that allows data to be easily retrievable and identifable.  He doesn't see it as lifelogging because he doesn't want the information public.  One article likens it to "immortality" but rather, it's more like a huge digital scrapbook or time capsule.  His laptop is so valuable to him now as a repository of memories, that he doesn't carry it around with him anymore.

Through the lens of forgetting, one should ask if keeping all this data is useful.  The technology is more for identifying and retrieving information more than collecting the information.  Collection is still a time-consuming and cumbersome process.  On top of that, for the information to be retrievable, he has to annotate all of his data.  How much of the data will anyone actually access in the future?  What are the benefits of the system.  Who benefits from the data?  He says he doesn't have a problem with persistence -- all of the data should exist in perpitude, but is this a realistic recollection of him as a person?

Annotation (all three facebook annotations are the same)

These three articles address the issue that one cannot be fully deleted from facebook. Instead your account is deactivated. The data persists on facebook's servers "in case you wish to reactivate your account". Users were concerned about persistence, i.e., forgetting, but of course, the articles and facebook frame the issue as a question of privacy. Facebook has since incorporated the ability to delete, but the option is still difficult to find and implement. Facebook has also integrated several other privacy features, but I would argue that the issue (again) is that of data persistence rather than data exposure.

Citation
Aspan, Maria. 2008. Quitting Facebook Gets Easier. The New York Times, February 13 http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/13/technology/13face.html?sq=facebook%20profile%20delete&st=nyt&scp=2&pagewanted=print (Accessed March 1, 2008).

 

Annotation (all 3 articles have the same annotation)

These three articles address the issue that one cannot be fully deleted from facebook. Instead your account is deactivated. The data persists on facebook's servers "in case you wish to reactivate your account". Users were concerned about persistence, i.e., forgetting, but of course, the articles and facebook frame the issue as a question of privacy. Facebook has since incorporated the ability to delete, but the option is still difficult to find and implement. Facebook has also integrated several other privacy features, but I would argue that the issue (again) is that of data persistence rather than data exposure.

Citation
Aspan, Maria. 2008. How Sticky Is Membership on Facebook? Just Try Breaking Free. The New York Times, February 11 http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/11/technology/11facebook.html?_r=1&sq=facebook%20profile%20delete&st=nyt&oref=slogin&scp=3&pagewanted=print (Accessed March 1, 2008).

 

 

Annotation

Blanchette & Johnson broadly call for reframing data retention from an issue of privacy and surveillance to one of persistence and forgetfulness. First they provide background on the current state of privacy and suggest that our constant surveillance is leading to a panoptic society. They call for a reaffirmation of the social values of forgetting. They use examples from U.S. law to demonstrate how forgetfulness can and is already incorporated into policy for the betterment of society, but warn that these policies are already buckling and old limits are fading under the increasing capability of technology to remember.

Specifically they draw on three policies: credit reports, bankruptcy law, and juvenile crime records. Each have limits on the time in which data is held. Such forgetting allows individuals a fresh start. They note that social forgetting/forgiving is not enough to affect policy change. In the case of bankruptcy law, the creditors and government benefit in the process (the law captures all debts in a central repository allowing for collective action and fair distribution; government needs to look responsive to helping individuals get back into economic business).

Citation
Blanchette, Jean-François, and Deborah G. Johnson. 2002. Data Retention and the Panoptic Society: The Social Benefits of Forgetfulness. Information Society 18, no. 1:33-45.

 

Annotation (all facebook artilces have the same annotation) 

These three articles address the issue that one cannot be fully deleted from facebook. Instead your account is deactivated. The data persists on facebook's servers "in case you wish to reactivate your account". Users were concerned about persistence, i.e., forgetting, but of course, the articles and facebook frame the issue as a question of privacy. Facebook has since incorporated the ability to delete, but the option is still difficult to find and implement. Facebook has also integrated several other privacy features, but I would argue that the issue (again) is that of data persistence rather than data exposure.

Citation
Aspan, Maria. 2008. After Stumbling, Facebook Finds a Working Eraser. The New York Times, February 18 http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/18/business/18facebook.html?sq=facebook%20profile%20delete&st=nyt&scp=1&pagewanted=print (Accessed March 1, 2008).

 

 

Annotation

Dodge & Kitchin explore pervasive computing in regards to surveillance and increasingly sousveillance (capturing data about yourself). They look at the development of life-logs, sociospatial archives that document every action, every event, every conversation, and every material expression of an individual's life and the potential social, political, and ethical implications of machines that never forget. They suggest that given the new possible paradigm, forgetting needs to be incorporated into new technologies. They look to Schacter's modes of forgetting as a basis for creating an ethics of forgetting. They go over the main types of forgetting in Schacter and call for implementing Schacter's models in technological design to create a humane but still useful system. They also champion the idea of incorporating forgetting into architecture (as a kernel) instead of legislating forgetting as a blanket.

Citation
Dodge, Martin, and Rob Kitchin. 2005. 'Outlines of a world coming into existence': pervasive computing and the ethics of forgetting. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 34, no. 3:431 - 445.

 

 

“Early Experiments in Cloud Computing”
by Gale Gruman
InforWorld.com
April 7, 2008

What do the New York Times and the Nasdaq have in common?  Both companies have made a critical and substantial leap into the world of cloud computing through Amazon.com.  Amazon offers its cloud computing infrastructure to third parties for “internet-provisioned computing and storage services.” [pg. 3]  Amazon’s two products are called Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2) and Simple Storage Service (S3). 

The New York Times used S3 in order to convert 11 million articles published between 1851 (the year the newspaper was founded) and 1989 from TIFF to PDF files.  The reason the newspaper converted the files was so that they could shrink them in size and then make them accessible through the nytimes.com website search engine.   What actually happen Ned?  The New York Times cut up old newspapers into columns to fit into the scanners in TIFF  format and then uploaded the files to S3.  In total, the TIFF data took up 4TB worth of storage space (1TB = 1,000 GB).  Then, the New York Times used EC2 to convert the 4 TB of raw data (the articles as they scanned them) into PDF files reducing the total size of the data to roughly 1.5 TB.   The greatest part of the story is that, “[t]he Times didn’t coordinate the job with Amazon – someone in IT just signed up for the service on the web using a credit card, then began uploading the data.” [pg. 4]  The New York Times IT staff completed the job in roughly 24 hours using 100 Linux computers. 

Nasdaq sought to make extra revenue by selling historic data regarding stocks and investment funds.  Nasdaq turned to Amazon to host the data using S3 and also had Amazon design a special reader application using Adobe AIR technology in order for customers to be able to view the data purchased.  

“The traditional approach wouldn’t have gotten off the ground economically…[t]he expenses of keeping all that data online was too high.  So Nasdaq took its market data and created flat files for every entity, each holding enough data for a 10-minute replay of the stock’s or fund’s price changes, on a second-by-second basis.  (It adds 100,000 files per day to the several million it started with.)  The Adobe AIR app Courbois’ (the VP for Data Products at Nasdaq) team put together in just a couple of days pulls in the flat files stored at Amazon.com and then creates the replay animations from them." [pg. 4]

Several issues arise in this story that are pertinent to further discussion regarding policy matters and cloud computing.  As is the case in many other situations, there is a concern about privacy.  For both Nasdaq and the New York Times there should also be concerns regarding the safety and availability of their data.  If either of these companies wants access to its information, they are at the mercy of Amazon, instead of controlling their own data by purchasing and maintaining its own additional servers to do the job.  Of course, both companies measured this risk and it is evident that in both cases, they determined that the cost (or the risk of holding their data remotely in these instances) was outweighed by the benefits (saving lots of money on hard ware as well as labor to maintain the hard wear to house the data).  

"Andy Grove, the former chairman and CEO of Intel, who was an enthusiastic supporter of Google's founders when they started the company, in 1998, believes that there may be more worry about Google than there was about Microsoft.  'Microsoft's power was intraindustry," he told me.  'Google's power is shaping what's happening to other industries.'  Because of this, he says, Google is increasingly seen as a company 'on steroid, with a finger in every industry.'" [pg. 3]

“Computing In The Clouds”
by Aaron Weiss
The Guide to Computing Literature, Networker Magazine
December 2007

In 1943, IBM Chairman Thomas Watson said, “I think there’s a world market for maybe five computer.” [pg. 18] The personal computing industry that began in the 1970’s and current popularity of cloud computing prove that Watson’s statement could not have been more wrong. Weiss defines cloud computing generally as the ability to distribute computer processes over a large number of small computers/servers in order to maximize the efficient use of resources. The idea being if one were to do an internet search through Google, for example, that Google could distribute the work of doing the actual search over a large number of computers rather than one large (and powerful) computer doing the search and returning the results to the user. The relevant question, in this case, is how does Google most efficiently distribute the task of fulfilling the search to many individual computers/servers in order to decrease the time it takes to conduct the search and then return the results to the user.

The article also provides working definitions of SaaS and utility computing in order to understand how they relate or should be considered as part of the larger cloud computing phenomenon. The most important and influential SaaS established to date is the creation of web-based email. While many individuals, organizations and companies do not entirely depend on web-based email service, the trend is quickly moving in that direction. Weiss refers to SaaS, as in the case of web-based email, as merely a revival of an older concept known as “thin client” computing. In the realm of cloud computing, the most relevant concern that emerges is privacy because operating in the cloud and allowing a third party to store and/or process your digital information requires a high level of trust.

This article is relevant because it sheds light on the fact that cloud computing is a popular, “buzzword almost designed to be vague[.]” [pg. 25] One reaction to this piece is to feel that it is not possible to provide a complete definition for the terminology ‘cloud computing.’ Nevertheless, a more appropriate conclusion might be to think of cloud computing as a trend that “draws on many existing technologies and architectures.” [pg. 25]

Annotation

Forgetting is easier to do than remembering. Empirically cultures have tried to preserve memory through devices like books, film, record, etc. However, conservation has always been expensive, thus strict limits are applied as to what to keep. New digital memory is relatively inexpensive and it allows us to store everything, regardless of significance. Also, digital data is easily reproduced and accessed bringing up issues of privacy. Because of this, Mayer-Schonberger sees a shift from discarding to preserving. Is this a good thing? No.

Three conventional responses:

• Comprehensive privacy litigation is difficult because lobby groups exert a lot of power but represent only a few, while the masses who would benefit are diffuse and disorganized;
  
• constitutional reinterpretation while potentially valid under the First, Fourth, and implicit "privacy" amendments (first, third, fourth, fifth, ninth, and fourteenth) is difficult to pass and would not regulate private parties only public government;
  
• Null response or inaction can be argued as the best approach if there is no demand for legal action, however, the null response argument is naive when considering political theory's acknowledgment of the difficulty the majority has in transforming its will into law.

Lawrence Lessig proposes a solution that is a combination of law and code, but Mayer-Schonberger finds solution too complex for this focused issue of data retention. Instead, Mayer-Schonberger proposes a simple solution of reinstating forgetting over time through

1. user-defined storage timelines,
   
2. decreasing cookie life,
   
3. requiring companies to delete/forget data, including cell phone software, and
   
4. limiting sensor data.

Mayer-Schonberger briefly covers the strengths and weaknesses of his plan and summarizes article in the conclusion.

Source citation
Mayer-Schoenberger, Viktor. "Useful Void: The Art of Forgetting in the Age of Ubiquitous Computing." Working Paper RWP07-022, Cambridge, Mass.: John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, 2007 Apr.

danah boyd is a doctoral candidate in the School of Information at the University of California-Berkeley and a Fellow at the Harvard University Law School Berkman Center for Internet and Society.   apophenia is her blog.

In this post, she relates a story from a friend of hers, who centralized virtually all of his online life (and therefore, his life) on Google products, only to have his account erased by Google because of a fraudulent phishing attack.  The story raises concerns about storing all your data in one place and with one company.

Mozilla is currently testing out something called "Weave," a tool that would allow you to synchronize your content on multiple browsers, via a hosting option similar to what Google does.

This goes a step beyond Google, because Mozilla is, of course, a desktop application. So Mozilla Weave would have access to your desktop behavior and the stuff you store on their servers.

ALA Privacy Toolkit

Judge: NYC can make cabbies get GPS, credit card machines
BY PETE DONOHUE
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Saturday, September 29th 2007, 4:00 AM
A federal judge yesterday refused to stop the city from requiring all yellow cabs to be equipped with Global Positioning Systems and credit card machines.
Citing privacy concerns, a taxi drivers union had filed a lawsuit seeking a temporary order delaying the new city rules.
But U.S. District Judge Richard Berman ruled yesterday that the use of the technology to improve taxi service appeared to outweigh drivers' privacy rights.

When you print on a color laser printer, it's likely that you are also printing a pattern of invisible yellow dots. These marks exist to allow the printer companies and governments to track and identify you -- presumably as a way to combat money counterfeiting. When one person asked his printer manufacturer about turning off the tracking dots, Secret Service agents showed up at his door several days later.

Upset? You should be!

Let's stand up to silent tracking and government bullying and send a strong message to printer manufacturers. Our privacy and our control over our own technology is far too important to give up over trumped up fears of photocopied money.

Here's what you can do:

* Get informed about the issue!
* Spread the word. Tell your friends and coworkers.
* Follow our instructions and call up your printer maker. Ask them to stop using tracking codes and demand that they tell you how to turn it off. The Secret Service can't come and question all of us!
* Support groups like the EFF working to expose and oppose printer tracking dots.

Tracking and Video: Coming Soon to a Taxi Near You

by Sol Hess
June, 2007

In a matter of months, New Yorkers riding in taxicabs will have more to look at than the view. The constant media buzz of modern life - television programs, sports scores, advertisements - will invade the back of cabs starting in October, the result of a new city regulation requiring that all yellow cabs be equipped with global positioning systems and video screens.

The city Taxi and Limousine Commission says it simply wants to make cab rides safer and more enjoyable for passengers. But the drivers of the city's 13,000 yellow cabs have protested, arguing that the new technology will cost them money and impinge on their privacy.

WHAT THE SYSTEM WILL DO

Through the GPS system, taxi passengers will be able to know where they are at any moment. For New Yorkers who never want to be out of touch, the monitors and tracking system will make a cab ride -- 13 minutes on average -- more enjoyable. Passengers will be able to follow sports scores, get up-to-the-minute news, weather and more. (Those who want some peace and quiet will be able to turn off the monitors.) The driver will also notified of traffic congestion in the area and of large parties or concerts that are ending – and could be fertile ground for finding fare-paying customers. With the new system, passengers can pay their fares using credit or debit cards.

Taxi and limousine commissioner Matthew Daus has called the tracking and the monitors “nothing short of revolutionary and evolutionary for the taxi industry" and has written that the technology “will benefit both drivers and customers.” The commission believes it will make it easier for tourists, who may not want to carry much cash, to use cabs. And the system believes such high-tech taxis will enhance New York’s image as the "city of the world.”

But cab drivers are not convinced. They worry that the tracking system will enable the police department and traffic agents to follow the cabs and prosecute drivers for violating traffic laws. “For myself, I am not against it, but I can see my fellow drivers being angry for being dictated to sacrifice for other people's extra entertainment," said one driver, Ibrahim Jane.

In this project, I will be examining how online social networks affect identity formation in their members. I am interested in both how people present themselves online and how that virtual persona/world affects their identity formation (for example, the phenomenom of taking a photograph simply because you want it to be your facebook picture). Online relationships/interactions and virtual popularity are also key issues for my project. I will predominantly be focusing on the Website Facebook.com, but for research, I will be looking at pieces that examine social networks, online privacy, virtual/computer mediated relationships, online popularity, and representations of self on the Internet/"virtual personae." Some helpful Websites for information on Facebook.com and its background: This first article discusses Facebook's critical success factors and why many of its features appeal to its users. (http://chimprawk.blogspot.com/2006/05/facebooks-critical-success-factors.html). This next blog is entitled "Facebook: The Complete Biography," and it is just that. It provides a good overview of the history of Facebook and its corporate culture (http://mashable.com/2006/08/25/facebook-profile/). And finally, the source of it all: http://www.facebook.com. Check out the blog and the privacy information without signing in.

In order to find this case on Findlaw, just search for it using "J.S. vs...." You can then create a free account. The link to the specific case is: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/pennsylvaniastatecases/supreme/j-111-2001mo.pdf. 

   This case deals with a middle school student who created a Website with defamatory statements about one of his teachers and his school principle. The site, “Teacher Sux,” was created on his home computer but was accessed at school. When it was discovered, it created a stir at school and the teacher he had mentioned, Ms. Fulmer, suffered from stress-related illnesses. The following summer, the school board expelled the student from school for the Website. The student’s parents sued the school board for their decision. The case made it to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which ruled that the Website did in fact cause “a material and substantial disruption of the school environment,” making it not protected under the 1^st amendment (even though the speech did not constitute a “true threat”). Because the Website affected the school environment, it did not matter that the student had created it at home.

   I am interested in how this precedent-setting case affects students’ postings on social networking sites of today, like Facebook.com and MySpace.com. Although these are log-in only websites, any one may gain access to them and may do so in a school environment. I wonder then if a student has been expelled for comments made on one of these social networking sites. This case brings to the forefront the issues of privacy and rights when it comes to personal postings on the internet, something that is all the more prevalent with the ubiquity of social networking sites in young people. The case illustrates the unique circumstances of a school environment and shows that the 1st amendment is limited in that space (going all the way back to the "Tinker" case which can also be found on FindLaw). What students put on their Facebook profiles or their friend’s wall can affect their standing at their university if it causes a “material and substantial disruption of the school environment” or portrays the student doing illegal activities. These Websites offer students a unique opportunity for self-expression and identity formation, but there is also the danger in the lack of privacy of internet postings.

     After doing some research online, I found a case where students were suspended from school for writing offensive and vulgar comments about their teacher on each other's facebook.com walls. The school used the "material and substantial disruption" clause to justify why the students were suspended. Apparently, the comments, though posted on Facebook.com from home, caused a disruption in school. The article can be found at: http://www.fox21.com/Global/story.asp?S=6195724&nav=2KPp.

 

 

This book is a sweeping look at the Internet and how it has changed the way that we view the world (a common cliché in Internet scholarship). Where I did find this book interesting though was in its discussion of privacy and the Internet.  Also the witty tone of the book (one chapter is entitled “Saddam, O.J., and the Unabomber” and is about the Internet and pop culture) makes it an easy book to get into. The later chapters (starting with Ch. 12) discuss the trade-off between technology/access and privacy. Many people, especially in the older generations who have not grown up with the Internet, still think of the Internet in terms of the “Big Brother” metaphor. There is definitely a trade-off and some of the “Big Brother”-ness of the Internet (and social networks where often very personal information is revealed) is often inevitable. Something this book does not directly discuss is how generational this discomfort is. Younger generations who have grown up with the Internet, instant messenger, and online social networks are far more comfortable with a lack of privacy than older generations.
            There is also another type of privacy that deals with the Internet: the privacy of being anonymous and creating an identity online. Chapter 13, “Nobody Knows You’re a Dog (or do they? Privacy issues and the Internet)" uses the image of the dog in front of the computer from the New Yorker cartoon to question how anonymity and privacy have changed. The author argues that maybe it used to be the case that “nobody knows you’re a dog” but now, they not only know you’re a dog, but they also know your favorite food and where you went walking yesterday. Applying the author’s point to social networks, it’s interesting that there is discomfort with a loss of privacy when in many cases, information is provided voluntarily. Of course, when it is appropriated for other uses, discomfort can ensue, but I think that (in many cases at least) with so much of one’s identity based on the Internet, it creates a double edged sword: you have to divulge information in order to create an online persona, but that also makes you vulnerable. I know that I am uncomfortable when Google puts up advertisements that correspond to my Gmail messages; and yet I still love my Gmail. In addition, Facebook.com has many privacy controls and options, but people were still livid when it added the “Live Feed” function. Of course, you could go to options and turn it off, but there erupted multiple groups on the site that were angry at this invasion of privacy. This book, especially the sections on privacy, were interesting in that they opened up more questions about how social networks interact with our lives both on and offline and how privacy or lack thereof can be a motivator for how identity is presented.

Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data