Posts by FPF Staff

|

Taming The Golem: Challenges of Ethical Algorithmic Decision-Making

This article examines the potential for bias and discrimination in automated algorithmic decision-making. As a group of commentators recently asserted, “[t]he accountability mechanisms and legal standards that govern such decision processes have not kept pace with technology.” Yet this article rejects an approach that depicts every algorithmic process as a “black box” that is inevitably plagued by bias and potential injustice.

|

FPF Welcomes New Senior Fellow

FPF is pleased to welcome Stanley W. Crosley as a senior fellow. Stanley has over 20 years of applied experience in law, data governance and data strategy across a broad sector of the economy, including from inside multinational corporations, academia, large law firm and boutique practices, not-for-profit advocacy organizations, and governmental agencies, and is the Co-Director of the Indiana University Center for Law, Ethics, and Applied Research in Health Information (CLEAR), is Counsel to the law firm of Drinker Biddle & Reath in Washington, DC, and Principal of Crosley Law Offices, LLC.  Stan is a Senior Strategist at the Information Accountability Foundation and a Senior Fellow at the Future of Privacy Forum, where he leads health policy efforts.

|

New Future of Privacy Forum Study Finds the City of Seattle’s Open Data Program a National Leader in Privacy Program Management

Today, the Future of Privacy Forum released its City of Seattle Open Data Risk Assessment. The Assessment provides tools and guidance to the City of Seattle and other municipalities navigating the complex policy, operational, technical, organizational, and ethical standards that support privacy-protective open data programs.

|

This Year’s Six Must-Read Privacy Papers: The Future of Privacy Forum Announces Recipients of Annual Privacy Award

Washington, DC – Today, the Future of Privacy Forum announced the winners of the 8th Annual Privacy Papers for Policymakers Award. The PPPM Award recognizes leading privacy scholarship that is relevant to policymakers in the U.S. Congress, at U.S. federal agencies, and for data protection authorities abroad. The winners of the 2017 PPPM Award are:

|

Financial Data Localization: Conflicts and Consequences

How has the growing trend of global financial data localization laws affected financial institutions handling difficult questions of data privacy? What have been the practical impacts of these laws? FPF addresses these questions in a new info-graphic: “Financial Data Localization: Conflicts and Consequences.”

|

Roundtable Discussion: Smart Cities and Open Data (2017 MetroLab Network Annual Summit)

The Smart Cities and Open Data movements promise to use data to spark civic innovation and engagement, promote inclusivity, and transform modern communities. At the same time, advances in sensor technology, re-identification science, and Big Data analytics have challenged cities and their partners to construct effective safeguards for the collection, use, sharing, and disposal of personal information.

|

John Verdi Talks Connected Devices with Fox 2 St. Louis

“What data is being transmitted and what data is being used really depends on the device,” Verdi said. “They can offload that information from the device to servers on the internet that are either controlled by the companies or third parties and there’s some processing that can happen there.”

|

New Study: Companies are Increasingly Making Data Accessible to Academic Researchers, but Opportunities Exist for Greater Collaboration

Washington, DC – Today, the Future of Privacy Forum released a new study, Understanding Corporate Data Sharing Decisions: Practices, Challenges, and Opportunities for Sharing Corporate Data with Researchers. In this report, FPF reveals findings from research and interviews with experts in the academic and industry communities. Three main areas are discussed: 1) The extent to which leading companies make data available to support published research that contributes to public knowledge; 2) Why and how companies share data for academic research; and 3) The risks companies perceive to be associated with such sharing, as well as their strategies for mitigating those risks.