Search results

[…] and when it should not. It examines the relationship between precluded personal information, such as race, and the proxies for precluded information, such as names and zip codes. It proposes that the success of these measures depends on what types of proxies exist for the information blocked and it explores in which situations those […]

[…] policy impact, making them “must-read” privacy scholarship for policymakers. Three papers were selected for Honorable Mention:  Can You Pay for Privacy? Consumer Expectations and the Behavior of Free and Paid Apps by Kenneth Bamberger, University of California, Berkeley – School of Law; Serge Egelman, University of California, Berkeley – Department of Electrical Engineering & Computer […]

[…] representation” of their data upon “verified request” and the names of third parties to whom it has been transferred (and, in Wicker, the names of service providers), free of charge (although Wicker limits free requests to 2/year). Deletion, Correction & Portability – Both bills would require companies, upon “verified request” to correct or delete […]

[…] of keeping kids off the internet. Jo Pedder, Head of Regulatory Strategy at the United Kingdom Information Commissioner’s Office discussed the UK’s implementation of the age-appropriate design code. The code’s goal is to empower kids on the internet while keeping them safe, rather than keeping them out of the digital world. Instead of a […]

[…] and signed by the governor if the amendments are “consistent with and further the purpose and intent” of the Act. Next Steps According to the California Elections Code (ELECT CA ELEC § 9002), the California Attorney General will hold a 30-day review process and public comment period, followed by five additional days for proponents […]

[…] Privacy Forum CEO Jules Polonetsky regarding two European Court of Justice decisions announced today in its cases with Google: Key decisions about the balance of privacy and free expression still remain to be settled by the European Court of Justice (ECJ). Although the ECJ’s two decisions generally support the rights of those searching the […]

[…] mechanisms transparent, access controls, monitoring, documentation, testing, and debugging. “Privacy or security harms in machine learning do not necessarily require direct access to underlying data or source code,” said Andrew Burt, Immuta Chief Privacy Officer and Legal Engineer. “We explore how creators of any machine learning system can limit the risk of unintended leakage […]

[…] explaining approaches to data protection. Unlike traditional software, in machine learning systems privacy or security harms do not necessarily require direct access to underlying data or source code. The whitepaper presents a layered approach to data protection in machine learning, including recommending techniques such as noise injection, inserting intermediaries between training data and the […]

[…] of the impact of a project on the environment, it measures the impact of a project using personal data on all the rights of the individuals concerned, from free speech, to privacy, to non-discrimination. Depending on the results of the DPIA, safeguards must be brought to minimize the impact on rights, or the project can simply […]

[…] of their decisions, as use cases run the gamut of useful and creative applications as well as those which might be concerning. OpenAI, a group which actively promotes cooperativeness in AI research, designed a fake text generator they felt was so good, they decided the risks it posed made it too dangerous to release. […]