- From: ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program <metadataportals@yahoo.com>
- Date: Wed, 7 May 2014 08:07:53 -0700 (PDT)
- To: "paoladimaio10@googlemail.com" <paoladimaio10@googlemail.com>
- Cc: Martin Voigt <martin.voigt@tu-dresden.de>, "public-swisig@w3.org" <public-swisig@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <1399475273.78534.YahooMailNeo@web162602.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Thanks for your kind words. When I started up the discussion about the Internet of Humans in various online fora, including SWISIG, I got back a lot of feedback mentioning the need to standardize and focus on the security and privacy requirements. But what really got me moving were two articles I found through a search on the website of Privacy International; 1. NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW PUBLIC LAW & LEGAL THEORY RESEARCH PAPER SERIES WORKING PAPER NO. 13-64 LAW & ECONOMICS RESEARCH PAPER SERIES WORKING PAPER NO. 13-36 Big Data and Due Process: Toward a Framework to Redress Predictive Privacy Harms Kate Crawford and Jason Schultz October 2013 2. de Montjoye, Y.-A., Hidalgo, C.A., Verleysen, M. & Blondel, V.D. Unique in the Crowd: The privacy bounds of human mobility. Sci. Rep. 3, 1376; DOI:10.1038/srep01376 (2013). These spell out in detail the harms inflicted on individuals if security and privacy issues are not addressed I quote the summary of the second article: We study fifteen months of human mobility data for one and a half million individuals and find that human mobility traces are highly unique. In fact, in a dataset where the location of an individual is specified hourly, and with a spatial resolution equal to that given by the carrier’s antennas, four spatio-temporal points are enough to uniquely identify 95% of the individuals. We coarsen the data spatially and temporally to find a formula for the uniqueness of human mobility traces given their resolution and the available outside information. This formula shows that the uniqueness of mobility traces decays approximately as the 1/10 power of their resolution. Hence, even coarse datasets provide little anonymity. These findings represent fundamental constraints to an individual’s privacy and have important implications for the design of frameworks and institutions dedicated to protect the privacy of individuals. Which means that all current apps that use geo-spatial data are already infringing on privacy and security in a big way and this will only get worse with the advent of medical apps which according to a recent report already number in the 80,000 plus. My choice to help stimulate creation of the SWISIG Community Group was partially based on some assumptions and my intuition. Since HCI and machine to machine interaction require intelligence driven interfacing the work of our community group can be seen as covering a lot of ground. But we have powerful allies out there willing to assist us. I hope to inspire more of our group to come forward and make a commitment. What we can do as a working group is important Milton Ponson GSM: +297 747 8280 PO Box 1154, Oranjestad Aruba, Dutch Caribbean Project Paradigm: A structured approach to bringing the tools for sustainable development to all stakeholders worldwide by creating ICT tools for NGOs worldwide and: providing online access to web sites and repositories of data and information for sustainable development This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you h ave received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. On Wednesday, May 7, 2014 10:38 AM, Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com> wrote: Thanks a lot Milton its great to have some commitment - We need commitment (especially in standardization) to be multilateral, rather than solely based on the needs/requirements of a single individual/party to get enough credibility Thanks for getting the ball rolling and Let's hope enough people will join to make the effort stand on its feet , and lets check the form in a couple of days, if the transition does not happen now, at the earliest opportunity hereafter :-) PDM On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 6:27 PM, ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program <metadataportals@yahoo.com> wrote: I have just submitted my response and hard commitment. I have been able to finally arrive at this hard commitment, because of the necessary standardization work that I am already required to do in light of my research efforts and proposed projects that will be submitted for funding under Horizon 2020, the European Union research funding program. > > > > >Milton Ponson >GSM: +297 747 8280 > >PO Box 1154, Oranjestad >Aruba, Dutch Caribbean >Project Paradigm: A structured approach to bringing the tools for sustainable development to all stakeholders worldwide by creating ICT tools for NGOs worldwide and: providing online access to web sites and repositories of data and information for sustainable development > >This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. > >On Wednesday, May 7, 2014 2:32 AM, Martin Voigt <martin.voigt@tu-dresden.de> wrote: > >Paola, all, > >I totally agree with you. > >Further: can you provide access to the documents ;-) > >Cheers, >Martin > > >Am 07.05.2014 05:39, schrieb Paola Di Maio: >> >> >> Dear all >> Welcome to new members :-) >> >> This is a reminder that the deadline is approaching to make a final decision >> I already submitted a 'not ready yet' response to the survey, based on >> the lack of explicit/firm commitment of members to specific actions so far >> >> When at least name 5 members (not anonymous !!) make an explicit >> commitment to deliver some WG output, we can consider a transition >> >> So far we have had two negative responses and (one anonymous positive >> response which does not make any commitment) >> >> *http://tinyurl.com/op7gg55* >> >> I dont think anonymous responses count when it comes to WG >> matters, we need serious committed individuals which are willing >> to put their name, (face?), time and weight behind the proposed work >> >> One of the anonymous entries in the reply form asks what is the charter, >> The minimal charter is on the wiki, >> https://www.w3.org/community/swisig/wiki/Main_Page >> feel free to suggest how it should evolve it further >> >> To warrant for the success of the WG we request explicit commitment of >> members to goals and actions, and will recommend that W3C considers >> requesting stronger and more (could add this to the charter?) >> >> There are still a few days, so if you think we should transition to WG >> please state exactly what is your plan of action, so that we can all >> support it >> before 10 May at the most. >> the form is here >> >> *http://tinyurl.com/mnr3fqe* >> >> >> Either way, it will be good to keep thinking along these lines >> because the issue will crop up again next year! >> >> This community is now actively recruiting for future WG leaders /co-leaders >> so that as soon as we are 'mature' we can make a firm and smooth (!) >> transition >> >> Thank you! >> >> PDM >> >> >> >> PDM >> >> >> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 11:16 PM, ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program >> <metadataportals@yahoo.com <mailto:metadataportals@yahoo.com>> wrote: >> >> Can we take unitl like May 1, 2014 to try to finalize a >> transition? If by May 1 next we do not all feel comfortable >> about this we can do a poll and take a consensus based decision. >> >> regards >> >> Milton Ponson >> GSM: +297 747 8280 <tel:%2B297%20747%208280> >> PO Box 1154, Oranjestad >> Aruba, Dutch Caribbean >> Project Paradigm: A structured approach to bringing the tools >> for sustainable development to all stakeholders worldwide by >> creating ICT tools for NGOs worldwide and: providing online >> access to web sites and repositories of data and information for >> sustainable development >> >> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential >> and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to >> whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in >> error please notify the system manager. This message contains >> confidential information and is intended only for the individual >> named. If you are not the named addressee you should not >> disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. >> On Sunday, April 20, 2014 3:02 AM, Paola Di Maio >> <paola.dimaio@gmail.com <mailto:paola.dimaio@gmail.com>> wrote: >> Greetings SWISIG members >> >> Yesterday I filled out a form to W3C more or less saying we are not >> ready yet to transition to WG, (I reply quickly sometimes not to >> forget) >> >> Only after hitting the send button >> it occurred to me I should have consulted with co-chair and >> group members >> >> We can change our response til 10 May, so if enough ppl think >> we should transition this year, please stepfforward and >> state your commitment to make things happen, and we'll resubmit >> >> Otherwise, let's see if plans mature in their own time >> >> Thanks, happy Spring Holidays to all >> >> PDM >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: *Paola Di Maio via WBS Mailer* <webmaster@w3.org >> <mailto:webmaster@w3.org>> >> Date: Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 7:45 AM >> Subject: [wbs] response to 'Determining which Community and >> Business Groups transitions to Working Group' >> To: paola.dimaio@gmail.com <mailto:paola.dimaio@gmail.com>, >> team-community-process@w3.org <mailto:team-community-process@w3.org> >> >> >> The following answers have been successfully submitted to >> 'Determining which >> Community and Business Groups transitions to Working Group' >> (public) for >> Paola Di Maio. >> >> > >> > --------------------------------- >> > Your Community Group or Business Group >> > ---- >> > Please, name the Community Group or Business Group for which >> you are >> > submitting answers. >> > >> > >> Name of your Community Group or Business Group: SEMANTIC WEB >> INTERFACES >> (SWI) SIG >> >> > >> > >> > --------------------------------- >> > State of your Community Group or Business Group >> > ---- >> > Is your Community Group or Business Group: >> > >> > >> >> * ( ) Active and ongoing and nearing completion >> * ( ) Inactive because it has completed its work >> * (x) Active and ongoing and far from completion >> * ( ) Inactive because the original scope is no longer >> relevant or because >> the CG never got momentum >> >> > >> > >> > --------------------------------- >> > Goal of your Community Group or Business Group >> > ---- >> > Is the goal of your Community Group or Business Group: >> > >> > >> >> * (x) To provide a specification >> * ( ) To be a discussion forum for specifications done elsewhere >> * ( ) Other (please specify) >> You checked "other", please specify: >> a high level specificationn >> >> > >> > >> > --------------------------------- >> > Status of the spec of your Community Group or Business Group >> > ---- >> > What are your specification transition plans? >> > >> >> * ( ) We have already handed off all or part of a >> specification to a >> Working Group. >> >> * ( ) We plan to request that a specification transition to a >> Working >> Group within six months. >> >> * ( ) We have a specification that is a candidate for >> transition to a >> Working Group but have no schedule yet for doing so. >> * (x) We do not plan to transition a specification to a >> Working Group >> (provide details in the next question). >> >> > >> > >> > --------------------------------- >> > No transition to a Working Group >> > ---- >> > We do not expect to transition to a Working Group for the >> following >> > reasons (check all that apply): >> > >> > >> >> * [x] Too early, insufficient number of implementations yet. >> * [ ] Too narrow, not a key part of the Open Web Platform. >> * [ ] A Community Group or Business Group is good enough, >> Working Groups >> have too much bureaucracy. >> * [ ] We suspect that key players will not want to make >> Working Group >> patent commitments. >> * [ ] Too many key players are not Members of W3C and would >> not want to >> follow the work into a Working Group. >> * [ ] Other (please specify). >> You checked "other", please specify: >> exploratory work, community is still loosely engaged so far >> maybe if one or two ears if things mature >> >> > >> > >> > --------------------------------- >> > Open comments >> > ---- >> > Please, let us us know of anything you feel is relevant to >> complete your >> > answers. >> > >> > >> Comments: >> >> >> > >> > These answers were last modified on 19 April 2014 at 02:14:48 >> U.T.C. >> > by Paola Di Maio >> > >> Answers to this questionnaire can be set and changed until >> 2014-05-11. >> >> Regards, >> >> The Automatic WBS Mailer >> >> >> >> >> >> > >-- >----------------------------------- >Dipl.-Medieninf. Martin Voigt >PhD student > >Technische Universität Dresden >Faculty of Computer Science >Institute of Software and Multimedia Technology >01062 Dresden > >fax : +49 (351) 463-38518 >web: http://mmt.inf.tu-dresden.de/voigt > >email: martin.voigt@tu-dresden.de >skype: m.voigt.1982 >linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/martin-voigt/9/3a0/64b >twitter: https://twitter.com/#!/m_a_r_t_i_n > > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 7 May 2014 15:08:22 UTC