[liberationtech] liberationtech Digest, Vol 270, Issue 1
Claude Migisha K.
mikaclau at gmail.com
Wed Nov 23 00:56:03 PST 2016
*Are you working on social change issues in Sub-Saharan Africa? Do
injustice, corruption and inequalities in your community motivate your
work? Do you use data and technology in your daily work? *
*APPLY to the matchbox partnership: *
https://www.theengineroom.org/driving-social-change-in-sub-saharan-africa-apply-for-matchbox-partnership-now/
On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 5:14 PM, <liberationtech-request at lists.stanford.edu>
wrote:
> Send liberationtech mailing list submissions to
> liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> liberationtech-request at lists.stanford.edu
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> liberationtech-owner at lists.stanford.edu
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of liberationtech digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: [democracies online exchange] Are you ready for e-voting
> in your country? Some articles (Gregory Miller)
> 2. Re: Are you ready for e-voting in your country? Some articles
> (Joseph Lorenzo Hall)
> 3. Day of Action: Stop expanded FBI snooping! (Kate Krauss)
> 4. Derechos Digitales regional fellowships 2016 (Claudio Ruiz)
> 5. new book: 'Socio-Legal Aspects of the 3D Printing Revolution'
> out now - & launch events (Angela Daly)
> 6. From Russia with love? Guccifer 2.0 and DNC Docs (Steven Clift)
> 7. Question about Windows 10 (Peter Chin)
> 8. Re: Question about Windows 10 (Andreas Bader)
> 9. Re: Question about Windows 10 (John Ostrander)
> 10. Re: Question about Windows 10 (Thomas Delrue)
> 11. Five Days Left to enter HOPE's Young Journalist Contest (aestetix)
> 12. Call for Papers- CPDP 2017 (Imge Ozcan)
> 13. CFP: Visual Data as Accountability, Resistance, and
> Surveillance (Bryce C Newell)
> 14. Support for Civil Society UN resolution? (Niels ten Oever)
> 15. media inquiry: surveillance technology (Yosem Companys)
> 16. Fwd: Hacks/Hackers global call coming up tomorrow! (Steven Clift)
> 17. Safe communications among media activist communties
> (mshelton at riseup.net)
> 18. The future of Digital Rights in the EU: Meet with MEPs
> Marietje Schaake, Kaja Kalals in SF, July 18th, 6PM (Danny O'Brien)
> 19. Re: Muslims do not feel safe any more (Cristina [efecto99])
> 20. Re: Muslims do not feel safe any more (Al Billings)
> 21. What were the first instances of hacking 4 Whisteblowing?
> (Yosem Companys)
> 22. Re: Muslims do not feel safe any more (Thomas Delrue)
> 23. CfP CeDEM17 Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government
> 17-19 May 2017 (Danube University Krems, Austria) (Noella Edelmann)
> 24. Re: Muslims do not feel safe any more (Cristina [efecto99])
> 25. is voice rather than vision a better way to be social online?
> (tmr)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 15:04:59 -0700
> From: Gregory Miller <gmiller at osetfoundation.org>
> To: exchange at groups.dowire.org
> Cc: Open Government and Civic Technology- The global #opengov group
> <opengovgroup at groups.facebook.com>, liberationtech
> <liberationtech at mailman.stanford.edu>, news-del2 at googlegroups.com,
> newswire <newswire at groups.dowire.org>, eGovIG IG
> <public-egov-ig at w3.org>
> Subject: Re: [liberationtech] [democracies online exchange] Are you
> ready for e-voting in your country? Some articles
> Message-ID:
> <CAOzx7Nz3THVsQEvOOBkvcCiK0PV54RmAyz7viEjiqNwSnv66fg at mail.
> gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Steven-
> Having been a participant on a recent Atlantic Council summit addressing
> this very issue following a report from Connie McCormack, which we blogged
> about at the OSET Institute web site (see: http://bit.ly/OSETrcrd) I
> strongly encourage a separation of terms and phrases that are increasingly
> confusing the discussion:
>
> *e-Voting* refers to the application of digital technologies to the casting
> and counting of ballots.
>
> *iVoting* refers to the use of the public packet switched network (the
> Internet) for casting and counting of ballots in public elections.
>
> Our position at the TrustTheVote Project <http://www.trustthevote.org>
> (shared by one of our outside development partners, Galois spin-off
> Freeandfair.us) is that NO, the current public Internet as available today
> is NOT designed nor able to simultaneously support privacy and security
> required to sustain a secret ballot and anonymous voter.
>
> Also, the evidence today is mixed about whether and to what extent making
> another means to cast a ballot (the so-called pajama-voting or smartphone
> voting methods) will actually increase turnout. It might of one
> demographic (Millennial) and as that generation matures and new digital-age
> populations reach the age of voting come along this may change.
>
> In any event, just want to weigh-in that we should keep terminology
> straight and address the issue with intellectual honesty to every extent
> possible. Goodness knows that our team, largely veterans of companies that
> help catalyze the commercial Internet, would love to see iVoting become a
> reality. But the challenges to do so safely and securely are enormous,
> overly downplayed, and largely misunderstood. This is moon-shot type stuff
> to make it work (at least in U.S. democracy; other nations with different
> conditions may have a different opportunity relying on the existing TCP/IP
> architecture.)
>
> Cheers
> --
> *Gregory Miller*
> Co-Executive Director & Chief Development Officer
> *OSET* *Institute* | *TrustTheVote* *Project*
> www.OSETFoundation.org <http://www.osetfoundation.org/> |
> www.trustthevote.org
> *Twitter*: @TrustTheVote | @OSET
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 12:39 PM, Steven Clift <clift at e-democracy.org>
> wrote:
>
> Democracies Online <http://groups.dowire.org>
> >
> > [image: Photo of Steven Clift] <http://groups.dowire.org/p/stevenclift>
> > *Are you ready for e-voting in your country? Some articles*
> > <http://groups.dowire.org/r/topic/4GsENZQUsLnkexlJbF1aFv>
> > by *Steven Clift* <http://groups.dowire.org/p/stevenclift>
> > in *Democracies Online Exchange*
> > <http://groups.dowire.org/groups/exchange>
> > ------------------------------
> > OK, these articles suggest continued skepticism. Are there other
> > decent counter points that say we can do e-voting securely enough to
> > take advantage of higher turn-out? Or is that a myth too?
> >
> > Notably, 26 US states now allow registering to vote online:
> > http://*www.ncsl.org*
> > ?/research?/elections?-and?-campaigns?/electronic?-or?-
> online?-voter?-registration?.aspx?#Table?%20of?%20states?%20w?/ovr
> > <http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/
> electronic-or-online-voter-registration.aspx#Table%20of%20states%20w/ovr>
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Steven Clift
> >
> > Online voting is a cybersecurity nightmare
> > By Eric Geller
> > Jun 10, 2016, 1:32pm CT | Last updated Jun 10, 2016, 1:33pm CT
> >
> > http://po.st/GEUEOE
> >
> > Chinese hackers target Taiwan political party to spy on website visitors
> > By James Griffiths, CNN
> > Updated 11:13 AM ET, Thu June 2, 2016
> >
> > http://*www.cnn.com*
> > ?/2016?/06?/01?/asia?/taiwan?-dpp?-chinese?-hackers?/index?.html
> > <http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/01/asia/taiwan-dpp-chinese-
> hackers/index.html>
> >
> > Philippine voter data hacked but polls to go ahead
> > By TERESA CEROJANO
> > Apr. 22, 2016 9:23 AM EDT
> >
> > http://*bigstory.ap.org*
> > ?/article?/9258d3314bba4f4c863d16b8f4b3a0ab?/data?-all?-filipino?-
> voters?-hacked?-may?-polls?-go?-ahead
> > <http://bigstory.ap.org/article/9258d3314bba4f4c863d16b8f4b3a0
> ab/data-all-filipino-voters-hacked-may-polls-go-ahead>
> >
> >
> > Could the 2016 Election Be Stolen with Help from Electronic Voting
> > Machines?
> > February 23, 2016
> >
> > http://*www.democracynow.org*
> > ?/2016?/2?/23?/could?_the?_2016?_election?_be?_stolen
> > <http://www.democracynow.org/2016/2/23/could_the_2016_election_be_stolen
> >
> >
> > Steven Clift - Executive Director, E-Democracy.org
> > clift at e-democracy.org - +1 612 234 7072
> > @democracy - http://*linkedin.com*/in/netclift
> > <http://linkedin.com/in/netclift>
> > http://*1radionews.com* <http://1radionews.com> - My radio app
> > ------------------------------
> > ? Reply
> > <exchange at groups.dowire.org?subject=Re%3A%20Are%20you%
> 20ready%20for%20e-voting%20in%20your%20country%3F%20Some%20articles>
> > ? New topic <exchange at groups.dowire.org> View topic?
> > <http://groups.dowire.org/r/topic/4GsENZQUsLnkexlJbF1aFv>
> > Unsubscribe
> > <exchange at groups.dowire.org?subject=Unsubscribe&body=
> Hello%2C%0A%0APlease%20remove%20me%20from%20Democracies%
> 20Online%20Exchange%0A%3Chttp%3A//groups.dowire.org/groups/
> exchange%3E%0A%0AThank%20you.>
> > ? Switch to a daily digest
> > <exchange at groups.dowire.org?subject=Digest%20on&body=
> Hello%2C%0A%0APlease%20switch%20me%20from%20receiving%20one%
> 20email%20per%20post%20to%20the%20daily%0Adigest%2C%
> 20which%20summarises%20the%20all%20the%20posts%20made%20each%20day%20in%
> 0ADemocracies%20Online%20Exchange%0A%3Chttp%3A//groups.dowire.org/groups/
> exchange%3E%0A%0AThank%20you.>
> >
> > - Privacy <http://groups.dowire.org/policies/privacy/>
> > - Acceptable Use <http://groups.dowire.org/policies/aup/>
> > - Terms of Service <http://groups.dowire.org/policies/tos/>
> >
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/liberationtech/
> attachments/20160620/53a570e0/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 17:28:03 -0400
> From: Joseph Lorenzo Hall <joe at cdt.org>
> To: liberationtech <liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu>
> Cc: liberationtech <liberationtech at mailman.stanford.edu>
> Subject: Re: [liberationtech] Are you ready for e-voting in your
> country? Some articles
> Message-ID:
> <CABtrr-VxVk_60nG2_a1fYWu4qMOcjcvUyVi5D5_
> 2W2xGV3yEBw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> I'd highly recommend reading in full (it's long) the Eric Geller
> piece, which interviews a bunch of board members of the Verified
> Voting Foundation as well as some internet voting vendors (note that
> in the field "e-voting" is any type of electronic voting typically not
> mediated by internet, and "internet voting" or "i-voting" is remote
> casting of official ballot data over a network that depends on
> internet).
>
> While I don't have it at my fingertips, studies have shown that there
> are much more dominant factors that affect turnout than the ballot
> casting method/technology, so I wouldn't hang my hopes there.
>
> (Full disclosure: I'm a member of the Verified Voting Foundation
> Board of Directors; I also believe that at some point in the future
> we will need to figure out how to run secure government elections
> without transferring physical matter, but that it's folly to do that now
> given our current interent and the state of mobile and consumer
> computing devices.)
>
> best, Joe
>
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 3:39 PM, Steven Clift <clift at e-democracy.org>
> wrote:
> > OK, these articles suggest continued skepticism. Are there other
> > decent counter points that say we can do e-voting securely enough to
> > take advantage of higher turn-out? Or is that a myth too?
> >
> > Notably, 26 US states now allow registering to vote online:
> > http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/
> electronic-or-online-voter-registration.aspx#Table%20of%20states%20w/ovr
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Steven Clift
> >
> > Online voting is a cybersecurity nightmare
> > By Eric Geller
> > Jun 10, 2016, 1:32pm CT | Last updated Jun 10, 2016, 1:33pm CT
> >
> > http://po.st/GEUEOE
> >
> > Chinese hackers target Taiwan political party to spy on website visitors
> > By James Griffiths, CNN
> > Updated 11:13 AM ET, Thu June 2, 2016
> >
> > http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/01/asia/taiwan-dpp-chinese-
> hackers/index.html
> >
> > Philippine voter data hacked but polls to go ahead
> > By TERESA CEROJANO
> > Apr. 22, 2016 9:23 AM EDT
> >
> > http://bigstory.ap.org/article/9258d3314bba4f4c863d16b8f4b3a0
> ab/data-all-filipino-voters-hacked-may-polls-go-ahead
> >
> >
> > Could the 2016 Election Be Stolen with Help from Electronic Voting
> Machines?
> > February 23, 2016
> >
> > http://www.democracynow.org/2016/2/23/could_the_2016_
> election_be_stolen
> >
> > Steven Clift - Executive Director, E-Democracy.org
> > clift at e-democracy.org - +1 612 234 7072
> > @democracy - http://linkedin.com/in/netclift
> > http://1radionews.com - My radio app
> > --
> > Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations
> of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/
> mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change
> password by emailing moderator at companys at stanford.edu.
>
>
>
> --
> Joseph Lorenzo Hall
> Chief Technologist, Center for Democracy & Technology [https://www.cdt.org
> ]
> 1401 K ST NW STE 200, Washington DC 20005-3497
> e: joe at cdt.org, p: 202.407.8825, pgp: https://josephhall.org/gpg-key
> Fingerprint: 3CA2 8D7B 9F6D DBD3 4B10 1607 5F86 6987 40A9 A871
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 10:17:51 -0400
> From: Kate Krauss <katiephr at gmail.com>
> To: liberationtech <liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu>
> Subject: [liberationtech] Day of Action: Stop expanded FBI snooping!
> Message-ID:
> <CAMJrQuZT0W+cMQB6xndt6tU0LgugiOh7_PBruQ9UKapX83M+Cg at mail.gmail.
> com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Greetings, Liberation Technologists:
>
> The US Department of Justice is trying to institute new rules that would
> let US law enforcement hack computers that use Tor and other
> privacy-protecting technologies--all over the world.
>
> Judges would still need a warrant, but under the new rules, those warrants
> would apply to many more people--and computers anywhere are vulnerable if
> they use privacy-protecting technology like Tor or a VPN.
>
> The rules are an amendment to Rule 41 of the US Federal Rules of Criminal
> Procedure (rules for US judges). They will go into effect on December 1,
> unless we stop them. They would greatly empower US law enforcement to snoop
> into people's computers -- making sweeping changes to US policy through a
> technicality--without Congressional oversight. Picture the abuses against
> journalists, members of Congress, activists, or everyday citizens that
> could occur under these new rules if the DOJ (and FBI) get their way.
>
> The Electronic Frontier Foundation and the Tor Project have partnered to
> launch a Day of Action designed to raise the profile of this critical
> issue.
>
> *Please sign the petition or email a member of Congress at TorProject.org
> or the campaign's website: NoGlobalWarrants.org--but remember that the new
> rules will apply to computers and phones all over the world--so everyone's
> voice is critical, no matter where you live.*
>
> US Senator Ron Wyden is leading a bipartisan effort to defeat the rules
> with a bill called the "Stop Mass Hacking Act" (#SMHAct)--so that's a good
> hashtag.
>
> *Spread the word! Forward this email! Tweet out the news! Protect the right
> to privacy!*
>
> Cheers,
>
> Katie
> @TorProject
>
> --
> Kate Krauss
> The Tor Project <https://www.torproject.org/>
> Tel +1 718-864-6647 <%2B1%20215.939.7852>
> kate at torproject.org
> Twitter: @TorProject
> Jabber: ailanthus at jabber.ccc.de
>
> Two minute video about the Tor Network:
> https://blog.torproject.org/blog/releasing-tor-animation
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/liberationtech/
> attachments/20160621/e63104b7/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 17:19:29 -0400
> From: Claudio Ruiz <claudio at derechosdigitales.org>
> To: liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu
> Subject: [liberationtech] Derechos Digitales regional fellowships 2016
> Message-ID:
> <1466543969.263262.644567073.7890D794 at webmail.messagingengine.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> Just wanted to share that Derechos Digitales is opening their Regional
> Fellowships.
>
> Derechos Digitales is a Latin American non-profit founded in 2005 which
> objective is to defend, promote and develop human rights in digital
> environments. The mission of Derechos Digitales is to defend, promote
> and develop human rights in digital environments using advocacy tools
> among policymakers, private companies and the general public of Latin
> America.
>
> The Regional Fellowship is a program we have designed in order to
> strengthen ties with organizations based in the region and at the same
> time provide a platform for development of local projects that can be
> amplified with the collaborative work.
>
> All the program details are in the Open Call [1] and the Fellowship
> includes airfare to Santiago, Chile and accommodation during the
> duration of the program. We are receiving application *until July 6th*.
>
> Best,
>
> ?Claudio Ruiz
> derechosdigitales.org | @claudio
> PGP fingerprint
> C40E 0C6E E7B2 FA91 D8A9 1FC4 74D2 5C4D B603 D089
>
> [1]: In Spanish:
> https://derechosdigitales.org/10191/derechos-digitales-abre-
> su-programa-de-pasantias-2016/
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 16:31:01 +0200
> From: Angela Daly <angelacdaly at gmail.com>
> To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org, csaa-forum at lists.cdu.edu.au,
> cyberprof at mailman.stanford.edu, liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu
> Subject: [liberationtech] new book: 'Socio-Legal Aspects of the 3D
> Printing Revolution' out now - & launch events
> Message-ID:
> <CAKh3=sovENn40MTQd=noBXzHmOx+ZiR-J52ZK0yQ9CPDkgZ7WA at mail.
> gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> I am delighted to announce that my book, *Socio-Legal Aspects of the 3D
> Printing Revolution,* published by Palgrave, is now available in hardback
> and ebook forms:
> http://www.palgrave.com/gp/book/9781137515551
>
> Book launch events will be taking place in July and August:
>
> - Tilburg (NL), Tuesday 5 July, 1200-1330, Tilburg Institute for Law,
> Technology and Society
> https://www.tilburguniversity.edu/web/show/seminar-daly-3d-printing.htm
> - London (UK), with Dr Dinusha Mendis (Bournemouth), Tuesday 12 July,
> 1800-2000, Institute for Advanced Legal Studies
> http://www.sas.ac.uk/support-research/public-events/2016/
> 3d-printing-law-and-society
> - Melbourne (Australia), Thursday 4 August, 1200-1300, room AGSE211,
> Swinburne University of Technology Hawthorn campus
>
> See you there!
>
> Angela
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/liberationtech/
> attachments/20160622/ec3d4668/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 12:03:33 -0500
> From: Steven Clift <clift at e-democracy.org>
> To: newswire <newswire at groups.dowire.org>, "Open Government and Civic
> Technology- The global #opengov group"
> <opengovgroup at groups.facebook.com>, liberationtech
> <liberationtech at mailman.stanford.edu>
> Subject: [liberationtech] From Russia with love? Guccifer 2.0 and DNC
> Docs
> Message-ID:
> <CAO9TZ0Vm4hchd0rrHXrc+cJTHRphpDQd7oxd6Ykus8vMmPUopA@
> mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> https://guccifer2.wordpress.com/
>
> News about:
> https://www.google.com/search?q=Guccifer+2.0
>
> Steven Clift - Executive Director, E-Democracy.org
> clift at e-democracy.org - +1 612 234 7072
> @democracy - http://linkedin.com/in/netclift
> http://1radionews.com - My radio app
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 05:31:08 +0000
> From: Peter Chin <telemachus18 at hotmail.com>
> To: "liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu"
> <liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu>
> Subject: [liberationtech] Question about Windows 10
> Message-ID:
> <DM3PR19MB0891BB006FB42DE81954E2D8DF2E0 at DM3PR19MB0891.
> namprd19.prod.outlook.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>
> Hello folks,
>
> I need some advice about upgrading to Windows 10. My laptop is running
> Windows 8 and I need to do the free upgrade to Win 10 because I have a lot
> of applications that run on Windows and I feel it is time to upgrade to the
> newest Windows O.S. But I really don't want my personal data collected in
> Windows 10 either.
>
> I recently read that Microsoft could be releasing data controls that
> actually allow privacy (http://www.ghacks.net/2016/
> 02/11/microsoft-promises-to-implement-full-windows-10-
> data-tracking-controls/) but I'm not holding my breath. If I upgrade to
> Windows 10, what can I do to control personal privacy? I heard that the
> Enterprise version of Windows 10 would let me have more privacy and not
> collect my data.
>
> How are you all dealing with upgrading to Windows 10 so that you can still
> control your own personal data? Thanks for your thoughts.
>
>
> Peter Chin
> (in Vancouver, Canada)
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/liberationtech/
> attachments/20160624/5286793f/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 16:31:31 +0200
> From: Andreas Bader <andreas.bader at nachtpult.de>
> To: liberationtech <liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu>
> Subject: Re: [liberationtech] Question about Windows 10
> Message-ID: <576D4443.1000403 at nachtpult.de>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> Dear Peter,
>
> You do still have the possibility to use two different systems, e.g.
> Linux/OSX for important data and Windows for the rest.
> If this is no solution for you then you can just stay with Windows 8;
> ignore the "feeling" that you need to upgrade.
> "Never change a running system."
>
> Kinds,
>
> Andreas
>
> On 24.06.2016 07:31, Peter Chin wrote:
> > Hello folks,
> >
> > I need some advice about upgrading to Windows 10. My laptop is running
> Windows 8 and I need to do the free upgrade to Win 10 because I have a lot
> of applications that run on Windows and I feel it is time to upgrade to the
> newest Windows O.S. But I really don't want my personal data collected in
> Windows 10 either.
> >
> > I recently read that Microsoft could be releasing data controls that
> actually allow privacy (http://www.ghacks.net/2016/
> 02/11/microsoft-promises-to-implement-full-windows-10-
> data-tracking-controls/) but I'm not holding my breath. If I upgrade to
> Windows 10, what can I do to control personal privacy? I heard that the
> Enterprise version of Windows 10 would let me have more privacy and not
> collect my data.
> >
> > How are you all dealing with upgrading to Windows 10 so that you can
> still control your own personal data? Thanks for your thoughts.
> >
> >
> > Peter Chin
> > (in Vancouver, Canada)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/liberationtech/
> attachments/20160624/97fdfe3c/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 10:48:30 -0400
> From: John Ostrander <john at crackroot.org>
> To: liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu
> Subject: Re: [liberationtech] Question about Windows 10
> Message-ID: <91e1767f-38f5-ef13-5c74-93c262a40bc1 at crackroot.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
>
> Hey y'all,
>
> I was originally going to only reply to Peter's question about how to
> wrest some control back from M$, but this might be something that others
> aren't aware exists and could make use of. If one must run Windows then
> I'd advise them to seriously consider running the Tron Script to cut
> down on some of the shady stuff that Windows does with your data.
>
> Link to Tron Script subreddit where you can find the latest download link
> https://www.reddit.com/r/TronScript/
>
> Link to list of what the Tron Script does
> https://github.com/bmrf/tron/blob/master/README.md#full-tron-description
>
> I hope this is able to help some folks out.
>
>
> On 06/24/2016 01:31 AM, Peter Chin wrote:
> >
> > Hello folks,
> >
> > I need some advice about upgrading to Windows 10. My laptop is running
> > Windows 8 and I need to do the free upgrade to Win 10 because I have a
> > lot of applications that run on Windows and I feel it is time to upgrade
> > to the newest Windows O.S. But I really don't want my personal data
> > collected in Windows 10 either.
> >
> > I recently read that Microsoft could be releasing data controls that
> > actually allow privacy
> > (http://www.ghacks.net/2016/02/11/microsoft-promises-to-
> implement-full-windows-10-data-tracking-controls/)
> > but I'm not holding my breath. If I upgrade to Windows 10, what can I do
> > to control personal privacy? I heard that the Enterprise version of
> > Windows 10 would let me have more privacy and not collect my data.
> >
> > How are you all dealing with upgrading to Windows 10 so that you can
> > still control your own personal data? Thanks for your thoughts.
> >
> >
> > Peter Chin
> > (in Vancouver, Canada)
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> John M. Ostrander
> john at crackroot.org
>
> "Man is the measure of all things: of things which are, that they are,
> and of things which are not, that they are not." Protagoras
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 11:09:27 -0400
> From: Thomas Delrue <thomas at epistulae.net>
> To: liberationtech <liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu>,
> telemachus18 at hotmail.com
> Subject: Re: [liberationtech] Question about Windows 10
> Message-ID: <576D4D27.9020508 at epistulae.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
>
> TL;DR: Debian, Arch Linux, Linux Mint, etc are perfectly capable
> alternatives, and that likely includes your "list of windows
> applications you need to run".
>
> On 06/24/2016 01:31 AM, Peter Chin wrote:
> > I need some advice about upgrading to Windows 10. My laptop is
> > running Windows 8 and I need to do the free upgrade to Win 10 because
> > I have a lot of applications that run on Windows and I feel it is
>
> You don't really *need* to upgrade to Win10, you're likely just getting
> worn down by the continued nagging to have you upgrade to it because
> you're being told you'd lose out if you don't. Win8 will receive at
> least another 6-7 years of updates (security and regular) so it's not
> like you will miss out on security.
> While I can't vouch for the quality, trustworthiness or genuineness of
> it, there is a "Never10" tool that disables the incessant haranguing to
> get you to upgrade to the latest Windows.
> (https://www.grc.com/never10.htm - run a scan on it first!)
>
> Secondly, what exactly is this list of lots of apps that need to run on
> Windows? I always hear people complain about "I need to run App X or Y"
> but they never show me a list so that I can actually suggest alternatives.
> I dare to bet that half of them you don't really need (but hey, the
> customer's always right) and that the ones you /do/ need either a) have
> an open source equivalent that does exactly what you need or b) run
> perfectly fine on top of Wine (Windows emulator layer on Linux). A + B
> should cover roughly 90% of everything out there I think.
>
> > time to upgrade to the newest Windows O.S. But I really don't want my
> > personal data collected in Windows 10 either.
>
> Good luck with that... The new business model of the Windows group (and
> MSFT in general) is to collect everything and anything. (and yes, that
> includes what you type on your keyboard)
> I don't think they'll ditch that new model any time soon.
>
> > I recently read that Microsoft could be releasing data controls that
> > actually allow privacy
> > (http://www.ghacks.net/2016/02/11/microsoft-promises-to-
> implement-full-windows-10-data-tracking-controls/)
> > but I'm not holding my breath. If I upgrade to Windows 10, what can I
> > do to control personal privacy? I heard that the Enterprise version
> > of Windows 10 would let me have more privacy and not collect my
> > data.
>
> I wouldn't hold my breath but I'll wait & see how much of these promises
> they'll actually fulfil and how far these implementations go before
> making any bets on it. But my magic 8-ball says "outlook not so good".
>
> Regarding the enterprise edition: Although I'm not 100% sure, you'll
> likely have to set up and run an Active Directory domain and define a
> policy on it that does not allow the sending of the 'collected
> telemetry' information in order to actually not have your data siphoned
> over to Redmond.
>
> > How are you all dealing with upgrading to Windows 10 so that you can
> > still control your own personal data? Thanks for your thoughts.
>
> There are two parts to your question:
> "How are you all dealing with upgrading to Windows 10": I advise all my
> clients to avoid it. I only have one who didn't take that advice and now
> that one is complaining about it to me.
> "so that you can still control your own personal data": I tell all my
> clients that with Windows, they *will* lose that control.
>
> All of that being said: you're already on Windows 8 and many of these
> 'telemetry collection' pieces have already been back-ported to it and
> pushed onto you via Windows Update, so there's that.
> But I do seem to recall some tool called Aegis-Voat or something which
> disabled a large amount of 'outreach' from Win7/8/10 machines to Redmond
> by (among things) messing around with routing tables on your local
> machine (because the IPs are hard coded in Windows, the telemetry
> collection for the most part doesn't use DNS nor your hosts file). That
> is something you might want to investigate. Unfortunately it is no
> longer maintained (https://github.com/th3power/aegis-voat) and its
> approach was reactionary instead of proactive, so you'd have to keep
> monitoring and updating your blocking periodically.
>
> In fairness, if you stick with Windows, you really don't have a choice
> in whether or not your personal data is collected. It will be collected,
> stored & processed and in the near future, I expect windows to start
> complaining in big red alarm-fonts and warning-signs if it detects that
> it cannot send it over to Redmond because you've put preventative
> measures in place.
>
> All in all: switch to Linux! Give me a shout if you want to work on the
> list of 'windows apps you need to run'.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 22:11:47 +0200
> From: aestetix <aestetix at aestetix.com>
> To: liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu
> Subject: [liberationtech] Five Days Left to enter HOPE's Young
> Journalist Contest
> Message-ID: <20160624201146.GA10048 at dan>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
>
> "If you're a student journalist and want to attend HOPE XI, the Eleventh
> Hackers
> on Planet Earth conference (July 22-24, NYC) you can win free admission
> (and an
> interview with me!) by submitting an article about any of the topics come
> up at
> HOPE conferences! Get writing!" -- Cory Doctorow
>
> https://boingboing.net/2016/06/24/student-journalists-5-days-le.html
>
> For more details:
> http://www.2600.com/content/eleventh-hope-announces-young-
> journalist-contest
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 21:29:24 +0200
> From: Imge Ozcan <imgeozcan at gmail.com>
> To: liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu
> Subject: [liberationtech] Call for Papers- CPDP 2017
> Message-ID:
> <CAO6JxtGDYS_-Sm3fVVq2P3+FahqKifrAksv1Rncub4bai4QZhA@
> mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> *CfP Computers, Privacy and Data Protection 2017 ? The Age of Intelligent
> Machines http://www.cpdpconferences.org/callforpapers.html
> <http://www.cpdpconferences.org/callforpapers.html>*
>
> CPDP is an annual three-day conference devoted to privacy and data
> protection. The 10th edition of CPDP will be held on 25-27 January 2017 in
> Brussels. Whilst a number of speakers are specifically invited by the
> conference, several slots remain open to application through an annual call
> for papers. The CPDP2017 Call for Papers is addressed to all researchers
> who wish to present their papers at the next Computers, Privacy and Data
> Protection conference.
>
> The call is split into two different tracks. The first is dedicated to
> experienced researchers, while the second welcomes PhD students and junior
> researchers. Contributions are welcome from all disciplines with
> perspectives on the themes of the conference. The dual-track structure of
> the CPDP 2017 Call for Papers aims to meet the increasing interest of
> researchers ? from all levels and from multiple disciplines ? in CPDP and
> their expectations in terms of academic feedback and exchange. Please
> submit your contribution through the EasyChair conference system by
> following this link:
> https://easychair.org/account/signin.cgi?key=39741672.tc6QibMd0JZ3njVe
>
> *RELEVANT FIELDS AND TOPICS*
>
> The CPDP Scientific Committee invites papers in the fields of law, social
> sciences, philosophy and computer sciences (as well as other relevant
> fields). Multidisciplinary papers are particularly welcome. In particular,
> this call aims to reach researchers whose works relate to new technologies,
> privacy and data protection. Selected researchers will have the valuable
> opportunity to present their papers in the conference academic sessions.
> The main theme highlighted this year is Artificial Intelligence, but we
> welcome any original topics related to the general themes of the conference
> and especially encourage technology-focused and interdisciplinary
> submissions.
>
> For more information about the topics presented at previous editions of
> CPDP, please visit http://www.cpdpconferences.org/archive.html
>
> In case of doubt regarding the suitability of a contribution for the
> conference, please contact Lorenzo Dalla Corte (
> lorenzo.dallacorte at cpdpconferences.org).
>
> *CPDP2017 KEY DATES*
>
> Deadline for submissions: Friday 7 Oct. 2016
> Notification to authors: Friday 2 Dec. 2016
> Papers accepted for presentation at the conference will go through a second
> round of reviews for inclusion in the conference book (see below).
> The deadline for submissions to the second round of reviews is: Monday 6
> March 2017.
>
> *SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS*
>
> Authors responding to this Call for Papers are asked to submit a full paper
> via a dedicated webpage on the EasyChair system, together with a short
> abstract and up to 5 keywords. Authors should select the track for which
> they are applying in EasyChair: either CPDP 2017 Experienced Researchers or
> CPDP 2017 Junior Researchers.
>
> Papers should be between 6000 and 8000 words in length and follow the CPDP
> layout rules based on the Springer template which is available here (zip
> file to download): http://www.cpdpconferences.
> org/Resources/splnproc1110.zip
> The text of the paper should not include the name of the author(s) and all
> self-references should be deleted. Submissions not meeting these criteria
> risk rejection without consideration of quality.
>
> Contributions and identifying information should be submitted through the
> EasyChair conference system following this link:
> https://easychair.org/account/signin.cgi?key=39741827.Ufkihm1uEzFTFQDx
>
> Papers will be selected on the basis of their quality. All submitted papers
> will be peer reviewed by members of the CPDP 2017 Scientific Committee (and
> other independent reviewers where necessary) and will be commented upon by
> distinguished scholars. Authors of accepted papers must guarantee that
> their papers will be presented at the conference: at least one author of
> each accepted paper is required to register for the conference and to
> present the paper. Accepted papers will be considered for publication in
> the conference book published by Springer.
>
> Selected authors will receive free entrance for the duration of the
> conference. Funding for travel expenses may be available for PhD Candidates
> who cannot cover their own costs. If you require funding, please get in
> touch.
>
> For further details on the conference structure and its main topic areas,
> interested researchers are invited to visit the www.cpdpconferences.org or
> to contact info at cpdpconferences.org
>
> *CONFERENCE BOOK*
>
> Eight books based on papers presented at previous CPDP conferences have
> already been published, and a 9th edition is currently in production:
>
> 1. Gutwirth, S., Y. Poullet, P. De Hert, C. de Terwangne, and S. Nouwt,
> eds. Reinventing Data Protection? Dordrecht: Springer, 2009. (
> www.springer.com
> <http://www.springer.com/law/international/book/978-1-4020-9497-2>)
> 2. Gutwirth, S., Y. Poullet, and P. De Hert, eds. Data Protection in a
> Profiled World. Dordrecht: Springer, 2010. (www.springer.com
> <http://www.springer.com/law/international/book/978-90-481-8864-2>)
> 3. Gutwirth, S., Y. Poullet, P. De Hert and R. Leenes eds. Computers,
> Privacy and Data Protection: an Element of Choice. Dordrecht: Springer,
> 2011. (www.springer.com
> <http://www.springer.com/law/international/book/978-94-007-0640-8>)
> 4. Gutwirth, S., R. Leenes, P. De Hert and Y. Poullet, European Data
> Protection: In Good Health? Dordrecht: Springer, 2012. (
> www.springer.com
> <http://www.springer.com/law/international/book/978-94-007-2902-5>)
> 5. Gutwirth, S., R. Leenes, P. De Hert and Y. Poullet, European Data
> Protection:Coming of Age, Dordrecht: Springer, 2012. (www.springer.com
> <http://www.springer.com/law/international/book/978-94-007-5184-2>)
> 6. Gutwirth, S., R. Leenes and P. De Hert, Reloading Data Protection:
> Multidisciplinary Insights and Contemporary Challenges. Dordrecht:
> Springer, 2014. (www.springer.com
> <http://www.springer.com/law/international/book/978-94-007-7539-8>)
> 7. Gutwirth, S., R. Leenes and P. De Hert, Reforming Data Protection:
> The Global Perspective. Dordrecht: Springer, 2015. (www.springer.com
> <http://www.springer.com/us/book/9789401793841>)
> 8. Gutwirth, S., Leenes R., P. De Hert and Y. Poullet, Data protection
> on the Move. Dordrecht: Springer (www.springer.com
> <https://www.springer.com/us/book/9789401773751>)
> 9. Gutwirth, S., Leenes R., P. De Hert and R. Van Brakel, Computers,
> Privacy and Data Protection: Invisibilities & Infrastructures.
> Dordrecht:
> Springer, 2017. (forthcoming)
>
> Specific guidelines on the publication of the CPDP 2017 book have been
> adopted. Please visit: http://www.cpdpconferences.org/information.html
>
> *BEYOND THE CPDP 2017 CALL FOR PAPERS*
>
> CPDP would like to create a platform where all people passionate about
> privacy and data-protection can meet. If you are a social, political or
> computer scientist, activist, policy maker, lawyer, ICT expert or
> passionate person interested in being a speaker or getting involved in next
> year?s Conference, please notify the Conference secretariat at the
> following address: info at cpdpconferences.org
>
> We look forward to receiving your submissions and to welcoming you in
> Brussels in January 2017!
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> The CPDP 2017 Programme Committee
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/liberationtech/
> attachments/20160624/6391a752/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 16:42:55 +0200
> From: Bryce C Newell <bcnewell at uw.edu>
> To: liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu
> Subject: [liberationtech] CFP: Visual Data as Accountability,
> Resistance, and Surveillance
> Message-ID:
> <CAP+dcqzzkhV0SMAFpTQYgxFWncsKV+AJDAXD0qYv=Z6tm+ERkA at mail.
> gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> *(with apologies for cross-posting)*
>
>
> *Call for Papers (abstracts due August 10, 2016)*
>
> *Visual Data as Accountability, Resistance, and Surveillance*
> For a special issue of *Law & Social Inquiry* (Journal links: Wiley
> <http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1747-4469> *|*
> American
> Bar Foundation
> <http://www.americanbarfoundation.org/publications/lawsocialinquiry.html>)
>
>
> Edited by: Sarah Brayne (UT-Austin), Karen E. C. Levy (Cornell), and Bryce
> Clayton Newell (Tilburg)
>
> *Overview*
>
> The capture, analysis, and dissemination of visual data?including video
> (with or without audio), photographs, and other visual recordings?has
> become ubiquitous. Facilitated by digitization, globalization, and the
> proliferation of mobile media, visual data is transforming the
> documentation of activities in a wide range of contexts, including
> policing, legal adjudication, war, human rights struggles, and civic
> action. Visual data is being collected by state actors and individual
> citizens, each often documenting the actions of the other. The use of this
> data as evidence (both inside and outside formal legal proceedings) raises
> significant issues related to privacy and ethics, authentication and
> credibility, interpretation, inequality, power, and legibility. Law is
> implicated at both the point of recording (or documentation) and during
> downstream activities, such as when recordings are shared or posted online,
> publicly disclosed under freedom of information laws, or introduced into
> evidence during legal proceedings.
>
> Different technologies afford different viewpoints. Visual data constitutes
> a unique form of information that presents emergent legal and policy
> questions because of its technical form and social effects. The
> mobilization of visual data can shape and reshape public opinion,
> representation, suppression, visibility, inequality, and admissibility of
> evidence; it can serve to incriminate or exonerate. Visual evidence can
> legitimize certain accounts of events while calling others into question.
> And, thanks to the proliferation of mobile devices, more people can capture
> video and photographs than ever before, at a moment?s notice, simply by
> pulling out their phones?and can distribute them instantaneously, creating
> visual records of all types of behaviors and conflicts, from confrontations
> between citizens and police to political gaffes, from sex tapes to
> dashboard camera footage of traffic-related events. The recent adoption of
> police body cameras and the use of video by bystanders as a tool for
> inverse surveillance demonstrate our increasing reliance on video as a
> check on power, as well as a source of ostensible authority when accounts
> about ?what really happened? are in conflict. At the same time, the crucial
> role of interpretation suggests video is not as much of an ?objective
> observer? or independent witness as it is sometimes claimed to be, and
> visual evidence may have unforeseen implications for weighing evidence in
> civil or criminal cases?or in the court of public opinion.
>
> Permissive freedom of information laws in some jurisdictions have also led
> to recordings made by the police ending up on websites like
> YouTube?alongside myriad channels of police misconduct videos filmed by
> citizens. All of this footage increases the secondary visibility of those
> captured in recordings, and the video itself can also be analyzed as
> (potentially) a new form of big data. Audio and video streams contain
> biometric information that can be detected, analyzed, and compared against
> existing databases?while also adding new data to these databases in the
> process.
>
> The creation, dissemination, mediation, interpretation, and quantification
> of visual data are all fundamentally social processes. From citizen video
> of police (mis)conduct to the visual documentation of human rights abuses,
> the process of transforming material experience into digital evidence can
> facilitate accountability or resistance. These citizen-led forms of
> surveillance also function as forms of resistance to more panoptic forms of
> state-sponsored video collection and surveillance (e.g. camera-enabled
> drones, CCTV cameras). On the other hand, police-worn body cameras also act
> as an accountability mechanism, even though they face away from officers
> and collect evidence about?and document the conduct of?civilians. These
> forms of mobile, user-controlled cameras significantly alter earlier
> reliance on more static and passive video collection.
>
> As technological developments far outpace empirical research on?and legal
> regulation of?visual data, this special paper symposium in Law & Social
> Inquiry will provide an opportunity to highlight new empirical work with
> connections to law and policy, serve as a venue to build theory about a
> rapidly changing subject, and showcase research relevant to a variety of
> stakeholders?including lawyers, judges, law enforcement, legislators and
> policymakers, activists and civil and human rights organizations,
> technologists, and academics in a variety of fields.
>
> We welcome contributions that present original empirical research; offer
> conceptual, critical, or theoretical analyses; or address the unique legal,
> ethical, and policy questions implicated by visual documentation. We
> welcome scholarly contributions that come from?or that cross?academic
> disciplines such as sociology, law, information science, anthropology,
> science and technology studies, criminology, geography, communications and
> media studies, and computer science.
>
>
> *We encourage submissions addressing (but not limited to) such subjects
> as:*
>
> - Body-worn cameras, dashcams, policing practices
> - Citizen video/video as human rights advocacy
> - Covert and overt recording
> - Video as surveillance and sousveillance
> - Resistance to and avoidance of audio or visual surveillance
> - Design and regulation of audio or visual surveillance systems
> - Unanticipated consequences of audio or visual records
> - Use and interpretation of audio or video as evidence in legal
> proceedings
> - Data storage, access, and retention policies
> - Algorithmic practices of metadata extraction from video content
> - Image processing
> - Technical means of privacy preservation and authentication
> - Audio and video analytics and forensics
> - Audio and video redaction and privacy concerns
> - Live streaming
> - Video/audio and public opinion
> - Voyeurism, victimhood, and the ethics of viewing
> - Affective aspects of video
> - Embedding human values into the design of video-related technologies
> or systems (e.g. value sensitive design or privacy by design)
> - Implications for inequality
> - Facial recognition or other forms of biometrics enabled by audio or
> visual documentation and recording
>
> *Deadlines and anticipated timeline:*
>
> -
> *Initial abstract submission deadline (~ 500 words): August 10, 2016 *
> - Authors notified of (tentative) acceptance: August 30, 2016
> - Full papers due (based on accepted abstracts): December 1, 2016
> - Papers sent out for peer-review: mid-December, 2016
> - Reviews returned to authors (with editorial decisions): expected,
> Feb.-Mar. 2017
> - Publication in 2017
>
>
> *Specifics about submissions:*
> Initial abstracts should contain approximately 500 words. Subsequent full
> paper submissions should contain fewer than 10,000 words (including
> footnotes and citations), and should contain a 200-word abstract and
> biographical information about the authors on a cover page. Invited full
> paper submissions will undergo formal double-blind peer review, which is
> expected to take between 1 and 3 months (submissions that are not selected
> for peer-review will be released back to the authors quickly). All
> submissions should be submitted in editable Word (*.doc/x) or *.rtf
> formats, and should adhere to the formatting and citation requirements of
> Law & Social Inquiry (available at
> http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/pdf/lsi_author_guidelines.pdf).
>
> All submissions should be sent to the editors via email to
> LSIvisualdataspecialissue at gmail.com. Please do not submit to this special
> call via the regular Law & Social Inquiry journal submission portal.
>
> Additional questions may be sent to the editors at the same address.
>
>
> *--*
> *Bryce Clayton Newell, Ph.D., J.D.*
> Post-Doctoral Researcher
> Tilburg Institute for Law, Technology, and Society (TILT)
> Tilburg University, Faculty of Law
> b.c.newell at uvt.nl | SSRN <http://ssrn.com/author=1576462> | @newmedialaw
> <http://twitter.com/newmedialaw>
> www.bcnewell.com | www.humanitarianfilm.org
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/liberationtech/
> attachments/20160627/1b4e75ea/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 14
> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 16:10:27 +0200
> From: Niels ten Oever <lists at digitaldissidents.org>
> To: liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu
> Cc: Andrew Smith <andrew at article19.org>
> Subject: [liberationtech] Support for Civil Society UN resolution?
> Message-ID:
> <9ee4d7d5-4b57-0e31-f1ab-3814994d42ed at digitaldissidents.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
> We are writing to seek your organisation's signature for a joint civil
> society letter
> https://crm.ishr.ch/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.
> php?u=379&qid=47521
> defending a strong Human Rights Council resolution on civil society
> space. The letter is attached.
>
> As you may be aware, Chile, Ireland, Japan, Sierra Leone, & Tunisia have
> proposed a draft resolution on protecting and promoting civil society
> space at the 32nd Session of the UN Human Rights Council. It was
> developed through broad consultation with States and civil society and
> in the past was adopted by consensus.
> The draft resolution is based on the UN High Commissioner's report on
> civil society space
> https://crm.ishr.ch/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.
> php?u=381&qid=47521
> , and highlights the important role civil society actors play in
> contributing to peace and security, human rights and sustainable
> development. It also includes a number of positive measures on promoting
> and protecting civic space and requests OHCHR to develop a report on the
> participation of civil society across the UN and regional and
> international organisations.
>
> The letter will be updated tomorrow lunchtime, to react to an expected
> attack on the resolution from some states, aimed at weakening the
> resolution. Advanced sign-on ensures a swift and collective voice
> against this attack on the resolution, and in support of the UN taking
> action to defend civil society space.
>
> We invite you to sign on using this link, provided by ISHR, which has
> initiated this letter with ARTICLE19:
> https://crm.ishr.ch/en/civicrm/event/register?reset=1&id=79 (please do
> not reply to this email to sign, but use the link only).
>
> We intend to *circulate a final letter to signatory organisatons by 4 PM
> on 28 June 2016*. Organisations that sign on now, which we encourage,
> will have a period of 2 hours to opt-out once the letter is finalised.
> We intend to send the letter to States in the evening of Tuesday, 28
> June. For any questions, contact Andrew at Article 19
> (andrew at article19.org) or Michael at ISHR (m.ineichen at ishr.ch).
>
> Thank you and kind regards,
>
>
> Niels
> --
> Niels ten Oever
> Head of Digital
>
> Article 19
> www.article19.org
>
> PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
> 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 15
> Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 18:16:51 -0700
> From: Yosem Companys <companys at stanford.edu>
> To: Liberation Technologies <liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu>
> Cc: Matthew Hutson <matt at silverjacket.com>
> Subject: [liberationtech] media inquiry: surveillance technology
> Message-ID:
> <CANhci9E3r2CGvxYWNrxba8LBWJfG+Zz7+JPPiXLwRmvA0V0e3A at mail.
> gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> *From: *Matthew Hutson <matt at silverjacket.com>
>
> I?m a science writer working on a potential story for *The Atlantic* about
> the future of surveillance technology. I?m wondering if you could recommend
> someone for me to speak to about this topic.
>
> Thanks a lot,
> Matt
>
> ??????????????????????
> Matthew Hutson
> Science Writer
> MagicalThinkingBook.com <http://magicalthinkingbook.com/>
> @SilverJacket <https://twitter.com/SilverJacket>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/liberationtech/
> attachments/20160630/d1368f21/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 16
> Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2016 10:08:58 -0700
> From: Steven Clift <clift at e-democracy.org>
> To: newswire <newswire at groups.dowire.org>, brigade
> <brigade at codeforamerica.org>, poplus <poplus at googlegroups.com>,
> liberationtech <liberationtech at mailman.stanford.edu>, "Open
> Government
> and Civic Technology- The global #opengov group"
> <opengovgroup at groups.facebook.com>
> Subject: [liberationtech] Fwd: Hacks/Hackers global call coming up
> tomorrow!
> Message-ID:
> <CAO9TZ0WMixG0in8Rds1hVcxqn0EcT0e7HYo6s_u2ry5LiR4HHg at mail.
> gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> See:
> http://us1.campaign-archive1.com/?u=c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=
> e72dbb79be&e=305ffa5ca0
>
> For my civic tech and gov friends also interested in the intersection on
> civic tech and media.
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Hacks/Hackers" <samantha at hackshackers.com>
> Date: Jul 4, 2016 9:21 AM
> Subject: Hacks/Hackers global call coming up tomorrow!
> To: <clift at e-democracy.org>
> Cc:
>
> Updates from Hacks/Hackers chapters around the world.
> View this email in your browser
> <http://us1.campaign-archive1.com/?u=c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=
> e72dbb79be&e=305ffa5ca0>
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=85911a6635&e=305ffa5ca0>
>
> Welcome to July, hacks and hackers! In the first half of 2016, H/H chapters
> held nearly 100 meetups in dozens of cities. We also held seven *Connect
> events*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=5388a97f53&e=305ffa5ca0>
> from San Francisco to London, with another coming up in *Toronto in a
> couple months*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=18ef26d821&e=305ffa5ca0>
> .
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=06b7fd3572&e=305ffa5ca0>
>
> Next week, we're holding our *monthly global call*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=ca103b58e5&e=305ffa5ca0>,
> so please join in!
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=f0a405fe7a&e=305ffa5ca0>
>
> *The week ahead:*
>
> - *Miami*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=2197d73daf&e=305ffa5ca0>
> is holding OpenHack Miami
> - *IRE*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=dd38b3fc1d&e=305ffa5ca0>
> is meeting for its regular open lab
> - Hacks/Hackers is holding its *global monthly call*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=78fc8ce84c&e=305ffa5ca0>
>
> *Chapter spotlight:*
>
> *London*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=80cfab422e&e=305ffa5ca0>
> held its *June meetup last week*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=d140127b5c&e=305ffa5ca0>,
> looking at polling data just before the Europe-shaking Brexit vote. The
> London meetups draw huge crowds of up to 200 people a month, so the
> organizers built a list of tasks ahead of time.
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=9b892445d0&e=305ffa5ca0>
>
> Organizer *Joanna Geary*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=96cb8fda82&e=305ffa5ca0>
> shared the templates they use for assigning *roles*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=4716cc79fc&e=305ffa5ca0>
> and* tasks*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=8d0a76a791&e=305ffa5ca0>.
> "This means everyone knows what they have to do and stops too many
> last-minute panics!" she said.
>
> *Worth a read:*
>
> - That surge of Britons "frantically Googling" the EU after Brexit
> turned out to be *under than a thousand people*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=e3cc083ddf&e=305ffa5ca0>
> (Medium)
> - The FAA finally announced its rules for drones, and Matt Waite
> explains *what that means*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=54d4160664&e=305ffa5ca0>
> for drone journalists (Drone Journalism Lab)
> - Social networks are *quietly beginning to ban*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=6769782514&e=305ffa5ca0>
> extremist content using algorithms (Reuters)
>
> *Job openings:*
>
> - Europe:
> - The Bureau of Investigative Journalism is hiring a *Data Lab
> director*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=6147451450&e=305ffa5ca0>
> - Storyful is hiring a *journalist*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=5910e76b7e&e=305ffa5ca0>
> in the UK
> - North America:
> - Vox is hiring a *graphics reporter*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=2312d1a993&e=305ffa5ca0>
> in Washington, D.C.
> - Conde Nast is hiring a *data engineer*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=d92298f0e0&e=305ffa5ca0>
> in New York
> - The NYT has several *data analyst positions*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=11c7810eef&e=305ffa5ca0>
> open
> - The New Yorker is looking for an *editorial production developer*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=04fa5fe863&e=305ffa5ca0>
> - EdSurge is seeking a *data journalist*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=b73bf5e2d3&e=305ffa5ca0>
> to cover education technology
> - The Good Search, an ethical executive search company, wants to hire
> a *data research associate*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=1f4e1d65b1&e=305ffa5ca0>
> - Africa:
> - CodeforAfrica is hiring for *several positions*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=425df2a24c&e=305ffa5ca0>,
> including senior Python developer
>
> *Other upcoming events:*
>
> - July 19 - *Austin, Texas, USA* - *Front Porch*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=57d90c5b66&e=305ffa5ca0>,
> a conference for web design and development
> - July 28-29 - *Portland, Oregon, USA* - *SRC CON*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=9e852595e7&e=305ffa5ca0>,
> a Mozilla conference for journalist coders
> - July 29-31 - *Atlanta, USA* - the first *Women Who Code hackathon*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=e759a24f47&e=305ffa5ca0>
> - Sept. 22: NYC Media Lab *Annual Summit*
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=aa2b314112&e=305ffa5ca0>,
> for executives, academics and startups to convene around future of media
>
> Subscribe to this newsletter
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=eda1d2e90f&e=305ffa5ca0>
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=f0963f4949&e=305ffa5ca0>
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=456ca0457d&e=305ffa5ca0>
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=dde4d1a25c&e=305ffa5ca0>
> *Copyright ? 2016 Hacks and Hackers, All rights reserved.*
> You are receiving this email because you signed up at
> http://hackshackers.com
>
> *Our mailing address is:*
> Hacks and Hackers
> 3790 16th Street
> San Francisco, CA 94114
>
> Add us to your address book
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage1.com/vcard?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=fb2bc6f10b>
>
>
> Want to change how you receive these emails?
> You can update your preferences
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage2.com/profile?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=fb2bc6f10b&e=305ffa5ca0>
> or unsubscribe from this list
> <http://hackshackers.us1.list-manage.com/unsubscribe?u=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&id=fb2bc6f10b&e=305ffa5ca0&c=e72dbb79be>
>
> [image: Email Marketing Powered by MailChimp]
> <http://www.mailchimp.com/monkey-rewards/?utm_source=
> freemium_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=monkey_rewards&aid=
> c56f2e53d5ed6ef87f8aaa75c&afl=1>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/liberationtech/
> attachments/20160704/0d61db02/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 17
> Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2016 13:05:31 -0400
> From: mshelton at riseup.net
> To: liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu
> Subject: [liberationtech] Safe communications among media activist
> communties
> Message-ID: <7544a9535201a8483469b329dd726a4b at riseup.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
>
> At The Coral Project we're conducting research to learn about safe
> communications among media activist communities and civil society
> groups. If you can help or know someone who can, please check out the
> short survey here:
> https://oasis.sandstorm.io/shared/G3FdYnMhqoxpquvoQCsVHLPeBqx47p
> ctUdDHzaAjDrh
>
> Feel free to reach out with any thoughts or questions.
>
> Thanks so much,
> Martin
>
> --
>
> Martin Shelton <mshelt.onl>
> Knight-Mozilla OpenNews Fellow <opennews.org>
> New York Times + Coral Project
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 18
> Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 16:34:58 -0700
> From: "Danny O'Brien" <danny at eff.org>
> To: Liberation Tech <liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu>
> Subject: [liberationtech] The future of Digital Rights in the EU: Meet
> with MEPs Marietje Schaake, Kaja Kalals in SF, July 18th, 6PM
> Message-ID: <20160705233458.5zb6niww5x3weo7a at eff.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Libtech folks:
>
> This month's San Francisco Techno-Activism Third Monday has two very
> special
> guest speakers, who I thought you would all appreciate:
>
> MARIETJE SCHAAKE, one of the leading lights in Internet issues in the
> European
> Parliament, and KAJA KALLAS, who as a Parliamentary member for Estonia has
> been
> pushing for the EU to eliminate borders in the digital world. She's also
> the
> vice chair of the EU-Ukraine co-operation committee.
>
> Both will be talking and answering questions on a wide range of digital
> issues
> including freedom of speech, internet governance, intermediary liability,
> net
> neutrality, and export controls. If you're looking for insight in how
> Europe's
> governments are planning to deal with the Internet, digital security, and
> Silicon Valley, I can't think of two better people to hear it from.
>
> TA3M starts at 6PM on Monday July 18th, at EFF's offices in San Francisco.
> We're at 815 Eddy St, SF, CA 94109; https://eff.org/815eddy .
>
> More info at:
> https://www.eff.org/event/techno-activism-third-mondays-sf-july-2016
>
> Best,
>
> d.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 19
> Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 23:45:21 -0300
> From: "Cristina [efecto99]" <efecto99 at riseup.net>
> To: liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu
> Subject: Re: [liberationtech] Muslims do not feel safe any more
> Message-ID: <4d1ae3c6-1266-7974-5f4f-487cd1cf9a93 at riseup.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> On 15/06/16 14:25, Thomas Delrue wrote:
> > On 06/15/2016 12:44 PM, Maria Al-Masani wrote:
> >
> >> I briefly supported Trump before he started going crazy.
> > There was a /before/? (sorry, couldn't resist)
>
> me neither: there was??!!
> >
> >> I support the right of the left and right wing to discuss their ideas,
> but
> >> when it comes to bismerching and dehumanizing a group in society -
> whether
> >> it's men "it's the patriachy" or "all Muslims" for evil, allowing it
> hurts
> >> the quality of life.
> > I'm willing to believe the first part of your claim ("I support the
> > right of the left and right wing to discuss their ideas"),
> > unfortunately, it is followed with a 'but' and what follows seems to
> > create a discrepancy with the initial claim.
> > Anyone has the right to free speech, but no-one has the right to force
> > you to listen.
> It seems Thomas you are from a country that privilege free speech over
> any other human right. To know what are we talking about when we claim
> about freedom of speech there is a document from NU that explain that
> human right (notice than HR are not ideal ideas descending from Heaven:
> they are agreements made after abuses from a part of the humanity
> against other people, in fact US didn't ratify most of the HR agreements).*
> Free speech cannot be allowed if it contain racial, religious, gender or
> any other similar discrimination, because could become an apology for
> xenophobia, etc.
> There is a thin line between freedom of speech and apology of
> violence/crimes/etc. and not always is simple to identify where one ends
> and the other starts, then sorry, but is not as simply as "you have the
> right of don't listen to it".
>
> >> What should people like us do?
> > First: don't curtail or limit free speech. Don't even suggest limiting
> > it; you wouldn't like the world we'd end up with. Sure, you'll hear
> > things you won't like and don't agree with, but so what, you're an adult
> > and you can deal with that!
> >
> > Second: turn off your television and get off of twitter, facebook and
> > the like, in fact, stay off of the intertubes for a couple of days. Get
> > out of the echo chamber and go out campaigning for what you believe in.
> >
> > Exercise your right to free speech, while you can, until someone who
> > doesn't like what /you/ are saying, tries to censor /you/.
>
> Good advices. I will suggest one more to Maria and the rest of the
> readers too: take a look at http://sister-hood.com/ and to the work of
> this amazing woman, Deeyah Khan http://deeyah.com/. She is an
> inspiration and a dedicate worker for Human Rights and she understand
> particularly the muslims people -specially women- situation on the light
> of the "war against terrorism". You will not regret of reading and
> contact those references I'm sharing with you.
>
> In hope of peace,
>
> Cristina, from Argentina
>
> *https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_treaties_
> unsigned_or_unratified_by_the_United_States
>
> --
> Esta comunicaci?n puede ser ilegalmente recogida y almacenada por la
> Agencia Nacional de Seguridad de los EEUU (NSA) + otras.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/liberationtech/
> attachments/20160705/d34eecbb/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 20
> Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 21:29:04 -0700
> From: Al Billings <albill at openbuddha.com>
> To: liberationtech <liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu>
> Subject: Re: [liberationtech] Muslims do not feel safe any more
> Message-ID: <C67BB363-C9D3-4DE4-ABB6-7646C9B97487 at openbuddha.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Maybe not in your country...
>
> > On Jul 5, 2016, at 7:45 PM, Cristina [efecto99] <efecto99 at riseup.net>
> wrote:
> >
> > Free speech cannot be allowed if it contain racial, religious, gender or
> any other similar discrimination, because could become an apology for
> xenophobia, etc.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 21
> Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2016 06:28:27 -0700
> From: Yosem Companys <companys at stanford.edu>
> To: Liberation Technologies <liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu>
> Subject: [liberationtech] What were the first instances of hacking 4
> Whisteblowing?
> Message-ID:
> <CANhci9ESQZTOvKgW-B_Qpbe6GfogV+or5Th=yQvyHP8VxxfOE
> g at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> From: Gabriella "Biella" Coleman <enid.coleman at mcgill.ca>
>
> Hi all,
>
> I am writing a piece that is trying to historicize direct action
> hacking/whistelblowing and am trying to pin point any early examples
> of hackers hacking in order to access and then leak the
> information/emails to expose wrong doing..
>
> Obviously Anonymous popularized the tactic and prior to them there are
> many examples of black hat groups
> engaging in revenge hacking/doxing (and the leaked emails likely had
> that sort of relevant information) but I am looking for examples that
> pre-date Anonymous and that more explicitly follow the whistle blowing
> mold, if this exists.
>
> One of the earliest and only examples I have is a hack against the
> Church of Scientology (which is very fitting but)...
>
> Just to be clear too: I am not interested in early hacktivist
> interventions per se, like DDoS, or web site defacements, or even
> dumping of data like credit cards for politics sabotage, but only one
> instance: whereby the hack led to evidence (via documents or emails)
> of wrong doing.
>
> Thanks!
> Biella
>
>
> --
> Gabriella Coleman
> Wolfe Chair in Scientific and Technological Literacy
> Department of Art History & Communication Studies
> McGill University
> 853 Sherbrooke Street West
> Montreal, PQ
> H3A 0G5
> http://gabriellacoleman.org/
> 514-398-8572
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 22
> Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2016 10:07:21 -0400
> From: Thomas Delrue <thomas at epistulae.net>
> To: liberationtech <liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu>,
> efecto99 at riseup.net
> Subject: Re: [liberationtech] Muslims do not feel safe any more
> Message-ID: <577D1099.3090203 at epistulae.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
>
> On 07/05/2016 10:45 PM, Cristina [efecto99] wrote:
> >>> I support the right of the left and right wing to discuss their ideas,
> but
> >>> when it comes to bismerching and dehumanizing a group in society -
> whether
> >>> it's men "it's the patriachy" or "all Muslims" for evil, allowing it
> hurts
> >>> the quality of life.
> >> I'm willing to believe the first part of your claim ("I support the
> >> right of the left and right wing to discuss their ideas"),
> >> unfortunately, it is followed with a 'but' and what follows seems to
> >> create a discrepancy with the initial claim.
> >> Anyone has the right to free speech, but no-one has the right to force
> >> you to listen.
> > It seems Thomas you are from a country that privilege free speech over
> > any other human right.
>
> Have you also considered the possibility that I may be from a country
> that has experienced complete & total surveillance and that it could be
> this experience which informs my opinions on free speech and the
> surveillance used to enforce said speech and thought?
>
> > To know what are we talking about when we claim
> > about freedom of speech there is a document from NU that explain that
> > human right (notice than HR are not ideal ideas descending from Heaven:
> > they are agreements made after abuses from a part of the humanity
> > against other people, in fact US didn't ratify most of the HR
> agreements).*
>
> You're moving the goal posts. We were talking about whether or not
> social and other media should (auto-)censor an undefined set of ideas &
> opinions, regardless of merit or lack thereof, and that it should start
> with what the original author doesn't like.
> Dragging in ratification of agreements by certain countries (with an
> accusing finger pointed at one particular one) is trying to move the
> goal posts and is misdirecting the discussion.
>
> Human rights are indeed not 'descended from heaven' and I don't claim
> they are. However, just like 'brush your teeth twice a day' isn't
> divinely inspired either, it's still an good idea.
>
> Instead, free speech, being the right that we are talking about in this
> case, is something that we've thought about; and we have figured out,
> based on our current understanding of human nature, society and its
> dynamics, that having & protecting it would be a good idea because a
> whole other slew of Bad Things(tm) would happen otherwise:
> self-censorship and though suppression are just a measly start of what
> not only could happen but already has happened and is happening in
> practice (e.g.
> https://theintercept.com/2016/04/28/new-study-shows-mass-
> surveillance-breeds-meekness-fear-and-self-censorship/
> - note: mass surveillance, implemented by for instance social media in
> the suggestion of the original poster, would be required for the
> censorship that was advocated for in the original post).
>
> If you restrict free speech, you set the rules and get to frame the
> discussion, you get to determine what is and isn't an allowed argument.
> Thus, you are the victor by default. The terms Show Trial and Kangaroo
> Court come to my mind spontaneously.
> Limiting free speech isn't about protecting against harm or
> discrimination, it is about protecting against you losing, whether you
> are an individual, a group of individuals or a state.
> *That* is what the reigning in of free speech is about!
>
> > Free speech cannot be allowed if it contain racial, religious, gender or
> > any other similar discrimination, because could become an apology for
> > xenophobia, etc.
> > There is a thin line between freedom of speech and apology of
> > violence/crimes/etc. and not always is simple to identify where one ends
> > and the other starts, then sorry, but is not as simply as "you have the
> > right of don't listen to it".
>
> I so very, very, VERY much and fundamentally disagree with you! And
> isn't it nice that we are allowed to disagree and have the conversation?
>
> I never hear individuals arguing for the position of
> free-speech-but-not-too-much-of-it consider the possibility of being on
> the receiving end of the stick; they always argue from the position that
> assumes that they are on the deciding end of the stick, that they know
> what is best in order to determine what should or shouldn't be allowed,
> and I find that very telling. Sure, I am 'begging the question', if you
> will.
>
> Enforcement of what is and isn't acceptable to be expressed is done by
> humans and groups of humans. They all have their own agenda and going by
> a good amount of recorded history, that agenda is usually not very
> favourable to the out-group. Both you and I are someone else's out-group.
>
> Really, think of free speech this way: free speech enables idiots (your
> own definition thereof) to self-identify.
> By allowing anyone to say whatever they want and as loudly as they want,
> at least I can decide for my own which ones I do and do not want to
> interact with and if so, how much I want to engage with them. On top of
> that, by having free speech, I can decide to say the exact opposite of
> what the 'reciprocal idiot' is saying in order to counter it.
>
> I am also willing to listen to opinions that are entirely contradictory
> to my world view. Not because they are right or wrong but because they
> give me a glimpse of how others view the world and provide me an
> opportunity to communicate with them about things that we may or may not
> agree on. This opens up the opportunity for me to learn new things,
> change my mind, and on a very rare occasion, change someone else's mind.
> If being offended occasionally is a side effect of that, I'll happily
> take that with it, I'm a responsible adult and can deal with being
> offended from time to time. I'll surely do a little bit of sulking and
> then move on.
>
> If you think that by censoring opinions and taking away what you call
> 'harmful speech' you will eradicate xenophobia, violence, etc..., I have
> a bridge to sell you (sturdy bridge, very cheap!). All you will
> accomplish instead is to make it harder for /you/ to find them, you'll
> filter them from /your/ world, but not from reality.
> Those already pre-disposed to these opinions will still find these
> 'harmful opinions' and get sucked deeper and deeper into them without a
> reasonable way out that is not criminalized or doesn't require
> 'intensive re-education'.
> I would rather have these ideas be in the open so we can argue about
> them instead of having these opinions and ideas go underground where
> they grow & fester without anyone noticing until it is too late.
>
> Free speech is scary, and it should be. It should be scary to those in
> power and it should be scary to you too because it is supposed to be
> that way!
> One may hear things one doesn't like & feels offended by and/or it may
> upend an entire world view; that means that you, or I, were wrong in
> earlier held opinions! And it's never nice to learn you were wrong
> before or be offended, but so what? So what?!
>
> I, for one, like being offended occasionally, because it tells me that
> there are others out there, who aren't like me and don't act, look or
> think like me. I may even learn something from them...maybe...
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 23
> Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2016 12:45:49 +0200
> From: "Noella Edelmann" <Noella.Edelmann at donau-uni.ac.at>
> To: <liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu>
> Subject: [liberationtech] CfP CeDEM17 Conference for E-Democracy and
> Open Government 17-19 May 2017 (Danube University Krems, Austria)
> Message-ID: <577CFD7D020000DA000A2472 at gwgwia.donau-uni.ac.at>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
> Apologies for cross-posting, but do join us as CeDEM17!
>
> ************************************************************
> ************************
> CeDEM17 Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government 17-19 May 2017
> (Danube University Krems, Austria)
> CeDEM17 Details: www.donau-uni.ac.at/cedem17
> CeDEM17 CfP: http://tinyurl.com/cedem17cfp
> CeDEM on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/cedem.community
> Chairs: Peter Parycek and Noella Edelmann (Department for E-Governance and
> Administration, Danube University Krems, Austria)
> ************************************************************
> ************************
> The international Conference for e-Democracy and Open Government brings
> together e-democracy, e-participation and open government specialists
> working in academia, politics, government and business to critically
> analyse the innovations, issues, ideas and challenges in the networked
> societies of the digital age. We look forward to your submissions (full
> papers, workshop proposals, reflections, PhD papers) and seeing you in
> Krems!
>
> CeDEM17 Tracks:
> E-Democracy and E-Participation
> Social Media, Public Administration and Citizen Engagement
> Open Collaborative Government
> Open Data, Transparency and Open Innovation
> Citizen's Participation in Democratic Governance Processes through ICT in
> Africa
> Open Access
> Communities, Participation and Civic Engagement
> Information Visualization for the People
> Connected Smart City
> E-Voting
> Emerging Issues in E-Democracy and Open Government
> Identity, Privacy, and Security
>
> Submissions can be:
> Full Papers
> Workshop Proposals
> Reflections
> PhD Colloquium
> Open Space
>
> We have a bursary for PhD students: http://tinyurl.com/cedem17phd
>
> Important Dates:
> *Deadline for the submission of all papers, workshop proposals,
> reflections: 12 December 2016
> *Notification of acceptance: 13 February 2017
> *Camera-ready paper submission: 6 March 2017
>
> If you are interested in reviewing papers for CeDEM17, enter your detaills
> and expertise here: cedem17 people: http://tinyurl.com/cedem17people
>
> Looking forward to seeing you there!
>
> Kind regards
> Noella
>
>
>
>
>
> Noella Edelmann BA, MSc, MAS
> Research Fellow
>
> Department for E-Governance and Administration
> Danube University Krems
> Dr.-Karl-Dorrek-Strasse 30
> 3500 Krems
> Austria
> www.donau-uni.ac.at/egov
>
> CeDEM
> Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government
> www.donau-uni.ac.at/cedem
>
> JeDEM
> eJournal of eDemocracy and Open Government
> www.jedem.org
>
> Digital Society Lab
> http://digitalgovernment.wordpress.com/
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 24
> Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2016 03:24:40 -0300
> From: "Cristina [efecto99]" <efecto99 at riseup.net>
> To: liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu
> Subject: Re: [liberationtech] Muslims do not feel safe any more
> Message-ID: <be71a3a9-482b-6a9f-7af7-9a38153bc8f3 at riseup.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> On 06/07/16 01:29, Al Billings wrote:
> > Maybe not in your country...
> I'm talking about all countries that signed and ratified -at least- the
> American Convention of Human Rights... ups! US didn't!
>
> What strange "privilege" you have...
>
> >
> >> On Jul 5, 2016, at 7:45 PM, Cristina [efecto99] <efecto99 at riseup.net>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Free speech cannot be allowed if it contain racial, religious, gender
> or any other similar discrimination, because could become an apology for
> xenophobia, etc.
>
>
> --
> Esta comunicaci?n puede ser ilegalmente recogida y almacenada por la
> Agencia Nacional de Seguridad de los EEUU (NSA) + otras.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/liberationtech/
> attachments/20160706/0ebf7f30/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 25
> Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 22:35:34 -0700
> From: tmr <pixtas at gmail.com>
> To: liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu
> Subject: [liberationtech] is voice rather than vision a better way to
> be social online?
> Message-ID:
> <CAJDN9ZaPU5MW53OHC+o+di5AgAVpMz=R22mKnk9JdmBeOrk8+
> A at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> we are beta testing SVR (sound virtual reality). our app currently host
> 80,000 questions & answers, created & played each day, but in one
> dimensional twitter like list. with SVR, we are experimenting with people
> speaking to our right, center, left, near and far as we move through the
> 'hall', gravitating toward and joining the conversations we find
> interesting. could use more beta testers if this may be of interest to you.
>
> thanks,
> tom
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/liberationtech/
> attachments/20160705/95dcc7a5/attachment.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> --
> Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations
> of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/
> mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change
> password by emailing moderator at companys at stanford.edu.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of liberationtech Digest, Vol 270, Issue 1
> **********************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/liberationtech/attachments/20161123/fdfaa24b/attachment.html>
More information about the liberationtech
mailing list