Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Human Rights & Technology


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

Human Rights & Technology

  1. HUMAN RIGHTS & TECHNOLOGY <ul><li>Mathias Klang </li></ul>
  2. TECHNOLOGY & RIGHTS? <ul><li>Why & What </li></ul>
  3. TECHNOLOGY IS NOT ABOUT DEMOCRACY <ul><li>Technology = Communication = Society = Democracy </li></ul>
  4. Communication Organization Protest Access Religion Privacy Culture Education Press
  6. LIFE IS ORGANIZED AROUND TECHNOLOGY… <ul><li>… and it always has been…. </li></ul>
  7. BY CONTROLLING TECHNOLOGY WE CONTROL SOCIETY <ul><li>Regulation of technology is the regulation of democracy </li></ul>
  10. SO WHAT?
  12. SO WHAT?
  13. DISRUPTIVE TECHNOLOGY <ul><li>The disruption occurs when the technology, which is introduced effects the social arrangements around which we build our lives </li></ul>
  16. ANTIDOTE? <ul><li>Free Software </li></ul>
  17. REGULATION <ul><li>From Command and Control to Fuller & Lessig </li></ul>
  18. WHAT’S WRONG WITH COMMAND AND CONTROL? <ul><li>It relies to heavily upon coercion and cooperation. </li></ul>
  19. ONLINE OFFLINE <ul><li>“ We are forming our own Social Contract. This governance will arise according to the conditions of our world, not yours. Our world is different.” (Barlow 1996) </li></ul>
  20. Regulatory Metaphor Law Social Rules Contextual & programed Architecture
  21. Lessig (1999)
  22. CASES
  23. SPEECH & CENSORSHIP <ul><li>Case 1: </li></ul>Censorship
  24. Information Control <ul><li>Local </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Client based (software4parents, matewatcher) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Organizational </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Server based </li></ul></ul><ul><li>National </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Backbone/gateway based </li></ul></ul>Censorship
  25. Filtering methods <ul><li>Inclusion - whitelist </li></ul><ul><li>Exclusion - blacklist </li></ul><ul><li>Content analysis </li></ul>Censorship
  26. Privatizing Censorship <ul><li>Non-technical/self censorship </li></ul><ul><ul><li>“ Public Pledge of Self-Regulation & Professional Ethics for China Internet Industry” </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Responsibility on the signatories: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Inspect & monitor foreign & domestic sites </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Block harmful information </li></ul></ul>Censorship
  27. SURVEILLANCE <ul><li>Case 2: </li></ul>Surveillance
  28. Integrity <ul><li>That the individual shall have full protection in person and in property is a principle as old as the common law; but it has been necessary from time to time to define anew the exact nature and extent of such protection. </li></ul><ul><li>Brandeis & Warren 1890 </li></ul>Surveillance
  29. <ul><li>Louis Brandeis & Samuel Warren &quot;The Right to Privacy,&quot; 4 Harvard Law Review 193-220 (1890-91) </li></ul>Surveillance
  30. Technology 1888 <ul><li>1888 - Kodak nr 1 </li></ul><ul><li>First mass produced box </li></ul><ul><li>Simple and portable </li></ul><ul><li>Shot exposure </li></ul>Surveillance
  31. Paparazzi (1898) Surveillance
  32. Reklam (1902) <ul><li>Robertson v. Rochester Folding Box Co (1902) </li></ul><ul><li>The court did not accept Brandeis & Warrens argument of a “common law” right </li></ul>Surveillance
  33. Hidden camera 1928 <ul><li>Execution of Ruth Snyder 1928 </li></ul>Surveillance
  34. Surveillance Surveillance
  35. Little brothers A must for anyone who needs to protect their loved ones, home or business! Surveillance
  36. TARGETING TECHNOLOGY <ul><li>Case 3: The Lufthansa Case </li></ul>DoS
  37. Denial of Service - examples <ul><li>1998 DoS attack against the Mexican president’s website. </li></ul><ul><li>8,000 hacktivists participated to show their support for the Zapatistas. </li></ul><ul><li>In 2003 the electrohippies antiwar protest disrupted the PM’s webpage ( causing it to be unavailable on several occasions. </li></ul>DoS
  38. <ul><li>Three way handshake (Gibson: </li></ul>Denial of Service - technology DoS
  39. Denial of Service - the players <ul><li>The Electrohippies </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Practitioners </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Now on walkabout </li></ul></ul><ul><li>The Cult of the Dead Cow </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Claim the name Hacktivism </li></ul></ul>DoS
  40. <ul><li>Accountability: “…we do not try bury our identities from law enforcement authorities any authority could, if it chose to, track us down in a few hours.” </li></ul><ul><li>Popular participation: If people don't vote with their modems (rather than voting with their feet) the action would be an abject failure” </li></ul><ul><li>Symbolism rather than damage </li></ul>The Arguments: Electohippies DoS
  41. The Arguments 2: Dead Cow <ul><li>“ No rationale, even in the service of the highest ideals, makes them anything other than what they are -- illegal, unethical, and uncivil” (Ruffin 2000). </li></ul>DoS
  42. SOLIDARITY <ul><li>Case 4: Green Twitter, Location Tehran, Facebook for Monks </li></ul>
  43. <ul><li>Arik Fraimovich (@arikfr)set up & seeks support for the protesters in Iran. Support by “greening” the Twitter avatar </li></ul>
  44. ORGANISATION <ul><li>HSBC </li></ul><ul><li>FRA & the Bloggquake (bloggbävning) </li></ul>
  46. COMMUNICATION <ul><li>Case 6 </li></ul>
  51. Thank you!