Paper by Christopher Tucci, Gianluigi Viscusi and Heidi Gautschi: “In this article, we explore the use of hackathons and open data in corporations’ open innovation portfolios, addressing a new way for companies to tap into the creativity and innovation of early-stage startup culture, in this case applied to the food and nutrition sector. We study the first Open Food Data Hackdays, held on 10-11 February 2017 in Lausanne and Zurich. The aim of the overall project that the Hackdays event was part of was to use open food and nutrition data as a driver for business innovation. We see hackathons as a new tool in the innovation manager’s toolkit, a kind of live crowdsourcing exercise that goes beyond traditional ideation and develops a variety of prototypes and new ideas for business innovation. Companies then have the option of working with entrepreneurs and taking some of the ideas forward….(More)”.
(In)Equalities and Social (In)Visibilities in the Digital Age
Intro by Inês Amaral, Maria João Barata and Vasco Almeida to the Special issue of Interações: “The influence of new technologies in public and private spheres of society, rather than a reformulation, has given rise to a new social field and directly interferes with how we perceive the world, relate to it and to others. One should note that in Pierre Bourdieu›s (2001) theory, field arises as a configuration of socially distributed relations.
Progressively, a universe of socialisation has emerged and consolidated: cyber-space. Although virtual, it exists and produces effects. It can be defined as the space boosted by the different digital communication platforms and assumes itself as an
individual communication model, allowing the receiver to be simultaneously emitter. Space of flows (Castells, 1996), cyberspace translates the social dimension of the Internet, enabling the diffusion of communication/information on a global scale. This causes an intense process of inclusion and exclusion of people in the network.
The reference to info-inclusive and info-excluded societies of the digital scenario is imperative when it is reflected in the geography of the new socio-technological spaces. The dynamics of these territories are directly associated with the way social,
demographic, economic and technological variables condition each other, revealing the potential for dissemination of information and knowledge through technologies.
In this special issue of the journal Interações we propose a reflection on (In)Equalities and Social (In)Visibilities in the Digital Age. The articles in the volume present research results and/or theoretical reflection on social visibilities and invisibilities
created by dynamics of media and digital inclusion and exclusion, relations between the digital and inequalities in different geographical, social and professional contexts, digital literacy and vulnerable social groups, conditioning created by technology to the individual in social context, among others….(More)”
Privacy and Interoperability Challenges Could Limit the Benefits of Education Technology
Report by Katharina Ley Best and John F. Pane: “The expansion of education technology is transforming the learning environment in classrooms, schools, school systems, online, and at home. The rise of education technology brings with it an increased opportunity for the collection and application of data, which are valuable resources for educators, schools, policymakers, researchers, and software developers.
RAND researchers examine some of the possible implications of growing data collection and availability related to education technology. Specifically, this Perspective discusses potential data infrastructure challenges that could limit data usefulness, consider data privacy implications in an education technology context, and review privacy principles that could help educators and policymakers evaluate the changing education data privacy landscape in anticipation of potential future changes to regulations and best practices….(More)”.
Open Data, Grey Data, and Stewardship: Universities at the Privacy Frontier.
Paper by Christine L. Borgman: “As universities recognize the inherent value in the data they collect and hold, they encounter unforeseen challenges in stewarding those data in ways that balance accountability, transparency, and protection of privacy, academic freedom, and intellectual property. Two parallel developments in academic data collection are converging: (1) open access requirements, whereby researchers must provide access to their data as a condition of obtaining grant funding or publishing results in journals; and (2) the vast accumulation of “grey data” about individuals in their daily activities of research, teaching, learning, services, and administration.
The boundaries between research and grey data are blurring, making it more difficult to assess the risks and responsibilities associated with any data collection. Many sets of data, both research and grey, fall outside privacy regulations such as HIPAA, FERPA, and PII. Universities are exploiting these data for research, learning analytics, faculty evaluation, strategic decisions, and other sensitive matters. Commercial entities are besieging universities with requests for access to data or for partnerships to mine them. The privacy frontier facing research universities spans open access practices, uses and misuses of data, public records requests, cyber risk, and curating data for privacy protection. This Article explores the competing values inherent in data stewardship and makes recommendations for practice by drawing on the pioneering work of the University of California in privacy and information security, data governance, and cyber risk….(More)”.
The latest tools for sexual assault victims: Smartphone apps and software
Peter Holley at the Washington Post: “…For much of the past decade, dozens of apps and websites have been created to help survivors of sexual assault electronically record and report such crimes. They are designed to assist an enormous pool of potential victims. The Rape Abuse & Incest National Network reports that more than 11 percent of all college students — both graduate and undergraduate — experience rape or sexual assault through physical force, violence or incapacitation. Despite the prevalence of such incidents, less than 10 percent of victims on college campuses report their assaults, according to the National Sexual Violence Resource Center.
The apps range from electronic reporting tools such as JDoe to legal guides that provide victims with access to law enforcement and crisis counseling. Others help victims save and share relevant medical information in case of an assault. The app Uask includes a “panic button” that connects users with 911 or allows them to send emergency messages to people with their location.
Since its debut in 2015, Callisto’s software has been adopted by 12 college campuses — including Stanford, the University of Oregon and St. John’s University — and made available to more than 160,000 students, according to the company. Sexual assault survivors who visit Callisto are six times as likely to report, and 15 percent of those survivors have matched with another victim of the same assailant, the company claims.
Peter Cappelli, a professor of management at the Wharton School and director of Wharton’s Center for Human Resources, told NPR that he sees potential problems with survivors “crowdsourcing” their decision to report assaults.
“I don’t think we want to have a standard where the decisions are crowdsourced,” he said. “I think what you want is to tell people [that] the criteria [for whether or not to report] are policy related, not personally related, and you should bring forward anything that fits the criteria, not [based on] whether you feel enough other people have made the complaint or not. We want to sometimes encourage people to do things they might feel uncomfortable about.”…(More)”.
Managing the Consumer Data Deluge
Joe Marion at Healthcare Informatics: “By now, everyone is aware of Apple’s recent announcement of an ECG capability on its latest watch. It joins an expanding list of portable or in-home devices for monitoring cardiac and other functions. The Apple device takes advantage of an established ECG device from AliveCor, which had previously introduced the CardiaMobile ECG capture device for Android and iOS devices. More sophisticated monitoring devices such as implantable devices can monitor heart function in heart failure cases.
Many facilities are implementing video-conferencing type capabilities for patient consultation for non-life-threatening issues. These might include the capture of information such as a “selfie” of a rash that is uploaded to the physician for assessment.
Given that many of these devices are designed to collect diagnostic data outside of the primary care facility, there is a growing tsunami in terms of the amount of diagnostic data that will need to be managed. Since most of this data is created outside of the primary care facility, there are several questions that need to be addressed.
Who owns the data? Let’s take the case of ECG data captured from an Apple or AliveCor device. The data is being acquired by the user, and it is initially stored on the watch or phone device, and may utilize some initial diagnosis application. The whole purpose of capturing this data is to monitor cardiac function, particularly fibrillation, and to share it with a medical professional. In the case of these devices the data can be optionally uploaded to an AliveCor cloud application for storage. Thus, the assumption would be that the patient is the “owner” of the data. But what if it is necessary to transmit this data to a professional such as a cardiologist? Is it then the responsibility of the receiving entity to store and manage the data? Or, is it assumed that the patient is responsible for maintaining the data?
Once data is brought into a provider organization for diagnostic purposes, it seems reasonable that the facility would be responsible for maintaining that data, just as they do today for radiographic studies that are taken. If, for example a cardiologist dictates a report on ECG results, the results most likely end up in the EHR, but what becomes of the diagnostic data?
Who is responsible for maintaining the data? As stated above, if the acquired data results in a report of some type, the report most likely becomes the legal document in the EHR, but for legal purposes, many facilities feel the need to store the original diagnostic data for some period of time….
Who is the originator of the data collection? The informed patient may wish to acquire diagnostic data, such as ECG or blood pressure information, but are they prepared to manage that data? If they are concerned about episodes of atrial fibrillation, then there may be an incentive to acquire and manage such data.
Conversely, many in-home devices are initiated by care providers, such as remote monitoring of heart failure. In these instances, the acquisition devices are most likely provided to the patient for the physician’s benefit. Therefore, the onus is on the provider to manage the acquired data, and it would become the facility’s responsibility for managing data storage.
Another question is how valuable is such data to the management of the patient? For devices such as the Apple watch ECG capability, is it important to the physician to have access to that data over the long term?…(More)”.
What is the true value of data? New series on the return on investment of data interventions
Case studies prepared by Jessica Espey and Hayden Dahmm for SDSN TReNDS: “But what is the ROI of investing in data for altruistic means–e.g., for sustainable development?
Today, we are launching a series of case studies to answer this question in collaboration with the Global Partnership on Sustainable Development Data. The ten examples we will profile range from earth observation data gathered via satellites to investments in national statistics systems, with costs from just a few hundred thousand dollars (US) per year to millions over decades.
The series includes efforts to revamp existing statistical systems. It also supports the growing movement to invest in less traditional approaches to data collection and analysis beyond statistical systems–such as through private sector data sources or emerging technologies enabled by the growth of the information and communications technology (ICT) sector.
Some highlights from the first five case studies–available now:
An SMS-based system called mTRAC, implemented in Uganda, has supported significant improvements in the country’s health system–including halving of response time to disease outbreaks and reducing medication stock-outs, the latter of which resulted in fewer malaria-related deaths.
NASA’s and the U.S. Geological Survey’s Landsat program–satellites that provide imagery known as earth observation data–is enabling discoveries and interventions across the science and health sectors, and provided an estimated worldwide economic benefit as high as US$2.19 billion as of 2011.
BudgIT, a civil society organization making budget data in Nigeria more accessible to citizens through machine-readable PDFs and complementary online/offline campaigns, is empowering citizens to partake in the federal budget process.
International nonprofit BRAC is ensuring mothers and infants in the slums of Bangladesh are not left behind through a data-informed intervention combining social mapping, local censuses, and real-time data sharing. BRAC estimates that from 2008 to 2017, 1,087 maternal deaths were averted out of the 2,476 deaths that would have been expected based on national statistics.
Atlantic City police are developing new approaches to their patrolling, community engagement, and other activities through risk modeling based on crime and other data, resulting in reductions in homicides and shooting injuries (26 percent) and robberies (37 percent) in just the first year of implementation….(More)”.
Ctrl Alt Delete: How Politics and the Media Crashed Our Democracy
Book by Tom Baldwin: We all know something has gone wrong: people hate politics, loathe the media and are now scared of each other too. Journalist and one-time senior political advisor Tom Baldwin tells the riveting–often terrifying–story of how a tidal wave of information overwhelmed democracy’s sandcastle defenses against extremism and falsehood.
Ctrl Alt Delete exposes the struggle for control between a rapacious 24-hour media and terrified politicians that has loosened those leaders’ grip on truth as the internet rips the ground out from under them. It explains how dependency on data, algorithms and digital technology brought about the rise of the Alt Right, the Alt Left and a triumphant army of trolls driving people apart. And it warns of the rise of those threatening to delete what remains of democracy: resurgent populists in Westminster, the White House and the Kremlin, but also–just as often–liberals fearful of mob rule.
This is an explosive, brutally honest and sometimes funny account of what we all got wrong, and how to put it right again. It will change the way you look at the world–and especially the everyday technology that crashed our democracy….(More)”.
Tech Was Supposed to Be Society’s Great Equalizer. What Happened?
Derek Thompson at The Atlantic: “Historians may look back at the early 21st century as the Gilded Age 2.0. Not since the late 1800s has the U.S. been so defined by the triad of rapid technological change, gaping economic inequality, and sudden social upheaval.
Ironically, the digital revolution was supposed to be an equalizer. The early boosters of the Internet sprang from the counterculture of the 1960s and the New Communalist movement. Some of them, like Stewart Brand, hoped to spread the sensibilities of hippie communes throughout the wilderness of the web. Others saw the internet more broadly as an opportunity to build a society that amended the failures of the physical world.
But in the last few years, the most successful tech companies have built a new economy that often accentuates the worst parts of the old world they were bent on replacing. Facebook’s platform amplifies preexisting biases—both of ideology and race—and political propaganda. Amazon’s dominion over online retail has allowed it to squash competition, not unlike the railroad monopolies of the 19th century. And Apple, in designing the most profitable product in modern history, has also designed another instrument of harmful behavioral addiction….
The only way to make technology that helps a broad array of people is to consult a broad array of people to make that technology. But the computer industry has a multi-decade history of gender discrimination. It is, perhaps, the industry’s original sin. After World War II, Great Britain was the world’s leader in computing. Its efforts to decipher Nazi codes led to the creation of the world’s first programmable digital computer. But within 30 years, the British advantage in computing and software had withered, in part due to explicit efforts to push women out of the computer-science workforce, according to Marie Hicks’ history, Programmed Inequality.
The tech industry isn’t a digital hippie commune, anymore. It’s the new aristocracy. The largest and fastest growing companies in the world, in both the U.S. and China, are tech giants. It’s our responsibility, as users and voters, to urge these companies to use their political and social power responsibly. “I think absolute power corrupts absolutely,” Broussard said. “In the history of America, we’ve had gilded ages before and we’ve had companies that have had giant monopolies over industries and it hasn’t worked out so great. So I think that one of the things that we need to do as a society is we need to take off our blinders when it comes to technology and we need to kind of examine our techno-chauvinist beliefs and say what kind of a world do we want?”…(More)”.
The secret data collected by dockless bikes is helping cities map your movement
Elizabeth Woyke at Technology Review: “Ask Tim Corcoran about the most popular destinations for bike-share trips in South Bend, Indiana, and he can give you a list, or even GPS latitude and longitude coordinates. As the city’s planning director, Corcoran is responsible for overseeing a program that enables residents to rent bicycles via a mobile app and then pick them up and drop them off pretty much wherever and whenever they want. He doesn’t actually run the rental service, though. Lime, a Silicon Valley startup, manages the program and keeps Corcoran in the loop via a steady stream of data about bike activity in South Bend.
Lime is able to collect this information because its bikes, like all those in dockless bike-share programs, are built to operate without fixed stations or corrals. …In the 18 months or so since dockless bike-share arrived in the US, the service has spread to at least 88 American cities. (On the provider side, at least 10 companies have jumped into the business; Lime is one of the largest.) Some of those cities now have more than a year of data related to the programs, and they’ve started gleaning insights and catering to the increased number of cyclists on their streets.
South Bend is one of those leaders. It asked Lime to share data when operations kicked off in June 2017. At first, Lime provided the information in spreadsheets, but in early 2018 the startup launched a browser-based dashboard where cities could see aggregate statistics for their residents, such as how many of them rented bikes, how many trips they took, and how far and long they rode. Lime also added heat maps that reveal where most rides occur within a city and a tool for downloading data that shows individual trips without identifying the riders. Corcoran can glance at his dashboard and see, for example, that people in South Bend have taken 340,000 rides, traveled 158,000 miles, and spent more than 7 million minutes on Lime bikes since the company started service. He can also see there are 700 Lime bikes active in the city, down from an all-time high of 1,200 during the University of Notre Dame’s 2017 football season….(More)”.