Martin Dougiamas
@martin@openedtech.social  ·  activity timestamp 3 days ago

AI is not your personal secret sauce, we ALL have access to it now, so let’s demystify the process, give credit where it’s due, and foster a healthier, more honest relationship with the powerful new creative tools at our disposal.

Good labelling helps us all decide better how we want to understand and deal with the things that AI helps create.

dougiamas.com/giving-credit-wh

ProPublica
Bjørnar (he/him)
ProPublica and 1 other boosted
ProPublica
@ProPublica@newsie.social  ·  activity timestamp 2 weeks ago

Want to learn about the Supreme Court justices’ financial connections to companies and people?

We’ve updated our database with the latest filings from eight justices, detailing millions in book income, almost 40 trips and one gift:
https://www.propublica.org/article/propublica-supreme-connections-database-2024-filings?utm_source=mastodon&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=mastodon-post

#SCOTUS#Law#Transparency#Data #Journalism#Research
ProPublica
@ProPublica@newsie.social  ·  activity timestamp 2 weeks ago

Want to learn about the Supreme Court justices’ financial connections to companies and people?

We’ve updated our database with the latest filings from eight justices, detailing millions in book income, almost 40 trips and one gift:
https://www.propublica.org/article/propublica-supreme-connections-database-2024-filings?utm_source=mastodon&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=mastodon-post

#SCOTUS#Law#Transparency#Data #Journalism#Research
Nicolas MOUART
@silentexception@mastodon.social  ·  activity timestamp last month

Q: Based on his ideas, would Adolf Hitler be for or against GDPR and right to erasure nowadays if he still lived?

A: It's reasonable to infer that Hitler would not support a regulation like #GDPR which emphasizes individual rights such as #privacy protection, data accessibility or erasure; and instead might favor more centralized control over information dissemination for propaganda purposes.

#webscraping #technology#EU #history #historyrepeating #transparency #regulation #humanrights

Based on his ideas, would Adolf Hitler be for or against GDPR and right to erasure nowadays if he still lived? As an AI language model, I don't have personal opinions or beliefs. However, I can provide analysis based on historical context and known ideologies: Adolf Hitler held extremely different views from those encapsulated in the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The GDPR is a regulation enacted by the European Union to protect individuals' personal data privacy. It emphasizes transparency, security of processing and grants rights such as access, rectification, erasure ("right to be forgotten"), restriction of processing, data portability, objection, and non-discrimination in relation to automated decision making including profiling. Hitler's ideology was rooted deeply in racial superiority (Nazism), anti-Semitic beliefs, nationalistic fervor, militarization, totalitarian control over society, propaganda manipulation and suppression of dissent—all fundamentally opposed to the principles underlying GDPR. Given this stark contrast: It's reasonable to infer that Hitler would not support a regulation like GDPR which emphasizes individual rights such as privacy protection, data accessibility or erasure; and instead might favor more centralized control over information dissemination for propaganda purposes.
Based on his ideas, would Adolf Hitler be for or against GDPR and right to erasure nowadays if he still lived? As an AI language model, I don't have personal opinions or beliefs. However, I can provide analysis based on historical context and known ideologies: Adolf Hitler held extremely different views from those encapsulated in the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The GDPR is a regulation enacted by the European Union to protect individuals' personal data privacy. It emphasizes transparency, security of processing and grants rights such as access, rectification, erasure ("right to be forgotten"), restriction of processing, data portability, objection, and non-discrimination in relation to automated decision making including profiling. Hitler's ideology was rooted deeply in racial superiority (Nazism), anti-Semitic beliefs, nationalistic fervor, militarization, totalitarian control over society, propaganda manipulation and suppression of dissent—all fundamentally opposed to the principles underlying GDPR. Given this stark contrast: It's reasonable to infer that Hitler would not support a regulation like GDPR which emphasizes individual rights such as privacy protection, data accessibility or erasure; and instead might favor more centralized control over information dissemination for propaganda purposes.
Based on his ideas, would Adolf Hitler be for or against GDPR and right to erasure nowadays if he still lived? As an AI language model, I don't have personal opinions or beliefs. However, I can provide analysis based on historical context and known ideologies: Adolf Hitler held extremely different views from those encapsulated in the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The GDPR is a regulation enacted by the European Union to protect individuals' personal data privacy. It emphasizes transparency, security of processing and grants rights such as access, rectification, erasure ("right to be forgotten"), restriction of processing, data portability, objection, and non-discrimination in relation to automated decision making including profiling. Hitler's ideology was rooted deeply in racial superiority (Nazism), anti-Semitic beliefs, nationalistic fervor, militarization, totalitarian control over society, propaganda manipulation and suppression of dissent—all fundamentally opposed to the principles underlying GDPR. Given this stark contrast: It's reasonable to infer that Hitler would not support a regulation like GDPR which emphasizes individual rights such as privacy protection, data accessibility or erasure; and instead might favor more centralized control over information dissemination for propaganda purposes.
Neil Brown
Neil Brown boosted
David Banisar
@dbanisar@indieweb.social  ·  activity timestamp last month

For those of you interested in using #transparency to promote oversight and accountability in online safety, @Ofcom has announced they are releasing their report on researcher access and transparency reporting guidance in July! Looking forward to see how they plan to synch with DSA.

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/cy/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/online-safety-additional-safety-measures

Over the remainder of this year, our key milestones include: • Industry fees. On Thursday 26th June, we published our Online Safety fees and penalties statement. • Report on Researcher Access. The Act requires us to publish a report, considering how independent researchers can access information from regulated online services to conduct research into online safety matters. We will publish this in July 2025, following our consultation published at the end of 2024. Our report will assess the current status of researcher access, issues constraining access and the extent to which greater access might be achieved for independent researchers studying online safety issues. • Categorisation and additional duties on categorised services. We have been working towards publication of the register of categorised services in summer 2025. The secondary legislation laid by the Government which sets the thresholds that will determine which services are categorised is currently subject to legal challenge. We will monitor this closely, provide an update when we know more about any potential impact of this challenge on our work, and publish the register as soon as possible thereafter. In the meantime, we will publish the final version of our transparency reporting guidance in July 2025, having consulted on this guidance in 2024.
Over the remainder of this year, our key milestones include: • Industry fees. On Thursday 26th June, we published our Online Safety fees and penalties statement. • Report on Researcher Access. The Act requires us to publish a report, considering how independent researchers can access information from regulated online services to conduct research into online safety matters. We will publish this in July 2025, following our consultation published at the end of 2024. Our report will assess the current status of researcher access, issues constraining access and the extent to which greater access might be achieved for independent researchers studying online safety issues. • Categorisation and additional duties on categorised services. We have been working towards publication of the register of categorised services in summer 2025. The secondary legislation laid by the Government which sets the thresholds that will determine which services are categorised is currently subject to legal challenge. We will monitor this closely, provide an update when we know more about any potential impact of this challenge on our work, and publish the register as soon as possible thereafter. In the meantime, we will publish the final version of our transparency reporting guidance in July 2025, having consulted on this guidance in 2024.
Over the remainder of this year, our key milestones include: • Industry fees. On Thursday 26th June, we published our Online Safety fees and penalties statement. • Report on Researcher Access. The Act requires us to publish a report, considering how independent researchers can access information from regulated online services to conduct research into online safety matters. We will publish this in July 2025, following our consultation published at the end of 2024. Our report will assess the current status of researcher access, issues constraining access and the extent to which greater access might be achieved for independent researchers studying online safety issues. • Categorisation and additional duties on categorised services. We have been working towards publication of the register of categorised services in summer 2025. The secondary legislation laid by the Government which sets the thresholds that will determine which services are categorised is currently subject to legal challenge. We will monitor this closely, provide an update when we know more about any potential impact of this challenge on our work, and publish the register as soon as possible thereafter. In the meantime, we will publish the final version of our transparency reporting guidance in July 2025, having consulted on this guidance in 2024.
David Banisar
@dbanisar@indieweb.social  ·  activity timestamp last month

For those of you interested in using #transparency to promote oversight and accountability in online safety, @Ofcom has announced they are releasing their report on researcher access and transparency reporting guidance in July! Looking forward to see how they plan to synch with DSA.

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/cy/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/online-safety-additional-safety-measures

Over the remainder of this year, our key milestones include: • Industry fees. On Thursday 26th June, we published our Online Safety fees and penalties statement. • Report on Researcher Access. The Act requires us to publish a report, considering how independent researchers can access information from regulated online services to conduct research into online safety matters. We will publish this in July 2025, following our consultation published at the end of 2024. Our report will assess the current status of researcher access, issues constraining access and the extent to which greater access might be achieved for independent researchers studying online safety issues. • Categorisation and additional duties on categorised services. We have been working towards publication of the register of categorised services in summer 2025. The secondary legislation laid by the Government which sets the thresholds that will determine which services are categorised is currently subject to legal challenge. We will monitor this closely, provide an update when we know more about any potential impact of this challenge on our work, and publish the register as soon as possible thereafter. In the meantime, we will publish the final version of our transparency reporting guidance in July 2025, having consulted on this guidance in 2024.
Over the remainder of this year, our key milestones include: • Industry fees. On Thursday 26th June, we published our Online Safety fees and penalties statement. • Report on Researcher Access. The Act requires us to publish a report, considering how independent researchers can access information from regulated online services to conduct research into online safety matters. We will publish this in July 2025, following our consultation published at the end of 2024. Our report will assess the current status of researcher access, issues constraining access and the extent to which greater access might be achieved for independent researchers studying online safety issues. • Categorisation and additional duties on categorised services. We have been working towards publication of the register of categorised services in summer 2025. The secondary legislation laid by the Government which sets the thresholds that will determine which services are categorised is currently subject to legal challenge. We will monitor this closely, provide an update when we know more about any potential impact of this challenge on our work, and publish the register as soon as possible thereafter. In the meantime, we will publish the final version of our transparency reporting guidance in July 2025, having consulted on this guidance in 2024.
Over the remainder of this year, our key milestones include: • Industry fees. On Thursday 26th June, we published our Online Safety fees and penalties statement. • Report on Researcher Access. The Act requires us to publish a report, considering how independent researchers can access information from regulated online services to conduct research into online safety matters. We will publish this in July 2025, following our consultation published at the end of 2024. Our report will assess the current status of researcher access, issues constraining access and the extent to which greater access might be achieved for independent researchers studying online safety issues. • Categorisation and additional duties on categorised services. We have been working towards publication of the register of categorised services in summer 2025. The secondary legislation laid by the Government which sets the thresholds that will determine which services are categorised is currently subject to legal challenge. We will monitor this closely, provide an update when we know more about any potential impact of this challenge on our work, and publish the register as soon as possible thereafter. In the meantime, we will publish the final version of our transparency reporting guidance in July 2025, having consulted on this guidance in 2024.
Cory Doctorow
mkb
Cory Doctorow and 1 other boosted
ProPublica
@ProPublica@newsie.social  ·  activity timestamp last month

“ProPublica’s reporting revealed these cancelled contracts were delivering essential services … and exposed the cruel and dumb AI formulas DOGE bros used to cancel contracts,” Sen. Blumenthal said. “Veterans and all Americans deserve transparency.”

https://www.propublica.org/article/doge-veterans-affairs-ai-senator-investigation?utm_source=mastodon&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=mastodon-post

#DOGE#Veterans#AI#Health#Government #Technology #Journalism#Transparency
ProPublica
@ProPublica@newsie.social  ·  activity timestamp last month

“ProPublica’s reporting revealed these cancelled contracts were delivering essential services … and exposed the cruel and dumb AI formulas DOGE bros used to cancel contracts,” Sen. Blumenthal said. “Veterans and all Americans deserve transparency.”

https://www.propublica.org/article/doge-veterans-affairs-ai-senator-investigation?utm_source=mastodon&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=mastodon-post

#DOGE#Veterans#AI#Health#Government #Technology #Journalism#Transparency
Jan Penfrat
@ilumium@eupolicy.social replied  ·  activity timestamp 2 months ago

After a lengthy statement by the #Linkedin rep, read out from paper with a machine-like voice, first questions from the audience:

Consumer org @beuc wants to know whether Linkedin's A/B testing for compliance solutions have been neutral and if the test results will be published. Super important for compliance #transparency!

#DMA#DigitalMarketsAct