India Update: Talk, National Law University, New Delhi India

Chinmayi Arun, Research Director, Centre for Communication Governance, National Law University, Delhi, and Deepali Liberhan, Pam Dixon, and legal scholars on the grounds of the University, April 2014.

India Update

I was honored to address students at the National Law University, Delhi this past week about privacy in the US and global privacy trends and issues. The talk included a Q and A session, during which the students engaged in a spirited conversation about US policies regarding surveillance and privacy. I enjoyed the session thoroughly. The students asked challenging questions in particular about telecommunications policies and the idea of safety versus privacy and achieving proper balance.

During my time at the University, I had the honor of meeting with Vice-Chancellor Dr. Ranbir Singh, who gave me a beautifully bound copy of the Indian Constitution. It will be a treasure in my library. Chinmayi Arun, Research Director, Centre for Communication Governance, National Law University, Delhi was my gracious host for this event — she arranged both the event and a spectacular meal afterwards. Deepali Liberhan of Facebook India attended the talk and helped me arrive from door to door smoothly, which is a feat for a newcomer like me in a city as large and as complex as New Delhi.

Thank you to my gracious hosts, the University, Deepali, and the students and scholars for making this event happen so beautifully.

— Pam Dixon, Executive Director

Posted May 2, 2014 in Blog Post, International Privacy, Lecture, Modern privacy, Region: India

New Report: Risky Analysis: Assessing and Improving AI Governance Tools

We are pleased to announce the publication of a new WPF report, “Risky Analysis: Assessing and Improving AI Governance Tools.” This report sets out a definition of AI governance tools, documents why and how these tools are critically important for trustworthy AI, and where these tools are around the world. The report also documents problems in some AI governance tools themselves, and suggests pathways to improve AI governance tools and create an evaluative environment to measure their effectiveness. AI systems should not be deployed without simultaneously evaluating the potential adverse impacts of such systems and mitigating their risks, and most of the world agrees about the need to take precautions against the threats posed. The specific tools and techniques that exist to evaluate and measure AI systems for their inclusiveness, fairness, explainability, privacy, safety and other trustworthiness issues — called in the report collectively AI governance tools – can improve such issues. While some AI governance tools provide reassurance to the public and to regulators, the tools too often lack meaningful oversight and quality assessments. Incomplete or ineffective AI governance tools can create a false sense of confidence, cause unintended problems, and generally undermine the promise of AI systems. The report contains rich background details, use cases, potential solutions to the problems discussed in the report, and a global index of AI Governance Tools.
National IDs Around the World — Interactive map

About this Data Visualization: This interactive map displays the presence...
Report: From the Filing Cabinet to the Cloud: Updating the Privacy Act of 1974

This comprehensive report and proposed bill text is focused on the Privacy Act of 1974, an important and early Federal privacy law that applies to the government sector and some contractors. The Privacy Act was written for the 1970s information era -- an era that was characterized by the use of mainframe computers and filing cabinets. Today's digital information era looks much different than the '70s: smart phones are smarter than the old mainframes, and documents are now routinely digitized and stored and perhaps even analyzed in the cloud, among many other changes. The report focuses on why the Privacy Act needs an update that will bring it into this century, and how that could look and work. This work was written by Robert Gellman, and informed by a two-year multi-stakeholder process.