News Release: WPF to comment at Privacy Law Scholars Conference

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

June 2, 2015

San Diego — Pam Dixon will be the commenter for a scholarly paper at the annual Privacy Law Scholars Conference to be held this year in Berkeley, California. “It is an honor to be invited to be the commenter for a paper to be presented at PLSC,” said Ms. Dixon. “The PLSC is a significant conference, and papers workshopped at this conference often go on to impact privacy thought.”

Attendance at the conference is by invitation only. For those attending PLSC, the paper session Dixon is commenting on will be held Friday, June 5, at Workshop Session 6 beginning at 11 am.

Past PLSC conferences: http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/dsolove/PLSC/

PLSC is co-hosted by GWU Law and Berkeley Law by founders and organizers Chris Hoofnagle (Berkeley Law) and Daniel Solove (GWU Law).

Contact:

World Privacy Forum

www.worldprivacyforum.org

Pam Dixon 760-712-4281

or info@worldprivacyforum.org

About the World Privacy Forum

The World Privacy Forum is a nonprofit, non-partisan 501(C)(3) public interest research group. The World Privacy Forum is dedicated to reimagining privacy in a digital era through groundbreaking, in-depth privacy research, analysis, and consumer education of the highest quality. It’s vision is to empower people with the knowledge, rights, and tools they need to protect their privacy and shape their digital lives. The World Privacy Forum has published substantial and respected privacy studies and research, has testified before Congress and federal agencies, and is frequently quoted in the press. WPF is based in San Diego, California.

#####

Posted June 2, 2015 in News, Press, and Media, Privacy Law

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.