天天网官方

<bdo id="ug3eo"><b id="ug3eo"></b></bdo>

  • <tt id="ug3eo"><source id="ug3eo"><td id="ug3eo"></td></source></tt>
  • <bdo id="ug3eo"><input id="ug3eo"><p id="ug3eo"></p></input></bdo>

  • <bdo id="ug3eo"><b id="ug3eo"><tr id="ug3eo"></tr></b></bdo>

      June 27, 2019

      Political issues around big tech companies

      The technology industry has an increasingly complex relationship to government and politics, most importantly in three areas:

      Here’s some of what I think about that, plus links to a lot more.

      1. For a long time, I’ve maintained:

      The first point is now widely accepted. The second unfortunately is not; laws and regulations generally state who may or may not record, keep or decrypt particular kinds of data, rather than what particular uses they may make of it.

      2. Another threat to freedom has arisen as big as that from privacy/surveillance: a many-fronts push for censorship. It would ultimately be calamitous for free countries to agree that the threat of “Fake News” and other dangerous online partisanship justifies general censorship, by governments or “platform” tech companies as the case may be, yet that is exactly the path we seem to be on.

      Fortunately, there are less dangerous ways to address the same challenges. I expect to make as much fuss about this issue in the upcoming decade as I have about privacy/surveillance over the past one.

      Read more

      June 27, 2019

      How to beat “fake news”

      Most observers hold several or all of the views:

      And further:

      But despite all those difficulties, I also believe that a good solution to news/opinion filtering is feasible; it just can’t be as simple as everybody would like.

      Read more

      June 25, 2018

      New legal limits on surveillance in the US

      The United States has new legal limits on electronic surveillance, both in one specific way and — more important — in prevailing judicial theory. This falls far short of the protections we ultimately need, but it’s a welcome development even so.

      The recent Supreme Court case Carpenter v. United States is a big deal. Let me start by saying:

      *The Katz test basically says that that an individual’s right to privacy is whatever society regards as a reasonable expectation of privacy at that time.

      **The third-party doctrine basically says that any information of yours given voluntarily to a third party isn’t private. This includes transactional information such as purchases or telephone call detail records (CDRs)

      Key specifics include: Read more

      June 20, 2018

      Brittleness, Murphy’s Law, and single-impetus failures

      In my initial post on brittleness I suggested that a typical process is:

      In many engineering scenarios, a fuller description could be:

      So it’s necesseary to understand what is or isn’t likely to go wrong. Unfortunately, that need isn’t always met.? Read more

      June 20, 2018

      Brittleness and incremental improvement

      Every system — computer or otherwise — needs to deal with possibilities of damage or error. If it does this well, it may be regarded as “robust”, “mature(d), “strengthened”, or simply “improved”.* Otherwise, it can reasonably be called “brittle”.

      *It’s also common to use the word “harden(ed)”. But I think that’s a poor choice, as brittle things are often also hard.

      0. As a general rule in IT:

      There are many categories of IT strengthening. Two of the broadest are:

      1. One of my more popular posts stated:

      Developing a good DBMS requires 5-7 years and tens of millions of dollars.

      The reasons I gave all spoke to brittleness/strengthening, most obviously in:

      Those minor edge cases in which your Version 1 product works poorly aren’t minor after all.

      Similar things are true for other kinds of “platform software” or distributed systems.

      2. The UI brittleness/improvement story starts similarly:? Read more

      May 20, 2018

      Technology implications of political trends

      The tech industry has a broad range of political concerns. While I may complain that things have been a bit predictable in other respects, politics is having real and new(ish) technical consequences. In some cases, existing technology is clearly adequate to meet regulators’ and customers’ demands. Other needs look more like open research challenges.

      1. Privacy regulations will be very different in different countries or regions. For starters:

      All of these rules are subject to change based on:

      And so I believe: For any multinational organization that handles customer data, privacy/security requirements are likely to change constantly. Technology decisions need to reflect that reality.

      2. Data sovereignty/geo-compliance is a big deal. In fact, this is one area where the EU and authoritarian countries such as Russia formally agree. Each wants its citizens’ data to be stored locally, so as to ensure adherence to local privacy rules.

      For raw, granular data, that’s a straightforward — even if annoying — requirement to meet. But things get murkier for data that is aggregated or otherwise derived. Read more

      May 20, 2018

      Some stuff that’s always on my mind

      I have a LOT of partially-written blog posts, but am struggling to get any of them finished (obviously). Much of the problem is that they have so many dependencies on each other. Clearly, then, I should consider refactoring my writing plans. ??

      So let’s start with this. Here, in no particular order, is a list of some things that I’ve said in the past, and which I still think are or should be of interest today. It’s meant to be background for numerous posts I write in the near future, and indeed a few hooks for such posts are included below.

      1.? Data(base) management technology is progressing pretty much as I expected.

      2. Rightly or wrongly, enterprises are often quite sloppy about analytic accuracy.

      Read more

      February 7, 2018

      Some things I think about politics

      When one tries to think comprehensively about politics these days, it quickly gets overwhelming. But I think I’ve got some pieces of the puzzle figured out. Here they are in extremely summarized form. I’ll flesh them out later as seems to make sense.

      1. Most of what people are saying about modern tribalism is correct. But partisanship is not as absolute as some fear. In particular:

      2. The threat from Trump and his Republican enablers is indeed as bad as people fear. He’s a major danger to do terrible, irreversible harm to the US and the rest of the world. To date the irreversible damage hasn’t been all that terrible, but if Trump and his enablers are given enough time, the oldest modern democracy will be no more.

      All common interests notwithstanding, beating Trump’s supporters at the polls is of paramount importance.

      3. I agree with those who claim that many of our problems stem from the shredding of trust. But few people seem to realize just how many different aspects of “trust” there are, nor how many degrees there can be of trustworthiness. It’s not just a binary choice between “honest servant of the people” and “lying, cheating crook”.

      These observations have strong analogies in IT. What does it mean for a system to be “reliable” or to produce “accurate” results? There are many possible answers, each reasonable in different contexts.

      Read more

      February 7, 2018

      Politics can be overwhelming

      Like many people, I’ve been shocked and saddened by recent political developments. What I’ve done about it includes (but is not limited to):

      As for those writings: Read more

      January 22, 2018

      The chaotic politics of privacy

      Almost nobody pays attention to the real issues in privacy and surveillance. That’s gotten only slightly better over the decade that I’ve written about the subject. But the problems with privacy/surveillance politics run yet deeper than that.

      Worldwide

      The politics of privacy and surveillance are confused, in many countries around the world. This is hardly surprising. After all:

      Technical cluelessness isn’t the only problem. Privacy issues are commonly framed in terms of civil liberties, national security, law enforcement and/or general national sovereignty. And these categories are inherently confusing, in that:

      Data sovereignty regulations — which are quite a big part of privacy law — get their own extra bit of confusion, because of the various purposes they can serve. Chief among these are:? Read more

      Next Page →

      Feed: DBMS (database management system), DW (data warehousing), BI (business intelligence), and analytics technology Subscribe to the Monash Research feed via RSS or email:

      Login

      Search our blogs and white papers

      Monash Research blogs

      User consulting

      Building a short list? Refining your strategic plan? We can help.

      Vendor advisory

      We tell vendors what's happening -- and, more important, what they should do about it.

      Monash Research highlights

      Learn about white papers, webcasts, and blog highlights, by RSS or email.

      <bdo id="ug3eo"><b id="ug3eo"></b></bdo>

    1. <tt id="ug3eo"><source id="ug3eo"><td id="ug3eo"></td></source></tt>
    2. <bdo id="ug3eo"><input id="ug3eo"><p id="ug3eo"></p></input></bdo>

    3. <bdo id="ug3eo"><b id="ug3eo"><tr id="ug3eo"></tr></b></bdo>

        黄金娱乐场

        金元宝彩票注册-首页

        拉菲3娱乐

        天禧的彩的彩的正确网址

        亚投福彩快三

        阿里娱乐彩票登陆

        多赢的彩首页

        大旺彩票登录

        世界杯即时比分球探网