Podcast appearances and mentions of marc rotenberg

Ralph welcomes Marc Rotenberg, founder and president of the Center for AI and Digital Policy to fill us in on the latest international treaty aimed at putting guardrails on the potential Frankenstein monster that is Artificial Intelligence. Plus, as we get to the end of the Medicare enrollment period, we put out one last warning for listeners to avoid the scam that is Medicare Advantage.Marc Rotenberg is the founder and president of the Center for AI and Digital Policy, a global organization focused on emerging challenges associated with Artificial Intelligence. He serves as an expert advisor on AI policy to many organizations including the Council of Europe, the Council on Foreign Relations, the European Parliament, the Global Partnership on AI, the OECD, and UNESCO. What troubles me is the gap between an increasingly obscure, technical, and complex technology—abbreviated into “AI” —and public understanding. You know, when motor vehicles came and we tried to regulate them and did, people understood motor vehicles in their daily lives. When solar energy started coming on, they saw solar roof panels. They could see it, they could understand it, they could actually work putting solar panels on roofs of buildings. This area is just producing a massively expanding gap between the experts from various disciplines, and the power structure of corporatism, and their government servants and the rest of the people in the world.Ralph NaderThe difference between these two types of [AI] systems is that with the old ones we could inspect them and interrogate them. If one of the factors being used for an outcome was, for example, race or nationality, we could say, well, that's impermissible and you can't use an automated system in that way. The problem today with the probabilistic systems that US companies have become increasingly reliant on is that it's very difficult to actually tell whether those factors are contributing to an outcome. And so for that reason, there are a lot of computer scientists rightly concerned about the problem of algorithmic bias.Marc Rotenberg[The sponsors of California SB 1047] wanted companies that were building these big complicated systems to undertake a safety plan, identify the harms, and make those plans available to the Attorney General…In fact, I work with many governments around the world on AI regulation and this concept of having an impact assessment is fairly obvious. You don't want to build these large complex systems without some assessment of what the risk might be.Marc RotenbergWe've always understood that when you create devices that have consequences, there has to be some circuit breaker. The companies didn't like that either. [They said] it's too difficult to predict what those scenarios might be, but that was almost precisely the point of the legislation, you see, because if those scenarios exist and you haven't identified them yet, you choose to deploy these large foundational models without any safety mechanism in place, and all of us are at risk. So I thought it was an important bill and not only am I disappointed that the governor vetoed it, but as I said, I think he made a mistake. This is not simply about politics. This is actually about science, and it's about the direction these systems are heading.Marc RotenbergThat's where we are in this moment—opaque systems that the experts don't understand, increasingly being deployed by organizations that also don't understand these systems, and an industry that says, “don't regulate us.” This is not going to end well.Marc RotenbergIn Case You Haven't Heard with Francesco DesantisNews 11/27/241. Last week, the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant. According to a statement from ICC prosecutor Karim Khan, the international legal body found reasonable grounds to believe that each has committed war crimes and crimes against humanity, including the use of starvation as a method of warfare and intentionally directing attacks against civilians. This news has been met with varied reactions throughout the world. These have been meticulously documented by Just Security. The United States, which is under no obligation to honor the warrant as it is not a party to the Rome Statute, has said it “fundamentally rejects” the judgment and has called the issuing of warrants “outrageous.” Canada, which is party to the Rome Statue has vowed to uphold their treaty obligations despite their close ties to Israel. Germany however, another signatory to the Rome Statute, has suggested that they would not honor the warrants. In a statement, Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib said the warrants are “long overdue” and signal that “the days of the Israeli apartheid government operating with impunity are ending.” One can only hope that is true.2. On November 21st, 19 Senators voted for at least one of the three Joint Resolutions of Disapproval regarding additional arms transfers to Israel. As Jewish Voice for Peace Action puts it, “this is an unprecedented show of Senate opposition to President Biden's disastrous foreign policy of unconditional support for the Israeli military.” The 19 Senators include Independents Bernie Sanders and Angus King, progressive Democrats like Elizabeth Warren, Chris Van Hollen and Raphael Warnock, and Democratic caucus leaders like Dick Durbin, among many others. Perhaps the most notable supporter however is Senator Jon Ossoff of Georgia, whom Ryan Grim notes is the only Democrat representing a state Trump won and who is up for reelection in 2026 to vote for the resolution. Ossoff cited President Reagan's decision to withhold cluster munitions during the IDF occupation of Beirut in a floor speech explaining his vote. The Middle East Eye reports that the Biden Administration deployed Democratic Senate Leader Chuck Schumer to whip votes against the JRD.3. Last week, we covered H.R. 9495, aka the “nonprofit killer” bill targeting pro-Palestine NGOs. Since then, the bill has passed the House. Per the Guardian, the bill passed 219-184, with fifteen Democrats crossing the aisle to grant incoming-President Trump the unilateral power to obliterate any non-profit organization he dislikes, a list sure to be extensive. Congressman Jamie Raskin is quoted saying “A sixth-grader would know this is unconstitutional…They want us to vote to give the president Orwellian powers and the not-for-profit sector Kafkaesque nightmares.” The bill now moves to the Senate, where it is unlikely to pass while Democrats cling to control. Come January however, Republicans will hold a decisive majority in the upper chamber.4. President-elect Donald Trump has announced his selection of Congresswoman Lori Chavez-DeRemer as his pick for Secretary of Labor. Chavez-DeRemer is perhaps the most pro-labor Republican in Congress, with the AFL-CIO noting that she is one of only three Republicans to cosponsor the PRO Act and one of eight to cosponsor the Public Service Freedom to Negotiate Act. Chavez-DeRemer was reportedly the favored choice of Teamsters President Sean O'Brien, who controversially became the first ever Teamster to address the RNC earlier this year. While her selection has been greeted with cautious optimism by many labor allies, anti-labor conservatives are melting down at the prospect. Akash Chougule of Americans for Prosperity accused Trump of giving “A giant middle finger to red states,” by “picking a teachers union hack” and urged Senate Republicans to reject the nomination.5. Unfortunately, most of Trump's selections are much, much worse. Perhaps worst of all, Trump has chosen Mehmet Cengiz Öz – better known as Dr. Oz – to lead the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Beyond his lack of qualifications and history of promoting crackpot medical theories, Oz is a longtime proponent of pushing more seniors into privatized Medicare Advantage, or “Disadvantage,” plans, per Yahoo! Finance. This report notes that the Heritage Foundation's Project 2025 called for making Medicare Advantage the default health program for seniors.6. According to CNN, Brazilian police have arrested five people who conspired to assassinate leftist President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, better known as Lula, in 2022. This assassination plot was allegedly cooked up even before Lula took office, and included plans to kill Lula's Vice President Geraldo Alckmin and Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes. The conspirators included a former high-ranking Bolsonaro advisor and military special forces personnel. Reuters reports investigators have discovered evidence that Bolsonaro himself was involved in the scheme.7. In more news from Latin America, Drop Site reports that the United States and Colombia engaged in a secretive agreement to allow the country's previous U.S.-backed conservative President Ivan Duque to utilize the Israeli Pegasus spyware for internal surveillance in the country. Details of the transaction and of the utilization of the spyware remain “murky,” but American and Colombian officials maintain it was used to target drug-trafficking groups and not domestic political opponents. Just two months ago, Colombia's leftist President Gustavo Petro delivered a televised speech revealing details of this shadowy arrangement, including that the Duque government flew $11 million cash from Bogotá to Tel Aviv. As Drop Site notes, “In Colombia, there's a long legacy of state intelligence agencies surveilling political opposition leaders. With the news that the U.S. secretly helped acquire and deploy powerful espionage software in their country, the government is furious at the gross violation of their sovereignty. They fear that Colombia's history of politically motivated surveillance, backed by the U.S. government, lives on to this day.”8. Following the Democrats' electoral wipeout, the race for new DNC leadership is on. Media attention has mostly been focused on the race to succeed Jamie Harrison as DNC Chair, but POLITICO is out with a story on James Zogby's bid for the DNC vice chair seat. Zogby, a longtime DNC member, Bernie Sanders ally and president of the Arab American Institute has criticized the party's position on Israel and particularly of the Kamala Harris campaign's refusal to allow a Palestinian-American speaker at this year's convention. He called the move “unimaginative, overly cautious and completely out of touch with where voters are.” This report notes Zogby's involvement in the 2016 DNC Unity Reform Commission, and his successful push to strip substantial power away from the so-called superdelegates.9. Speaking of Democratic Party rot, the Lever reports that in its final days the Biden Administration is handing corporations a “get out of jail free card.” A new Justice Department policy dictates that the government will essentially look the other way at corporate misconduct, even if the company has “committed multiple crimes, earned significant profit from their wrongdoing, and failed to self-disclose the misconduct — as long as the companies demonstrate they ‘acted in good faith' to try to come clean.” This is the logical endpoint of the longstanding Biden era soft-touch approach intended to encourage corporations to self-police, an idea that is patently absurd on its face. Public Citizen's Corporate Crime expert Rick Claypool described the policy as “bending over backward to protect corporations.”10. Finally, on November 23rd lawyer and former progressive congressional candidate Brent Welder posted a fundraising email from Bernie Sanders that immediately attracted substantial interest for its strong language. In this note, Sanders writes “The Democrats ran a campaign protecting the status quo and tinkering around the edges…Will the Democratic leadership learn the lessons of their defeat and create a party that stands with the working class[?]…unlikely.” The email ends with a list of tough questions, including “should we be supporting Independent candidates who are prepared to take on both parties?” Many on the Left read this as Bernie opening the door to a “dirty break” with the Democratic Party, perhaps even an attempt to form some kind of independent alliance or third party. In a follow-up interview with John Nichols in the Nation, Sanders clarified that he is not calling for the creation of a new party, but “Where it is more advantageous to run as an independent, outside of the Democratic [Party]…we should do that.” Whether anything will come of this remains to be seen, but if nothing else the severity of his rhetoric reflects the intensity of dissatisfaction with the Democratic Party in light of their second humiliating defeat at the hands of a clownish, fascistic game show host. Perhaps a populist left third party is a far-fetched, unachievable goal. On the other hand, how many times can we go back to the Democratic Party expecting different results. Something has got to give, or else the few remaining pillars of our democracy will wither and die under sustained assault by the Right and their corporate overlords.This has been Francesco DeSantis, with In Case You Haven't Heard. Get full access to Ralph Nader Radio Hour at www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/subscribe

Tech policy experts Mark Coeckelbergh, author of the new book Why AI Undermines Democracy and What To Do About It, Mary Anne Franks of George Washington University Law School, and Marc Rotenberg of the Center for AI and Digital Policy explored the evolving relationship between artificial intelligence and constitutional principles and suggest strategies to protect democratic values in the digital age. This conversation was moderated by Thomas Donnelly, chief content officer at the National Constitution Center. This program was made possible through the generous support of Citizen Travelers, the nonpartisan civic engagement initiative of Travelers. Resources: Mark Coeckelbergh, Why AI Undermines Democracy and What To Do About It (2024) Center for AI and Digital Policy (CAIDP), “Universal Guidelines for AI” CAIDP, “Artificial Intelligence and Democratic Values” Mary Anne Franks, Fearless Speech: Breaking Free from the First Amendment, (forthcoming Oct. 2024) “Tougher AI Policies Could Protect Taylor Swift—And Everyone Else—From Deepfakes,” Scientific American (Feb. 8, 2024) Marc Rotenberg, “Human Rights Alignment: The Challenge Ahead for AI Lawmakers,” (Dec. 2023) EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), https://gdpr-info.eu/ “U.S. Senate Will Debate Three Bipartisan Bills Addressing the Use of AI in Elections,” Democracy Docket (May 14, 2024) OECD Principles on AI Marc Rotenberg, “The Imperative for a UN Special Rapporteur on AI and Human Rights,” Vol. 1 (2024) Mark Coeckelbergh, “The case for global governance of AI: arguments, counter-arguments, and challenges ahead,” (May 2024) Bipartisan Senate AI Working Group Report Council of Europe and AI Council of Europe AI Treaty Stay Connected and Learn More: Questions or comments about the show? Email us at programs@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Subscribe, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate

Jim Bidzos, creator of the RSA Conference, credited a phone call that he had with Marc Rotenberg in 1991 as the inspiration for the first RSA Conference. Rotenberg was the Washington Director at the Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, or CPSR, from 1988 to 1994. The RSA Conference grew from a small gathering of around 60 people, mostly cryptographers, to the world's largest security conference with tens of thousands of attendees each year.

In the governance of AI a few small initiatives have had a large impact. One of these is the Center for AI and Digital Policy (CAIDP), led by Marc Rotenberg and Merve Hickok, our guests in this Artificial Intelligence & Equality podcast. Among CAIDP activities is the yearly publication of an Artificial Intelligence and Democratic Index, in which more 75 countries (as of 2022) are rated on an array of metrics from endorsement of the OECD/G20 AI Principles to the creation of independent agencies to implement AI policies. Furthermore, the CAIDP staff and collaborators have been involved in and helped shape most of the major AI policy initiatives to date. For more, please go to carnegiecouncil.org. 

Part 2 of our interview with Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Center for AI and Digital Policy.

*****Contact us:Jerry Buckley | jbuckley@buckleyfirm.comJody Westby | westby@globalcyberrisk.comADCG | info@adcg.org

-Det kan ikke bare være en privatsak om du bryr deg om personvern. For om du gir blanke i personvernet ditt, kan det ha konsekvenser for alle i kontaktlistene dine og alle du kommuniserer med og om. Det sier Marc Rotenberg, direktøren for Center on AI and Digital Policy ved Michael Dukakis Institute. Senteret har tatt rollen som vaktbikkje som vil passe på at alle de fine og personvernvennlige strategiene for kunstig intelligens, som stat etter stat vedtar, ikke bare blir tomme ord.Marc er gjest i denne episoden av Personvernpodden, der han sammen med Datatilsynets Kari Laumann snakker om veien til en kunstig intelligens som fremmer demokrati og rettferdighet, heller enn å true slike verdier. De snakker om hvordan Datatilsynets regulatoriske sandkasse for ansvarlig kunstig intelligens kan påvirke retningen. Og om at gode slagord og humor overraskende nok er et viktig virkemiddel på veien. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In today's interview, I spar with Harriet Moynihan over the application of international law to cyberattacks, a topic on which she has written with clarity and in detail. We disagree politely but profoundly. I make the case that international law is distinct from what works in cyberspace and is inconsistent with either clarity or effectiveness in deterring cyberattacks. Harriet argues that international law has been a central principle of the post-1945 international system and one that has helped to keep a kind of peace among nations. It's a good exchange. In the News Roundup, David Kris and I discuss the state of Team Telecom, which is taking unwonted (but probably welcome) fire for not being tough enough on state-owned Chinese telecom firms. Predictably, Team Telecom is going with the flow and reportedly seeking to knock four such firms out of the US market. Maury Shenk reports that Vietnam is suspected of hacking Chinese health authorities. In response to the accusations, the Vietnamese released what looks to me like a word-for-word clone of Chinese cyber espionage boilerplate denials. Gapple's design for a COVID-19 tracing app isn't the best way to track infections, I claim, but it's all that Google and Apple are willing to let governments do because of their exquisitely refined and self-evidently superior sense of privacy. Nick Weaver disagrees, arguing that the Gapple system preserves privacy and allows health authorities all the information that they really need. Governments are mostly falling in line, either because they buy Nick's argument or because they have decided that their Silicon Valley overlords have the ability to wreck any more centralized system. France is still fighting for its vision of contact tracing. But Australia seems to be adopting a lightly tweaked version of the Gapple model to add some centralization. And Germany seems to be surrendering as well. Several senators want Cyber Command and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) to do more to deter coronavirus hackers, David reports. More importantly, he points out that sending a military organization to attack a civilian criminal gang will raise a host of legal issues that should be sorted out before rather than after the attack begins. Failure to protect your client from Chinese government hackers might be malpractice, a DC court rules. But as Maury points out, there's a long road from winning a motion to dismiss and winning at trial, so the lesson to be drawn from this case won't be certain for some time. Three years later, the Shadow Brokers leak is making news, and still providing challenges for private security researchers. Nick reports on how a three-year-old leak led to the latest revelation of an unknown advanced persistent threat (APT) group. Nick and I touch on the confused reporting about the latest filing in the mud fight between Facebook and NSO Group over NSO's hacks of WhatsApp customers. NSO, Facebook says, has used a lot of US servers in those attacks. That matters for the technical question of whether NSO can be sued in the United States, but the volume (several hundred instances) also suggests to Nick that NSO did more than throw exploits over the wall to its customers – it was arguably offering espionage as a service. David dings IBM for its handling of a researcher's disclosure of four zero-days – and that leads to a dive into what a good bug bounty program can and can't do. Maury notes that Amazon is getting new scrutiny for its handling of third-party sales data, including suspicions on Congress's part that it may have been lied to. This isn't the last we'll hear of this story. In quick hits, I am nonplussed by Vimeo's willingness to outsource its definition of “hate group” to the controversial Southern Poverty Law Center. Nick celebrates the end to Crown Sterling's “defamation” lawsuit against BlackHat, which has finally been settled. And Nick and I mark the surprising ouster of Marc Rotenberg, EPIC's long-time director, after Rotenberg continued to go to work and failed to notify staffers after he was diagnosed with COVID-19. Download the 313th Episode (mp3). You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

Episode 117 : Whatstabook est le grand projet de Facebook pour 2019. L'unification des ses trois grandes plateformes de messagerie : Facebook Messenger, Instagram Direct Message et WhatsApp. On vous explique dans cette épisode ce que pourrait être cette unification et ce qu'elle peut provoquer pour les utilisateurs comme pour les marques ! Nous faisons un peu de Social Media fiction ! Facebook possède trois des plus importantes messageries instantanées de la planète : WhatsApp, Instagram et Messenger, qui représentent 2,6 milliards d’utilisateurs actifs dans le monde. Mais voilà, ces applications ne communiquent pas entre elles. Et figurez vous que Mark Zuckerberg a un grand projet : unifier les infrastructures de ces mastodontes du chat. Le programme devrait être achevé d’ici à la fin de cette année ou au début de 2020 Attention, il ne s’agit pas de fusionner les applications… ##Zuckerberg rassure sur les questions de sécurité. 
Un écosystème crypté de bout en bout## Zuckerberg a également ordonné que les applications incorporent toutes un cryptage de bout en bout. Une étape majeure qui empêche les messages d'être vus par quiconque, à l'exception des participants à une conversation. Dans un communiqué, Facebook a déclaré vouloir "créer les meilleures expériences de messagerie possibles; et les gens veulent que la messagerie soit rapide, simple, fiable et privée. ##Une initiative qui soulève des questions de confidentialité## Le plan d'intégration soulève des questions de confidentialité en raison de la manière dont les données des utilisateurs peuvent être partagées entre les services.  WhatsApp n’a actuellement besoin que d’un numéro de téléphone lorsque de nouveaux utilisateurs s’inscrivent. Contrairement à Facebook Messenger et à Instagram, WhatsApp ne stocke pas les messages et conserve un minimum de données utilisateur.  En revanche, Facebook et Facebook Messenger demandent aux utilisateurs de fournir leur vraie identité.  Faire correspondre les utilisateurs de Facebook et Instagram aux comptes WhatsApp permettrait au Groupe Facebook de détenir à peu près toutes les infos de contacts d’une personne… Marc Rotenberg, président et directeur exécutif de l’EPIC (Electronic Privacy Information Center), a déclaré vendredi que le changement serait "un résultat terrible pour les utilisateurs d'internet". Il a exhorté la Federal Trade Commission, l' autorité de contrôle de la confidentialité des États-Unis , à "agir maintenant pour protéger la vie privée et préserver la concurrence." ##Facebook face aux lois antitrust## Le représentant Ro Khanna, démocrate de Californie, a critiqué le changement pour des raisons antitrust. "C'est pourquoi les acquisitions d'Instagram et de WhatsApp par Facebook auraient dû faire l'objet de beaucoup plus d'attention, ce qui apparaît désormais clairement comme une fusion horizontale qui aurait dû déclencher un contrôle antitrust", a-t-il déclaré dans un message publié sur Twitter . "Imaginez à quel point le monde serait différent si Facebook devait concurrencer Instagram et WhatsApp." ##Facebook souhaite accroître encore davantage la fidélisation de ses utilisateurs## En assemblant l'infrastructure des applications, Facebook espère accroître son utilité et maintenir l'engagement des utilisateurs pour son écosystème.  Cela pourrait réduire l'appétit des gens pour les services de messagerie concurrents, comme ceux proposés par Apple et Google.  Une ouverture vers de nouveaux produits publicitaires ? ##Zuck affirme son autorité## L’année 2018 a été très compliquée pour Mark Zuckerberg et les rumeurs de son éviction au post de CEO de Facebook sont de plus en plus récurrentes. Avec cette annonce, Zuck impose son autorité sur les unités qu’il avait autrefois promis de laisser évoluer indépendamment du géant Facebook. Au moment des acquisitions, M. Zuckerberg avait promis à WhatsApp et à Instagram une grande autonomie par rapport à leur nouvelle société mère.  Nous avons maintenant une explication aux récents départs des fondateurs d’Instagram et WhatsApp. Les fondateurs de Instagram, Kevin Systrom et Mike Krieger, ont quitté la société brusquement l'automne dernier. Les fondateurs de WhatsApp, Jan Koum et Brian Acton, sont partis pour des raisons similaires. . . . Le Super Daily est fabriqué avec une pluie d'amour par les équipes de Supernatifs. Nous sommes une agence de content marketing et social media basée à Lyon. Nous aidons les entreprises à créer des relations durables et rentables avec leurs audiences. Nous inventons, produisons et diffusons des contenus qui engagent vos collaborateurs, vos prospects et vos consommateurs. Contact : bonjour@supernatifs.com

Fairplay returns with the GM spinning a take for four young adventurers. Chocolate! Trump! Subway shootouts! Dragons! This one has it all. · (in order of first appearance) Dennis Leroy Kangalee, Marc Rotenberg, Mtume Gant, the Krieger Girls with friends, Adam Curtis. · Songs and music samples by Bee K. More details and shows at brokenwindowgarden.org

Ralph talks to former financial insider, Nomi Prins, about what central banks are and how much power they have to shape our world. Plus, president of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, Marc Rotenberg, tells us how Facebook uses our information for good or ill.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg seldom gives interviews, but in the wake of the massive Cambridge Analytica privacy breach, he made an exception to speak with Vox’s Ezra Klein. Mark tells Ezra why he’s hopeful about Facebook’s future before privacy advocate Marc Rotenberg tells Sean Rameswaram why he’s not. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

For Hillary Clinton, that private email server was an Achilles heel. For Donald Trump, late night tweet-storms and the echo chamber of the so-called alt-right were rocket fuel. For American voters, the power of technology was inescapable. We've seen the good, bad and ugly of tech this election cycle. And we all have big feelings about it. So Manoush hosted a good old-fashioned call-in, for listeners to share their thoughts and fears about our digital lives under a Trump administration.  Joining Manoush was Farhad Manjoo, New York Times technology columnist, and Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center.  They looked back at how social media shaped the Presidential race, and forward at privacy in the Trump era. We wish we could tell you it's uplifting. But we don't like to lie.  The call-in show was part of the United States of Anxiety, a series from WNYC Studios. If you're having big feelings about what the new administration means for the arts, women, the economy or just in general, they've got you covered.  Support Note to Self by becoming a member today at NotetoSelfRadio.org/donate.    

For Hillary Clinton, that private email server was an Achilles heel. For Donald Trump, late night tweet-storms and the echo chamber of the alt-right were rocket fuel. And for American voters, the power of technology was inescapable. Manoush Zomorodi, host of WNYC's Note to Self, has seen the good, bad and ugly of tech this election cycle. Farhard Manjoo, New York Times technology columnist, joins her to look back on how social media shaped the Presidential race, and how companies like Twitter and Facebook are responding as vitriol and fake news flood our feeds.  Plus Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, breaks down how digital privacy might look under the Trump administration.  

This time On the Road at the 2016 ABA Annual Meeting, host Joe Patrice speaks with Alsop Louie Partners “partner” Gilman Louie, Electronic Privacy Information Center President and Executive Director Marc Rotenberg, and Advisory Committee for the American Bar Association Standing Committee on Law and National Security Chair Harvey Rishikof about emergent technology’s effect on law enforcement and national security. Mark shares that listening to the FBI director talk about the problems he’s encountering with encryption and how these issues make it more difficult for law enforcement agencies to gain access to evidence was a very interesting portion of the “Emerging Issues in Law Enforcement and National Security” panel. He states that It’s better to have stronger encryption because we’re no longer simply talking about privacy and surveillance, but rather the internet of things and you want that to be secure because it's a matter of public safety. Gilman emphasizes that law enforcement agencies have many more tools today than they did 10 or 15 years ago simply because of digital exhaust and that, despite challenges to reading encrypted messages, it’s very hard to operate without leaving a digital footprint. Harvey explains that cyber threats fall into four categories: criminals, “hacktavists”, espionage, and war, and that delineating those statutory regimes is incredibly complicated. The group discusses why tracking, attributing, and classifying cyber attacks requires such caution, and they close the interview with an analysis of machine learning and online algorithmic transparency. Gilman Louie is a partner at Alsop Louie Partners and the founder and former CEO of In-Q-Tel, a strategic venture fund created to help enhance national security by connecting the Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. intelligence community with venture-backed entrepreneurial companies. He completed the Advanced Management Program/International Seniors Management Program at Harvard Business School and received a Bachelor of Science in Business Administration from San Francisco State University. Marc Rotenberg is president and executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) in Washington, DC. He teaches information privacy and open government at Georgetown Law and frequently testifies before Congress on emerging privacy and civil liberties issues. He testified before the 9-11 Commission on "Security and Liberty: Protecting Privacy, Preventing Terrorism." He has served on several national and international advisory panels, and currently serves on expert panels for the National Academies of Science and the OECD. He is a graduate of Harvard College and Stanford Law School, and received an LLM in International and Comparative Law. Harvey Rishikof is currently chair of the Advisory Committee for the American Bar Association Standing Committee on Law and National Security and serves on the Board of Visitors for the National Intelligence University (NIU). He was a Professor of Law and National Security Studies at the National War College (NWC) in Washington, DC. and is the former chair of the Department of National Security Strategy at the NWC. He specializes in the areas of national security, civil and military courts, terrorism, international law, civil liberties, and the U.S. Constitution.

Turns out on-call car service Uber compiles a lot of data about its customers. They can get a pretty good idea of what you are up to just by the way you use their service. Are you surprised?  How much privacy is there in the age of the internet? Marc Rotenberg is a lawyer specializing in privacy and civil rights. He is president of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, a public interest research group involved in privacy litigation and public policy. He also teaches about these issues at Georgetown University Law School in Washington D.C.Rotenberg says he doesn't use the word fear when discussing civil liberties in the information age. It is disempowering, he feels. Rather, there are challenges to be met, problems to solve. Rotenberg sat down with Steve Scher in late November, 2014, to discuss those challenges. 

Do current laws give public figures and private people adequate protection from online hackers who repost content on websites? The National Constitution Center’s Jeffrey Rosen speaks with Eric Posner and Marc Rotenberg about a very personal topic.

Do current laws give public figures and private people adequate protection from online hackers who repost content on websites? The National Constitution Center’s Jeffrey Rosen speaks with Eric Posner and Marc Rotenberg about a very personal topic.

Marc Rotenberg is President and Executive Director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) in Washington, DC, and a former counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee. EPIC focuses public attention on emerging privacy and civil liberties issues. EPIC routinely files amicus briefs in federal and state courts, testifies before Congress, participates in agency rule makings, and conducts extensive Freedom of Information Act litigation. In the last several months, EPIC settled FOIA cases favorably in EPIC v. CIA (surveillance of mosques), EPIC v. DHS and EPIC v. TSA (airport body scanners), EPIC v. Dept. of Ed (student privacy), and EPIC v. ODNI (Privacy Act compliance). Earlier this summer EPIC filed a petition with the US Supreme Court challenging the NSA's telephone record collection program. Legal scholars and former members of the Church Committee have filed several amicus briefs in support of In re EPIC, urging the Court to hear the case. The Court is scheduled to consider the EPIC petition at the November 15, 2013 conference. Event co-hosted by SLATA and Stanford CIS.

Dan Solve, Privacy Law Professor, Author of TheFuture of Reputation Professor Solove is an associate professor of law at the George Washington University Law School. He received his A.B. in English Literature from Washington University, where he was an early selection for Phi Beta Kappa, and his J.D. from Yale Law School. At Yale, Professor Solove won the university-wide scholarly writing Field Prize and served as symposium editor of the Yale Law Journal and as an editor of the Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities. Following law school, Professor Solove clerked for The Honorable Stanley Sporkin, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. After practicing law as an associate at the firm of Arnold & Porter in Washington, D.C., Professor Solove began a second clerkship with The Honorable Pamela Ann Rymer, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Professor Solove began teaching at Seton Hall Law School in 2000. In the fall semester of 2003, he was a visiting professor at the George Washington University Law School. He permanently joined the George Washington University Law School faculty in 2004. Professor Solove writes in the areas of information privacy law, cyberspace law, law and literature, jurisprudence, legal pragmatism, and constitutional theory. He teaches information privacy law, criminal procedure, criminal law, and law and literature. An internationally known expert in privacy law, Solove has been interviewed and quoted by the media in over 100 articles and broadcasts, including the New York Times, Washington Post, Chicago Tribune, Toronto Star, Associated Press, ABC News, CBS News, NBC News, CNN, and National Public Radio. Professor Solove recently published a new book, THE DIGITAL PERSON: TECHNOLOGY AND PRIVACY IN THE INFORMATION AGE (NYU Press, December 2004), which distinguished Berkeley Law School Professor Pamela Samuelson calls "the best exposition thus far about the threat that computer databases containing personal data about millions of Americans poses for information privacy." The book was recommended in the Wall Street Journal's Recommended Reading column in July 2005. Additionally, Solove also authored a casebook, INFORMATION PRIVACY LAW (Aspen, January 2003) (with Marc Rotenberg). Solove has published about 20 articles and essays, which have appeared or are forthcoming in many of the leading law reviews, including the Stanford Law Review, Yale Law Journal, California Law Review, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Michigan Law Review, Duke Law Journal, Minnesota Law Review, and Southern California Law Review, among others. He serves on the advisory board of the Electronic Privacy Information Center and is the president of the Law and Humanities Institute. He has contributed to several amicus briefs before the U.S. Supreme Court. Daniel J. Solove Associate Professor of Law George Washington University Law School 2000 H Street, NW Washington, DC 20052 Website: http://www.law.gwu.edu/facweb/dsolove/

EPIC has filed a series of innovative complaints at the Federal Trade Commission concerning emerging privacy issues. In one case, EPIC challenged Microsoft's identity management service "Passport." The FTC sided with EPIC, issued a consent order, and Microsoft backed off Passport. In a second case against the databroker Choicepoint, EPIC helped the FTC obtain $15 m, the largest judgement in the Commission's history. In the most recent case, EPIC has challenged the proposed merger of Internet search giant Google and Internet advertiser Doubleclick, alleging that the merged entity would be under essentially no legal obligation to protect the personal information that it collects. EPIC has urged the FTC to block the deal or impose substantial privacy safeguards as a condition of the merger. Marc Rotenberg, the director of EPIC, who teaches privacy law at Georgetown, has authored more than two dozen amicus briefs on emerging civil liberties issues, and has testified before Congress on more than fifty occasions will discuss the theory and strategy of the case.