Grazie Stefano della condivisione, molto interessante. Dato che, vedendo quanto sta accadendo oltreoceano parrebbe che non sempre gli argini legali servono a impedire comportamenti impropri, o i richiami arrivano quando ormai il danno è stato fatto,sarebbe interessante forse capire se esistono soluzioni "tecniche" per impedire l'aggregazione di datiche dovrebbero restare privati e separati fra loro. Buona giornata, Federico On 28/04/2025 at 8:14 PM, "Stefano Quintarelli via nexa" wrote:quando ero a Roma qualcuno voleva fare il data lake della PA, un bacino dove infilare tutti i dati di tutti i cittadini. ci fu anche un atto normativo, la PDND che pero' si scontro sulle nostre fondamenta istituzionali e divenne un centro di autorizzazione e gestione di interoperabilita'...
On 27/04/25 17:27, Federico Guerrini via nexa wrote: > Cosa succede, quando un governo "democratico" vira verso l'autoritarismo > e ha a disposizione un'immensa quantità di dati sui propri cittadini? > Probabilmente, nulla di buono. > > Da The Atlantic american-panopticon/682616/>: > > "In March, President Trump issued an executive order aiming to eliminate > the data silos that keep everything separate. Historically, much of the > data collected by the government had been heavily compartmentalized and > secured; even for those legally authorized to see sensitive data, > requesting access for use by another government agency is typically a > painful process that requires justifying what you need, why you need it, > and proving that it is used for those purposes only. Not so under > fraud-and-abuse-by-eliminating-information-silos/> Trump." > > "Advancements in artificial intelligence promise to turn this unwieldy > mass of data and metadata into something easily searchable, politically > weaponizable, and maybe even profitable. DOGE is reportedly attempting > to build a “master database doge-building-master-database-immigration/index.html>” of immigrant data > to aid in deportations; NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya has floated the > possibility of an autism registry s1-5372695/autism-nih-rfk-medical-records> (though the administration > quickly walked it back autism-registry-hhs-says-contradicting-nih-director-jay-bhattacharya- > claim/>). America already has all the technology it needs to build a > draconian surveillance society—the conditions for such a dystopia have > been falling into place slowly over time, waiting for the right > authoritarian to come along and use it to crack down on American privacy > and freedom." > > "Trump and DOGE are not just undoing decades of privacy measures. They > appear to be ignoring that they were ever written. Over and over, the > federal experts we spoke with insisted that the very idea of connecting > federal data is anathema." > > "Musk has said that his goal with DOGE is to serve his country. He says > he wants to “end the > tyranny of bureaucracy.” But around Washington, people are asking one > another what he /really /wants with all those data. Keys to the federal > dataverse could, for example, be extremely useful to a highly ambitious > man who is aggressively trying to win the AI race. > > "We already know that Musk’s people have access to large swaths of > information from federal agencies—what we don’t know is what they’ve > copied, exfiltrated, or otherwise taken with them. In theory, this > material, whether usable together or not, could be recombined with other > identifying information from private companies for all kinds of > purposes. There has been speculation already that it could be fed into > third-party large language models to train them or make the information > more usable (Musk’s xAI has its own model, Grok); outside firms could > use their own technologies to make sense of disparate sets of data, as > well. Such approaches, the federal workers told us, could make it easier > to turn previously obfuscated information, such as the individual > elements of a tax return, into something to be mined." > > "The thought that the government would centralize or even give away > citizen data for private use is scandalous. But it’s also, in a way, > expected. The Vietnam War and Watergate gave Americans reasons to > believe that the government can’t be trusted. The Cold War issued a > constant, decades-long threat of annihilation and the necessary > surveillance to avoid it. The War on Terror extended the logic into the > 21st century. Optical, recording, and then computer technologies arose, > offering new ways to watch the public. During the 2010s, Edward > Snowden’s NSA surveillance leaks took place, and the Facebook–Cambridge > Analytica scandal was brewing. By then, the 20th-century assumption that > U.S. intelligence agencies were running mind-control experiments, > infiltrating and disrupting civil-rights groups, or carrying out > surreptitious missions at home like they do abroad had been fully > internalized, and fused with the suspicion that Google, Facebook, > Amazon, and Walmart were—in their own ways—following suit." > > Buona lettura, > > https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2025/04/american- > panopticon/682616/ archive/2025/04/american-panopticon/682616/> > > F. > > > > > http://www.forbes.com/sites/federicoguerrini/ sites/federicoguerrini/> > -- You can reach me on Signal: @quinta.01 (no Whatsapp, no Telegram) http://www.forbes.com/sites/federicoguerrini/ https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/our-research/newsroom-curators-and-independent-storytellers-content-curation-new-form-journalism My latest book: Content Curation (Italian): http://www.amazon.it/Content-Curation-Federico-Guerrini/dp/8820366126
