PRIVACY Forum Archive Document
PRIVACY Forum Digest Tuesday, 11 August 1992 Volume 01 : Issue 12 Moderated by Lauren Weinstein (email@example.com) Vortex Technology, Topanga, CA, U.S.A. ===== PRIVACY FORUM ===== The PRIVACY Forum digest is supported in part by the ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy. CONTENTS DNA databanking: Just what data? (Jerry Leichter) [Gary Chapman: DNA databanking] (Brinton Cooper) Interesting Solicitation (A. Padgett Peterson) CNID press release (Nikki Draper) Online Access To Congressional Information (James P. Love) PDC '92 -- Advance Program (Paul Hyland) PDC '92 -- Call for Posters (Paul Hyland) *** Please include a RELEVANT "Subject:" line on all submissions! *** *** Submissions without them may be ignored! *** ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- The PRIVACY Forum is a moderated digest for the discussion and analysis of issues relating to the general topic of privacy (both personal and collective) in the "information age" of the 1990's and beyond. The moderator will choose submissions for inclusion based on their relevance and content. Submissions will not be routinely acknowledged. ALL submissions should be addressed to "firstname.lastname@example.org" and must have RELEVANT "Subject:" lines. Submissions without appropriate and relevant "Subject:" lines may be ignored. Subscriptions are by an automatic "listserv" system; for subscription information, please send a message consisting of the word "help" (quotes not included) in the BODY of a message to: "email@example.com". Mailing list problems should be reported to "firstname.lastname@example.org". All submissions included in this digest represent the views of the individual authors and all submissions will be considered to be distributable without limitations. The PRIVACY Forum archive, including all issues of the digest and all related materials, is available via anonymous FTP from site "cv.vortex.com/", in the "/privacy" directory. Use the FTP login "ftp" or "anonymous", and enter your e-mail address as the password. The typical "README" and "INDEX" files are available to guide you through the files available for FTP access. PRIVACY Forum materials may also be obtained automatically via e-mail through the listserv system. Please follow the instructions above for getting the listserv "help" information, which includes details regarding the "index" and "get" listserv commands, which are used to access the PRIVACY Forum archive. For information regarding the availability of this digest via FAX, please send an inquiry to email@example.com, call (310) 455-9300, or FAX to (310) 455-2364. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- VOLUME 01, ISSUE 12 Quote for the day: "Uh oh..." -- Last words reported to have been recorded on the space shuttle Challenger's cockpit voice recorder before the craft's explosion on Jan 28, 1986. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 4 Aug 92 22:25:14 EDT From: Jerry Leichter <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: DNA databanking: Just what data? An article in a recent issue of PRIVACY raises the issue of possible misuse of DNA "fingerprinting" data, proposed to be collected from all prisoners. Among the possible abuses cited are discrimination in hiring, insurance, and so on. While there are many potential (though, so far, only a few reported real) problems with the proliferation of genetic data, I don't believe this is one fo them. There's all sorts of different data that one can collect about DNA. The data used in "genetic fingerprinting" is a representation of the relative levels of a fairly small number of specific gene variations. There's no information about anything else. The sensitive data concerns genetic markers for various inherited conditions; these have to be tested for specifically, and are not part of the "fingerprinting" data. Certainly, there is likely to be SOME disease whose likelihood can be "read out" of a "DNA fingerprint". The same could be said of blood type, racial information, even traditional fingerprints. Knowing someone is 5 foot 3 and weighs 275 pounds - certainly something that would appear in any prisoner's file - would give pause to any life insurance company. Identifying anything involving DNA with a complete genetic scan and then worrying about the horrible privacy implications is like panicking over the danger from light bulbs on being told that they give off light "radiation". Many more facts are called for. -- Jerry ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Aug 92 14:39:17 EDT From: Brinton Cooper <abc@BRL.MIL> Subject: [Gary Chapman: DNA databanking] DNA databanking is quite properly an object of concern to all of us and it is appropriate for the scientific and technical communities to take a hard look at its use as evidence in criminal trials. Nothing, however, occurs in a vacuum. Years ago, Scientific American examined the use of eyewitness testimony in tort cases and others. The conclusions were far from gratifying. Yet, it does not appear that any defense based upon these findings has been terribly successful in ruling out such evidence as "conclusive prosecutorial evidence." One cannot help but wonder how the rates of false convictions based upon eyewitness testimony and DNA matching will compare. One wonders, too, how one would ever "accredit" eyewitness testimony in a federal (or any other) laboratory. _Brint ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Aug 92 15:45:52 -0400 From: email@example.com (A. Padgett Peterson) Subject: Interesting Solicitation Just received in the mail my new DAK Catalogue (for those of you not fortunate enough to be on Drew's mailing list, this is a California-based super deal catalogue mostly on electronics, hi-fi, computers, and bread makers). Lately they have been pushing CD-ROM quite heavily with a featured $199.00 (dollars US) 800 (eight hundred) ms caddyless external CD-ROM and a plethora of CD-ROM packages. The item that caught my interest from a privacy standpoint was the $129.00 (dollars US again) set of CD-ROMs containing "millions" of names, phone numbers, and addresses for both US businesses and residences. Could that heavily criticised address database from last year be surfacing again in a rather unlikely spot ? (don't know, haven't seen it. Warmly, Padgett [ DAK has their warehouse, offices, and walk-in store about 20 minutes from my area. I've been down there a number of times to very carefully buy various items. The important thing to keep in mind about DAK is that much of their merchandise consists of closeouts or "old versions" of items that have already been supersceded by later versions. One would have to wonder about the degree of data "staleness" in a DAK CD-ROM nationwide white pages (which is what I believe this item to be). -- MODERATOR ] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Aug 92 16:00:25 PDT From: draper@Csli.Stanford.EDU (Nikki Draper) Subject: CNID press release PACIFIC BELL'S PHONE PRIVACY RINGS FALSE, SAYS COMPUTER PROFESSIONALS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY PALO ALTO, Calif., August 10, 1992 -- Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR), a national alliance of professionals concerned with the impact of technology on society based here, expressed deep concern over Pacific Bell's attempt to gut a recent California Public Utility Commission (PUC) order on Calling-Number Identification (CNID). Pacific Bell has requested a rehearing on the PUC restrictions. PacBell's proposal will eliminate important safety and privacy protections in the Commission's order, CPSR charged. CNID allows businesses to collect the phone numbers of customers who call them. The Commission's order guarantees privacy protections for all Californians. PacBell proposes to eliminate a key privacy protection called Per-Line Blocking with Per-Call Unblocking. This feature prevents home numbers from being collected by businesses, unless the caller decides to give it to them. Phone companies would prefer to only offer per-call blocking, a scheme in which caller numbers are always given out unless the caller remembers to dial a blocking code before dialing the desired number. "If this happens, Californians will inevitably receive more junk mail, more annoying phone calls, and greater invasions of their privacy, some of which may be dangerous," said CPSR Chair and user interface expert, Dr. Jeff Johnson. PacBell claims that CNID would give people more control over their privacy by providing the phone number from the calling phone. This is the wrong technological answer to the problem according to Johnson. "What people want to know is who is calling, not what phone is being used. If my wife's car breaks down and she calls me from a pay phone, that's a call I want to answer. CNID doesn't give me any information that will help me do that." In PUC hearings held last year, Johnson accused the phone companies of designing a service that is more useful for businesses in gathering marketing data than for consumers in screening calls. Phone companies are opposed to per-line blocking because it would presumably result in more numbers being kept private, thereby reducing the value of the CNID service to business subscribers. "Phone companies don't want you to block your phone number when you call movie theaters or appliance stores. The more times your number is revealed to businesses, the better! So they oppose reasonable blocking options and are pushing an error-prone one," he said. If only per-call blocking were available, residential phone customers -- or their children, parents, grandparents, guests -- would often forget to dial their blocking code before making a call, resulting in frequent disclosure of private information to businesses without the consent, and sometimes even without the knowledge, of the caller. "Unless PacBell is willing to live within the very reasonable bounds set by the PUC decision, the concerns of Californians will be far better served if CNID is simply not offered at all," said Johnson. "Subscriber privacy is more important that Pacific Bell's profits." Founded in 1981, CPSR is a public interest alliance of computer scientists and other professionals interested in the impact of computer technology on society. As technical experts and informed citizens, CPSR members provide the public and policy makers with realistic assessments of the power, promise, and limitations of computer technology. It is a national organization, with 21 chapters throughout the United States. The organization also has program offices in Washington D.C. and Cambridge, MA. For information on CPSR, contact the national office at 415-322-3778 or firstname.lastname@example.org. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Aug 1992 22:13:41 EDT From: James P Love <LOVE@pucc.Princeton.EDU> Subject: ONLINE ACCESS TO CONGRESSIONAL INFORMATION ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Information Access Memorandum To: Citizens interested in public access to government information Re: Public Access to U.S. House and Senate Legislative Information Systems (LEGIS) Date: July 21, 1992 Dear friend: The following letter to Senator Ford (D-KY) and Representative Rose (D-NC) asks for public access to the House and Senate LEGIS systems. LEGIS provides online access to the full text of bills before congress, as well as other items. Access is now restricted to members of congress and their staff. (except for limited walk-in service). If you want to join us in asking for remote online access to this important taxpayer funded information system, please provide us with the following information, along with permission to add your name to the letter. Name Affiliation (for purposes of identification only) Address City, State and Zip Code Telephone (for verification) email address Please send (mail, fax, or email) this information to: Taxpayer Assets Project P.O. Box 19367 Washington, DC 20036 voice:202/387-8030 fax:202/234-5176 email@example.com Thank you. James Love Director Taxpayer Assets Project ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Senator Ford Chairman, Senate Committee on Rules and Administration U.S. Senate Washington, DC 20510 Representative Rose Chairman, Committee on House Administration U.S. House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 August XX, 1992 RE: Public Access to Senate and House LEGIS Dear Sirs: This letter is to request that the public be granted access to the Legislative Information Systems operated by the United States Senate and House of Representatives. These taxpayer financed information systems provide online access to information of immense interest to millions of citizens. (For purposes of this letter the two systems will be referred to simply as LEGIS). Examples of the information contained in LEGIS are: - Summary information about the content and status of all Senate and House bills, resolutions, floor amendments, public and private laws - Full text of the latest versions of Senate and House bills - Summary information on all Presidential nominations requiring Senate confirmation - Summary information on treaties submitted to the Senate for ratification - Summary information on communications from the executive branch and state and local governments on matters before the Congress Our specific recommendations are as follows: 1. CITIZENS SHOULD BE ABLE TO SEARCH LEGIS ONLINE FROM REMOTE LOCATIONS. While the public pays for the operation of LEGIS we have never been allowed access, except for limited walk-in access in Congressional reading rooms. This policy should change. In a period when Congress is seeking to reform itself, it is appropriate to extend access to these valuable information systems beyond the members and staff of congress, to the citizens whom they serve. 2. PUBLIC ACCESS TO LEGIS SHOULD BE MODELED ON THE PROPOSED GPO GATEWAY TO GOVERNMENT/WINDO LEGISLATION. As sponsors of S. 2813, the GPO Gateway to Government, and H.R. 2772, the GPO Wide Information Network for Data Online (WINDO), you have worked hard to expand public access to federal databases. Should the Gateway/WINDO become law, LEGIS should be among its initial core databases. In any event, the approach taken in these two bills is appropriate for LEGIS. - The public should have the right to subscribe to online access to LEGIS from remote locations. For most subscribers, the cost of the subscription should be based on the incremental cost of providing such access. - LEGIS information should also be made available without charge through the federal Depository Library Program. As you know, this important program, which began in the middle of the 19th century, is designed to promote universal access to federal government information. 3. CONGRESS SHOULD REGULARLY SOLICIT FEEDBACK FROM LEGIS USERS TO DETERMINE IF THE SYSTEM CAN BE IMPROVED. There are several areas where LEGIS could be improved. For example, some citizens may ask that Congress provide more detailed information on voting, committee actions, or other congressional business. Citizens should have opportunities to identify the types of information that would be useful in monitoring the actions of the Congress. Your support for the Gateway/WINDO bills is deeply appreciated, as are your other efforts to broaden public access to databases and information systems that are financed by the taxpayer. Please inform us of the specific steps that you will take to broaden public access to LEGIS. Thank you. Sincerely, ----------------------------------------------------------------- The following persons will be among those signing the letter asking for public access to LEGIS: Joan Claybrook Howard C. Weaver President Editor Public Citizen Anchorage Daily News 2000 P Street, NW Box 149001 Washington, DC 20036 Anchorage, Alaska 99514-9001 Brian Kahin Jack D. Lail Director, Information Metro Editor Infrastructure Project, Knoxville News-Sentinel Science, Technology and P.O. Box 59038 Public Policy Program Knoxville, TN 37950-9038 John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University Marc Rotenberg 79 John F. Kennedy St. Director, Washington Office Cambridge, MA 02138 Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility Professor James Galbraith 666 Pennsylvania Ave., S.E. LBJ School of Public Affairs Suite 303 and Department of Government Washington, DC 20003 University of Texas at Austin Austin, TX James Love Director Howard Rheingold Taxpayer Assets Project Editor P.O. Box 19367 Whole Earth Review Washington, DC 20036 27 Gate Five Road Sausalito, CA 94965 Dr. James R. Veatch firstname.lastname@example.org Nashville Tech Library 120 White Bridge Road Nashville, TN 37209-4515 ----------------------------------------------------------------- James Love, Director VOICE: 609-683-0534 Taxpayer Assets Project FAX: 202-234-5176 P.O. Box 19367 INTERNET: email@example.com Washington, DC 20036 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1992 14:04:17 EDT From: Paul Hyland <PHYLAND%GWUVM.BITNET@pucc.Princeton.EDU> Subject: PDC '92 -- Advance Program Advance Program PDC'92: PARTICIPATORY DESIGN CONFERENCE MIT Kresge Auditorium, Cambridge MA US 6-7 November 1992 PANEL: PARTICIPATION AND POWER Charley Richardson and Raymond Scannell PANEL: FLEXIBILITY AND TAILORABILITY IN SYSTEM AND WORK DESIGN Kim Halskov Madsen, Hans Dooreward, Trond Knudsen PANEL: FROM PARTICIPATORY DESIGN TO DEMOCRACY: SOCIAL CHANGE AS BOTH CAUSE AND EFFECT Steven E. Miller PLENARY PAPER: RETROSPECTIVE Andrew Clement. Participatory design projects: A retrospective look PAPERS: DESIGN PRACTICE William L. Anderson, and William T. Crocca. Experiences in reflective engineering practice: Co-development of product prototypes Ina Wagner. Caught in a web of fuzzy problems: Confronting the ethical issues in systems design Julian E. Orr and Norman C. Crowfoot. Design by anecdote -- The use of ethnography to guide the application of technology to practice PAPERS: TECHNIQUES AND PRACTICES I: USING ARTIFACTS Barbara Katzenberg and Peter Piela. Studying work language as an aid in evolutionary design processes Finn Kensing and Andreas Munk-Madsen. Participatory design: Structure in the toolbox Preben Mogensen and Randall H. Trigg. Artifacts as triggers for participatory analysis PAPERS: TECHNIQUES AND PRACTICES II: HANDS ON THE DESIGN Peter Aiken and Kim Halskov Madsen. Some experiences with cooperative interactive storyboard prototyping Michael J. Muller, John G. Smith, David S. Miller, Ellen A. White, and Daniel M. Wildman. Designing a groupware implementation of a manual participatory design process PAPERS: TECHNIQUES AND PRACTICES III: DIARIES Karlheinz Kautz. Communication support for participatory design projects Kristin Braa. Influencing system quality by using process documentation in prototyping projects PAPERS: INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS Erran Carmel, Randall Whitaker, and Joey F. George. Participatory design versus joint application design: Trans- Atlantic differences in systems development Philip Kraft and Joergen Bansler. The collective resource approach as a model of worker participation PAPERS: ORGANIZATIONAL CONSTRAINTS Yoram Reich, Suresh Konda, Ira Monarch, and Eswaran Subrahmanian. Participation and design: An extended view Jonathan P. Allen. Enabling participatory design in a tightly integrated, hierarchical setting Thea Turner, Suzi Levas, Mike Atwood, and Craig Reding. The influence of the existing environment on the design of a new workstation PAPERS: ANALOGIES TO NON-COMPUTER FIELDS Chengzhi Peng. Participatory architectural modeling: Common images and distributed design environments Joan Greenbaum. Notes toward a discussion of ethics and esthetics: Scandinavian design -- from furniture to participatory design INTERACTIVE POSTERS WORKSHOPS (parallel tracks, half-day) Michael K. Epstein and Elaine K. Yakura. Managing the stresses of participatory design Robert Karasek. The conducivity game: Developing worker re- coordination vocabularies Debbie Mrazek and Tom Cocklin. A paradigm shift to customer focus Charley Richardson and Raymond Scannell. Participation and power workshop Elizabeth B.-N. Sanders. Participatory design research in the product development process COMMITTEES: Conference Committee: William Anderson, JoAnn Brooks, Andrew Clement, Paul Czezewski, Elizabeth Dykstra Erickson, Dan Franklin, Sarah Kuhn, Michael McFarland, Judith A. Meskill, Susan Miller, Michael Muller, Ken Schroder, Melanie Weaver, Ellen White, and Dan Williams. Program Committee: William Anderson, Susanne Bodker, JoAnn Brooks, Andrew Clement, Joan Greenbaum, Marc Griffiths, Jonathan Grudin, Susan Harker, Pertti Jarvinen, Sarah Kuhn, Kim Halskov Madsen, Andrew Monk, Michael Muller, Horst Oberquelle, Charley Richardson, Lucy Suchman, Kari Thoresen, and Terry Winograd. Co-chairs: Sarah Kuhn, Michael Muller. PDC'92 is sponsored by Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, and is in cooperation with ACM SIGCHI, IFIP, and the Greater Boston SIGCHI chapter, with corporate sponsorship by Xerox PARC. For more information: Please contact either co-chair: Sarah Kuhn Department of Policy and Planning University of Massachusetts - Lowell Pasteur 2B Lowell MA 01854 US +1-508-934-2903 (voice) +1-508-934-3011 (fax) firstname.lastname@example.org Michael Muller Bellcore, Room RRC-1H229 444 Hoes Lane Piscataway NJ 08854 US +1-908-699-4892 (voice) +1-908-336-2969 (fax) email@example.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1992 14:02:56 EDT From: Paul Hyland <PHYLAND%GWUVM.BITNET@pucc.Princeton.EDU> Subject: PDC '92 -- Call for Posters Call for POSTERS - 15 August 1992 PDC'92 - Participatory Design Conference MIT Kresge Auditorium Cambridge MA US 6-7 November 1992 Computer technology today has a profound effect on our workplaces, communities, homes, and social institutions. Decisions about the design and implementation of computerized systems influence the character, pace, and organization of work, the extent of our privacy or isolation, and our ability to take an active role in our social, political, and economic lives. Participatory design examines the questions: o Who makes these decisions? and o How can we include the people who are directly affected by the technology and whose expertise is essential to making the technology fit into the users' lives? and o What processes, methods, and technologies support more inclusive decision-making? The Participatory Design Conference will bring together computer specialists, human factors workers, scholars, members of the labor and business communities, human resource workers, and design professionals from other fields. It will be practice- and action- oriented, interdisciplinary, international, and participatory. Possible topics: o Defining Participatory Design o Issues of particular user constituencies o Case studies of design processes o Methods for Participatory Design o Reports on work in progress o National and cultural contexts of design o Constraints on Participatory Design o Theories of design o Participatory research practices o PD in non-computer fields Other relevant topics are also welcome! Submission requirements: Poster proposals will be accepted until 15 August 1992. Please provide a 1500 word abstract and, if possible, an informal sketch of the poster. We also request a cover sheet with the following information: o primary contact author (with as much contact information as possible), o a 100 word abstract, and o an indication of which of the above topics is addressed by the submission. Send 5 copies of each proposal. Notifications regarding poster proposals will be sent out by 1 September 1992. We plan to publish posters in the Conference Proceedings by title only; poster abstracts will be published in the Conference Program. Please send all submissions to the following address: Michael J. Muller / PDC'92 Bellcore RRC-1H229, 444 Hoes Lane, Piscataway NJ 08854 US firstname.lastname@example.org +1 908 699 4892 (voice) +1 908 336 2932 (fax) The Conference is organized by Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, and is in cooperation with ACM, IFIP, and Greater Boston SIGCHI, with corporate sponsorship by Xerox PARC. The Conference co-chairs are Sarah Kuhn and Michael Muller. Program Committee: William Anderson, Susanne Bodker, JoAnn Brooks, Andrew Clement, Joan Greenbaum, Jonathan Grudin, Susan Harker, Pertti Jarvinen, Sarah Kuhn, Kim Halskov Madsen, Andrew Monk, Michael Muller, Horst Oberquelle, Charley Richardson, Lucy Suchman, Kari Thoresen, and Terry Winograd. ------------------------------ End of PRIVACY Forum Digest 01.12 ************************
Vortex Technology Home Page
Copyright © 2005 Vortex Technology. All Rights Reserved.