Centre for Internet and Society

The Digital Identification Parade

Aayush Rathi and Ambika Tandon — 2019-07-30T00:19:25Z

NCRB’s proposed Automated Facial Recognition System impinges on right to privacy, is likely to target certain groups.

The article by Aayush Rathi and Ambika Tandon was published in the Indian Express on July 29, 2019. The authors acknowledge Sumandro Chattapadhyay, Amber Sinha and Arindrajit Basu for their edits and Karan Saini for his inputs.

The National Crime Records Bureau recently issued a request for proposals for the procurement of an Automated Facial Recognition System (AFRS). The stated objective of the AFRS is to “identify criminals, missing persons/children, unidentified dead bodies and unknown traced children/persons”. It will be designed to compare images against a “watchlist” curated using images from “any […] image database available with police/other entity”, and “newspapers, raids, sent by people, sketches, etc.” The integration of diverse databases indicates the lack of a specific purpose, with potential for ad hoc use at later stages. Data sharing arrangements with the vendor are unclear, raising privacy concerns around corporate access to sensitive information of crores of individuals.

While a senior government official clarified that the AFRS will only be used against the integrated police database in India — the Crime and Criminal Tracking Network and Systems (CCTNS) — the tender explicitly states the integration of several other databases, including the passport database, and the National Automated Fingerprint Identification System. This is hardly reassuring. Even a targeted database like the CCTNS risks over-representation of marginalised communities, as has already been witnessed in other countries. The databases that the CCTNS links together have racial and colonial origins, recording details of unconvicted persons if they are found to be “suspicious”, based on their tribe, caste or appearance. However, including other databases puts millions of innocent individuals on the AFRS’s watchlist. The objective then becomes to identify “potential criminals” — instead of being “presumed innocent”, we are all persons-who-haven’t-been-convicted-yet.

The AFRS may allow indiscriminate searching by tapping into publicly and privately installed CCTVs pan-India. While facial recognition technology (FRT) has proliferated globally, only a few countries have systems that use footage from CCTVs installed in public areas. This is the most excessive use of FRT, building on its more common implementation as border technology. CCTV cameras are already rife with cybersecurity issues, and integration with the AFRS will expand the “attack surface” for exploiting vulnerabilities in the AFRS. Additionally, the AFRS will allow real-time querying, enabling “continuous” mass surveillance. Misuse of continuous surveillance has been seen in China, with the Uighurs being persecuted as an ethnic minority.

FRT differs from other biometric forms of identification (such as fingerprints, DNA samples) in the degree and pervasiveness of surveillance that it enables. It is designed to operate at a distance, without any knowledge of the targeted individual(s). It is far more difficult to prevent an image of one’s face from being captured, and allows for the targeting of multiple persons at a time. By its very nature, it is a non-consensual and covert surveillance technology.

Potential infringements on the right to privacy, a fundamental right, could be enormous as FRT allows for continuous and ongoing identification. Further, the AFRS violates the legal test of proportionality that was articulated in the landmark Puttaswamy judgment, with constant surveillance being used as a strategy for crime detection. Other civil liberties such as free speech and the right to assemble peacefully could be implicated as well, as specific groups of people such as dissidents and protests can be targeted.

Moreover, facial recognition technology has not performed well as a crime detection technology. Challenges arise at the stage of input itself. Variations in pose, illumination, and expression, among other factors, adversely impact the accuracy of automated facial analysis. In the US, law enforcement has been using images from low-quality surveillance feed as probe photos, leading to erroneous matches. A matter of concern is that several arrests have been made solely on the basis of likely matches returned by FRT.

Research indicates that default camera settings better expose light skin than dark, which affects results for FRT across racial groups. Moreover, the software could be tested on certain groups more often than others, and could consequently be more accurate in identifying individuals from that group. The AFRS is envisioned as having both functionalities of an FRT — identification of an individual, and social classification — with the latter holding significant potential to misclassify minority communities.

In the UK, after accounting for a host of the issues outlined above, the Science and Technology Committee, comprising 14 sitting MPs, recently called for a moratorium on deploying live FRT. It will be prudent to pay heed to this directive in India, in the absence of any framework around data protection, or the use of biometric technologies by law enforcement.

The experience of law enforcement’s use of FRT globally, and the unique challenges posed by the usage of live FRT demand closer scrutiny into how it can be regulated. One approach may be to use a technology-neutral regulatory framework that identifies gradations of harms. However, given the history of political surveillance by the Indian state, a complete prohibition on FRT may not be too far-fetched.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/aayush-rathi-and-ambika-tandon-indian-express-july-29-2019-the-digital-identification-parade

India is falling down the facial recognition rabbit hole

Prem Sylvester and Karan Saini — 2019-07-25T13:40:00Z

Its use as an effective law enforcement tool is overstated, while the underlying technology is deeply flawed.

The article by Prem Sylvester and Karan Saini was published in the Wire on July 23, 2019.

In a discomfiting reminder of how far technology can be used to intrude on the lives of individuals in the name of security, the Ministry of Home Affairs, through the National Crime Records Bureau, recently put out a tender for a new Automated Facial Recognition System (AFRS).

The stated objective of this system is to “act as a foundation for a national level searchable platform of facial images,” and to “[improve] outcomes in the area of criminal identification and verification by facilitating easy recording, analysis, retrieval and sharing of Information between different organizations.”

The system will pull facial image data from CCTV feeds and compare these images with existing records in a number of databases, including (but not limited to) the Crime and Criminal Tracking Networks and Systems (or CCTNS), Interoperable Criminal Justice System (or ICJS), Immigration Visa Foreigner Registration Tracking (or IVFRT), Passport, Prisons, Ministry of Women and Child Development (KhoyaPaya), and state police records.

Furthermore, this system of facial recognition will be integrated with the yet-to-be-deployed National Automated Fingerprint Identification System (NAFIS) as well as other biometric databases to create what is effectively a multi-faceted system of biometric surveillance.

It is rather unfortunate, then, that the government has called for bids on the AFRS tender without any form of utilitarian calculus that might justify its existence. The tender simply states that this system would be “a great investigation enhancer.”

This confidence is misplaced at best. There is significant evidence that not only is a facial recognition system, as has been proposed, ineffective in its application as a crime-fighting tool, but it is a significant threat to the privacy rights and dignity of citizens. Notwithstanding the question of whether such a system would ultimately pass the test of constitutionality – on the grounds that it affects various freedoms and rights guaranteed within the constitution – there are a number of faults in the issued tender.

Let us first consider the mechanics of a facial recognition system itself. Facial recognition systems chain together a number of algorithms to identify and pick out specific, distinctive details about a person’s face – such as the distance between the eyes, or shape of the chin, along with distinguishable ‘facial landmarks’. These details are then converted into a mathematical representation known as a face template for comparison with similar data on other faces collected in a face recognition database. There are, however, several problems with facial recognition technology that employs such methods.

Facial recognition technology depends on machine learning – the tender itself mentions that the AFRS is expected to work on neural networks “or similar technology” – which is far from perfect. At a relatively trivial level, there are several ways to fool facial recognition systems, including wearing eyewear, or specific types of makeup. The training sets for the algorithm itself can be deliberately poisoned to recognise objects incorrectly, as observed by students at MIT.

More consequentially, these systems often throw up false positives, such as when the face recognition system incorrectly matches a person’s face (say, from CCTV footage) to an image in a database (say, a mugshot), which might result in innocent citizens being identified as criminals. In a real-time experiment set in a train station in Mainz, Germany, facial recognition accuracy ranged from 17-29% – and that too only for faces seen from the front – and was at 60% during the day but 10-20% at night, indicating that environmental conditions play a significant role in this technology.

Facial recognition software used by the UK’s Metropolitan Police has returned false positives in more than 98% of match alerts generated.

When the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) used Amazon’s face recognition system, Rekognition, to compare images of legislative members of the American Congress with a database of mugshots, the results included 28 incorrect matches.

There is another uncomfortable reason for these inaccuracies – facial recognition systems often reflect the biases of the society they are deployed in, leading to problematic face-matching results. Technological objectivity is largely a myth, and facial recognition offers a stark example of this.

An MIT study shows that existing facial recognition technology routinely misidentifies people of darker skin tone, women and young people at high rates, performing better on male faces than female faces (8.1% to 20.6% difference in error rate), lighter faces than darker faces (11.8% to 19.2% difference in error rate) and worst on darker female faces (20.8% to 34.7% error rate). In the aforementioned ACLU study, the false matches were disproportionately people of colour, particularly African-Americans. The bias rears its head when the parameters of machine-learning algorithms, derived from labelled data during a “supervised learning” phase, adhere to socially-prejudiced ideas of who might commit crimes.

The implications for facial recognition are chilling. In an era of pervasive cameras and big data, such prejudice can be applied at unprecedented scale through facial recognition systems. By replacing biased human judgment with a machine learning technique that embeds the same bias, and more reliably, we defeat any claims of technological neutrality. Worse, because humans will assume that the machine’s “judgment” is not only consistently fair on average but independent of their personal biases, they will read agreement of its conclusions with their intuition as independent corroboration.

In the Indian context, consider that Muslims, Dalits, Adivasis and other SC/STs are disproportionately targeted by law enforcement. The NCRB in its 2015 report on prison statistics in India recorded that over 55% of the undertrials prisoners in India are either Dalits, Adivasis or Muslims, a number grossly disproportionate to the combined population of Dalits, Adivasis and Muslims, which amounts to just 39% of the total population according to the 2011 Census.

If the AFRS is thus trained on these records, it would clearly reinforce socially-held prejudices against these communities, as inaccurately representative as they may be of those who actually carry out crimes. The tender gives no indication that the developed system would need to eliminate or even minimise these biases, nor if the results of the system would be human-verifiable.

This could lead to a runaway effect if subsequent versions of the machine-learning algorithm are trained with criminal convictions in which the algorithm itself played a causal role. Taking such a feedback loop to its logical conclusion, law enforcement may use machine learning to allocate police resources to likely crime spots – which would often be in low income or otherwise vulnerable communities.

Adam Greenfield writes in Radical Machines on the idea of ‘over transparency,’ that combines “bias” of the system’s designers as well of the training sets – based as these systems are on machine learning – and “legibility” of the data from which patterns may be extracted. The “meaningful question,” then, isn’t limited to whether facial recognition technology works in identification – “[i]t’s whether someone believes that they do, and acts on that belief.”

The question thus arises as to why the MHA/NCRB believes this is an effective tool for law enforcement. We’re led, then, to another, larger concern with the AFRS – that it deploys a system of surveillance that oversteps its mandate of law enforcement. The AFRS ostensibly circumvents the fundamental right to privacy, as ratified by the Supreme Court in 2018, through sourcing its facial images from CCTV cameras installed in public locations, where the citizen may expect to be observed.

The extent of this surveillance is made even clearer when one observes the range of databases mentioned in the tender for the purposes of matching with suspects’ faces extends to “any other image database available with police/other entity” besides the previously mentioned CCTNS, ICJS et al. The choice of these databases makes overreach extremely viable.

This is compounded when we note that the tender expects the system to “[m]atch suspected criminal face[sic] from pre-recorded video feeds obtained from CCTVs deployed in various critical identified locations, or with the video feeds received from private or other public organization’s video feeds.” There further arises a concern with regard to the process of identification of such “critical […] locations,” and if there would be any mechanisms in place to prevent this from being turned into an unrestrained system of surveillance, particularly with the stated access to private organisations’ feeds.

The Perpetual Lineup report by Georgetown Law’s Center on Privacy & Technology identifies real-time (and historic) video surveillance as posing a very high risk to privacy, civil liberties and civil rights, especially owing to the high-risk factors of the system using real-time dragnet searches that are more or less invisible to the subjects of surveillance.

It is also designated a “Novel Use” system of criminal identification, i.e., with little to no precedent as compared to fingerprint or DNA analysis, the latter of which was responsible for countless wrongful convictions during its nascent application in the science of forensic identification, which have since then been overturned.

In the Handbook of Face Recognition, Andrew W. Senior and Sharathchandra Pankanti identify a more serious threat that may be born out of automated facial recognition, assessing that “these systems also have the potential […] to make judgments about [subjects’] actions and behaviours, as well as aggregating this data across days, or even lifetimes,” making video surveillance “an efficient, automated system that observes everything in front of any of its cameras, and allows all that data to be reviewed instantly, and mined in new ways” that allow constant tracking of subjects.

Such “blanket, omnivident surveillance networks” are a serious possibility through the proposed AFRS. Ye et al, in their paper on “Anonymous biometric access control”, show how automatically captured location and facial image data obtained from cameras designed to track the same can be used to learn graphs of social networks in groups of people.

Consider those charged with sedition or similar crimes, given that the CCTNS records the details as noted in FIRs across the country. Through correlating the facial image data obtained from CCTVs across the country – the tender itself indicates that the system must be able to match faces obtained from two (or more) CCTVs – this system could easily be used to target the movements of dissidents moving across locations.

Constantly watched

Further, something which has not been touched upon in the tender – and which may ultimately allow for a broader set of images for carrying out facial recognition – is the definition of what exactly constitutes a ‘criminal’. Is it when an FIR is registered against an individual, or when s/he is arrested and a chargesheet is filed? Or is it only when an individual is convicted by a court that they are considered a criminal?

Additionally, does a person cease to be recognised by the tag of a criminal once s/he has served their prison sentence and paid their dues to society? Or are they instead marked as higher-risk individuals who may potentially commit crimes again? It could be argued that such a definition is not warranted in a tender document, however, these are legitimate questions which should be answered prior to commissioning and building a criminal facial recognition system.

Senior and Pankanti note the generalised metaphysical consequences of pervasive video surveillance in the Handbook of Face Recognition:

“the feeling of disquiet remains [even if one hasn’t committed a major crime], perhaps because everyone has done something “wrong”, whether in the personal or legal sense (speeding, parking, jaywalking…) and few people wish to live in a society where all its laws are enforced absolutely rigidly, never mind arbitrarily, and there is always the possibility that a government to which we give such powers may begin to move towards authoritarianism and apply them towards ends that we do not endorse.”

Such a seemingly apocalyptic scenario isn’t far-fetched. In the section on ‘Mandatory Features of the AFRS’, the system goes a step further and is expected to integrate “with other biometric solution[sic] deployed at police department system like Automatic Fingerprint identification system (AFIS)[sic]” and “Iris.” This form of linking of biometric databases opens up possibilities of a dangerous extent of profiling.

While the Aadhaar Act, 2016, disallows Aadhaar data from being handed over to law enforcement agencies, the AFRS and its linking with biometric systems (such as the NAFIS) effectively bypasses the minimal protections from biometric surveillance the prior unavailability of Aadhaar databases might have afforded. The fact that India does not have a data protection law yet – and the Bill makes no references to protection against surveillance either – deepens the concern with the usage of these integrated databases.

The Perpetual Lineup report warns that the government could use biometric technology “to identify multiple people in a continuous, ongoing manner [..] from afar, in public spaces,” allowing identification “to be done in secret”. Senior and Pankanti warn of “function creep,” where the public grows uneasy as “silos of information, collected for an authorized process […] start being used for purposes not originally intended, especially when several such databases are linked together to enable searches across multiple domains.”

This, as Adam Greenfield points out, could very well erode “the effectiveness of something that has historically furnished an effective brake on power: the permanent possibility that an enraged populace might take to the streets in pursuit of justice.”

What the NCRB’s AFRS amounts to, then, is a system of public surveillance that offers little demonstrable advantage to crime-fighting, especially as compared with its costs to fundamental human rights of privacy and the freedom of assembly and association. This, without even delving into its implications with regard to procedural law. To press on with this system, then, would be indicative of the government’s lackadaisical attitude towards protecting citizens’ freedoms.

The views expressed by the authors in this article are personal.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/india-is-falling-down-the-facial-recognition-rabbit-hole

ออกแบบระบบข้อมูลประชาชนดิจิทัล: คุยกับผู้เชี่ยวชาญหาแนวทางเหมาะสม

Admin — 2019-07-21T14:32:25Z

Talk with Sunil Abraham, an expert on the Internet and good governance in the issue of creating a digital identification system.

What should you think before doing a national database? Transparency should be inversely proportional to the power of the person. The state must provide information as well. Not the only store Database technology and public surveillance are not the same. Otherwise the entire system will crash How important is democracy in making good information systems? Read the interview published by Prachatai on July 18, 2019 below

คุยกับสุนิล อับราฮัม ผู้เชี่ยวชาญเรื่องอินเทอร์เน็ตและธรรมาภิบาลในประเด็นการจัดทำระบบข้อมูลประจำตัวประชาชนแบบดิจิทัล ควรคิดอะไรก่อนทำฐานข้อมูลประชาชนระดับชาติ ความโปร่งใสควรแปรผกผันกับอำนาจของบุคคล รัฐต้องให้ข้อมูลด้วย ไม่ใช่เก็บอย่างเดียว เทคโนโลยีฐานข้อมูลกับการสอดส่องประชาชนไม่ใช่เรื่องเดียวกัน ไม่เช่นนั้นพังทั้งระบบ ประชาธิปไตยสำคัญอย่างไรกับการทำระบบข้อมูลที่ดี

หนึ่งในบทสนทนาที่มีในปัจจุบันคือการนำข้อมูลประชาชนขึ้นสู่ระบบดิจิทัล เทคโนโลยีการบริหารจัดการข้อมูลอย่างระบบฐานข้อมูลดิจิทัลไปจนถึงโครงข่ายออนไลน์แบบบลอกเชนทำให้จินตนาการดังกล่าวเป็นรูปเป็นร่างขึ้น

แต่เมื่อถอยกลับไปมองภาพใหญ่จะพบว่าเรื่องทางเทคนิคเป็นเพียงหนึ่งเม็ดทรายบนชายหาด ยังมีข้อควรคำนึงถึงเยอะแยะหยุมหยิมไปหมดทั้งในเรื่องกฎหมาย ความพร้อมของผู้บังคับใช้กฎหมาย ภาคธุรกิจและประชาชนที่ต้องคำนึงถึงเรื่องพฤติกรรม บรรทัดฐานของสังคม และคำถามสำคัญที่ว่าระบบดังกล่าวจะถูกใช้ในการเฝ้าระวัง สอดแนมประชาชนหรือไม่ เพราะประเทศเผด็จการที่คนไทยหลายคนยกย่องอย่างจีน ก็ใช้ข้อมูลอัตลักษณ์ประชาชนถึงขั้นคุมความประพฤติกันด้วยระบบคะแนนได้แล้ว

แม้ยังไม่เกิดในไทยแต่ก็ไม่ได้แปลว่าเป็นไปไม่ได้ ความกังวลของชาว 14 อำเภอและสามจังหวัดชายแดนใต้เมื่อมีข้อความ SMS จากกองอำนวยการรักษาความมั่นคงภายใน (กอ.รมน.) ให้ไปสแกนใบหน้าเพื่อลงทะเบียนซิมการ์ดตามประกาศของ กสทช. เป็นหนึ่งในภาพสะท้อนจากพื้นที่ที่ความมั่นคงหลอมรวมอยู่ในการใช้ชีวิตประจำวันที่ชัดเจน ปัญหาของการทำระบบนั้นยืนอยู่บนคำถามใหญ่ว่า “ทำอย่างไร” และ “เพื่ออะไร” หากกิจวัตรประจำวันของคนทั้งประความมั่นคงจะกลายเป็นองค์ประกอบในเทศ

สุนิล อับบราฮัม ผู้อำนวย (ผอ.) การบริหารจากศูนย์เพื่ออินเทอร์เน็ตและสังคมจากประเทศอินเดีย ให้สัมภาษณ์ประชาไทในเรื่องรูปร่างหน้าตาของระบบพิสูจน์อัตลักษณ์บุคคลดิจิทัลว่าควรเป็นแบบไหน อะไรที่ต้องคำนึงถึงและถามกันบ่อยๆ เมื่อจะออกแบบระบบ การเฝ้าระวังอาชญากรรมและปัญหาความมั่นคงทำได้แค่ไหน และการเป็นประชาธิปไตยเกี่ยวอะไรกับการมีระบบข้อมูลประชาชนดิจิทัลที่ดี

ประชาไท: ระบบข้อมูลประชาชนดิจิทัลคืออะไร

สุนิล: เดิมทีบัตรประชาชนเป็นวัตถุทางกายภาพ ส่วนมากก็เป็นกระดาษและมันก็มีข้อน่าห่วงมากๆ ในเรื่องความปลอดภัย เพราะว่ารัฐและบริษัทเอกชนต่างใช้บัตรประชาชนเพื่อไปถ่ายสำเนา อันนี้ผมได้ยินว่าในบริบทของไทยก็ถือเป็นเรื่องปกติเช่นกัน สิ่งที่คุณต้องการจริงๆ คือวิธีที่จะทำให้ภาครัฐและเอกชนยืนยันตัวตนโดยไม่ต้องเก็บข้อมูลจากคุณมากจนเกินไป

ในทางอุดมคตินั้นระบบเอกสารประจำตัวที่ดี ควรที่จะทำให้การยืนยันรายละเอียดของคุณอย่างพวกที่อยู่ อายุ สถานะจน-รวย โดยไม่ต้องเก็บข้อมูล (อื่นๆ) ที่ไม่จำเป็นรวมถึงเลขบัตรประชาชนด้วย แม้แต่เลขประจำตัวประชาชนของคุณก็ไม่ควรจะถูกเก็บไปโดยองค์กรอื่นๆ โดยไม่มีความจำเป็น

ปัจจุบันเรามีทางเลือกสองแบบ มีตัวอย่างในแคนาดา สหราชอาณาจักร หรือแม้แต่ในไทยที่กำลังทำ โครงการระบบพิสูจน์ตัวตนอิเลกทรอนิคส์แห่งชาติ หรือ National Digital ID (NDID) คุณคิดถึงวิธีแก้ปัญหาเรื่องระบบเอกสารประจำตัวในฐานะระบบนิเวศที่จะให้ตัวแสดงในระบบนิเวศยืนยันข้อมูลประจำตัวและเก็บข้อมูลของปัจเจกผ่านระบบการจัดการการยินยอมที่ดี (consent management)

(แต่) ก็มีหลายประเทศที่มีหน่วยงานจัดทำระบบฐานข้อมูลประชาชนแห่งชาติแบบรวมศูนย์ แล้วก็กลายเป็นจุดล้มเหลวจุดเดียว (Single Point of Failure - SPOF) ของระบบในประเทศ นี่จึงเป็นตัวเลือกใหญ่ๆ ที่แต่ละประเทศมี คือจะใช้วิธีจัดการแบบระบบนิเวศที่คิดถึงทุกอย่างแบบเป็นองค์รวม หรือมองว่าประเทศหนึ่งประเทศก็เหมือนกับบริษัทหรือมหาวิทยาลัย อะไรที่ใช้ได้กับบริษัทหรือมหาวิทยาลัยก็ใช้แบบนั้นกับประเทศทั้งประเทศ

แต่ละวิธีมีข้อเสียต่างกันอย่างไร

ในทางวิทยาศาสตร์คอมพิวเตอร์และวิศวกรรมคอมพิวเตอร์ ผู้เชี่ยวชาญทุกคนจะบอกว่าไม่มีระบบไหนที่ถูกแฮ็กไม่ได้ แต่ระหว่างสองตัวเลือกนี้มีความแตกต่างอย่างมาก ในโมเดลระบบนิเวศจะไม่มีจุดล้มเหลวจุดเดียวและการเจาะระบบนี้ก็มีต้นทุนสูงกว่าระบบแบบรวมศูนย์ แม้แต่การฟื้นฟูและรักษาข้อมูลที่หายไปก็ทำได้ถูกกว่าด้วย แต่ในระบบแบบรวมศูนย์นั้น ทุกคนจะได้รับผลกระทบเมื่อมีการเจาะเข้าไปได้ และส่วนมากการโจมตีจุดที่ล้มเหลวจุดเดียวก็มีต้นทุนน้อยกว่า

กระแสโลกที่มีต่อการทำข้อมูลประชาชนดิจิทัลคืออะไร

แนวโน้มใหญ่ๆ ของโลกคือมีบางบริษัทที่ขายเทคโนโลยีไบโอเมทริกซ์ (การใช้ข้อมูลทางชีวภาพ เช่น ลักษณะทางกายภาพอย่างม่านตา ลายนิ้วมือ ดีเอ็นเอ ใบหน้าเพื่อตรวจสิทธิหรือแสดงตน) ที่โดยพื้นฐานแล้วเป็นเทคโนโลยีแบบควบคุมจากระยะไกลและไม่ต้องใช้ความยินยอมของเจ้าของข้อมูล เพราะเวลาที่มีการสแกนใบหน้าหรือม่านตาเพื่อยืนยันตัวตนนั้น เจ้าของข้อมูลอาจจะไม่รู้ ผู้ใช้งานอาจจะสแกนจากระยะไกลด้วยกล้องความคมชัดสูง และการเก็บข้อมูลอัตลักษณ์ก็เก็บได้ขณะที่เจ้าของนอนหลับหรือหมดสติ

เทคโนโลยีไบโอเมทริกซ์เป็นเทคโนโลยีการเฝ้าระวังที่ดีมากเมื่อรัฐบาลต้องการต่อกรกับอาชญากรรมหรือบังคับใช้กฎหมาย อย่างไรก็ตาม เทคโนโลยีการเฝ้าระวังไม่ใช่เทคโนโลยีข้อมูลประจำตัวที่ดี โชคร้ายที่บริษัทใหญ่ๆ ที่ขายระบบเฝ้าระวังได้เดินทางไปทั่วโลกและบอกกับรัฐบาลต่างๆ ว่าพวกคุณสามารถแก้ปัญหาเรื่องเอกสารข้อมู,และความมั่นคงได้พร้อมกันด้วยเทคโนโลยีเฝ้าระวังซึ่งมันไม่จริง

ถ้าคุณใช้เทคโนโลยีการเฝ้าระวังมาสร้างระบบข้อมูลประชาชน นั่นหมายความว่าคุณยิ่งไปสร้างความเสี่ยงด้านความมั่นคงเข้าไปอีก เพราะคุณสร้างสิ่งที่เรียกว่า ‘ไหน้ำผึ้ง’ หมายถึงว่ามีจุดๆ หนึ่งที่เก็บข้อมูลลายนิ้วมือ ใบหน้าหรือม่านตาของทุกๆ คน แล้วถ้าระบบนั้นมีจุดที่ล้มเหลวขึ้นมาเพียงจุดเดียว ลองนึกถึงระบบอินเทอร์เน็ตที่เก็บพาสเวิร์ดของทุกคนเอาไว้ในเซิฟเวอร์เดียวกัน มันก็เป็นความเสี่ยงนั้น

เทคโนโลยีไบโอเมทริกซ์นั้นควรใช้ในระบบแบบไม่รวมศูนย์ คุณสามารถเก็บข้อมูลทางชีวภาพจากประชาชนได้ แต่ควรเก็บมันเอาไว้ในชิปสมาร์ทการ์ดของแต่ละคน อย่างระบบสแกนใบหน้าของไอโฟนที่ไม่มีเซิฟเวอร์เก็บข้อมูลใบหน้า แต่อาศัยพื้นที่บนโทรศัพท์มือถือของผู้ใช้งานให้เก็บข้อมูลเหล่านั้นเอง

บางประเทศมีสมาร์ทการ์ดที่มีแม้กระทั่งเครื่องอ่านลายนิ้วมือบนบัตร ที่คุณต้องทำก็คือใส่สมาร์ทการ์ดเข้าไปในเครื่องอ่าน จากนั้นคุณก็วางนิ้วมือลงบนสมาร์ทการ์ดโดยไม่ต้องเอานิ้วไปแปะที่อุปกรณ์อื่นของรัฐหรือเอกชน นั่นเป็นวิธีการใช้งานไบโอเมทริกซ์ที่ถูกต้องเพราะคุณใช้โบโอเมทริกซ์แบบที่ไม่อิงอยู่กับการเฝ้าระวัง

แปลว่าแนวโน้มระบบข้อมูลประชาชนของรัฐส่วนใหญ่อยู่กับฐานคิดการเฝ้าระวังใช่ไหม

ใช่แล้ว ความมั่นคงแห่งชาติและการเฝ้าระวังถูกจัดเป็นความสำคัญอันดับต้นๆ ซึ่งนั่นไม่ใช่แนวทางในการออกแบบระบบฐานข้อมูลประจำตัวประชาชนแบบ e-governance (ธรรมาภิบาลอิเล็คโทรนิกส์) การเฝ้าระวังนั้นสำคัญมากสำหรับสังคม แต่มันก็เหมือนเกลือในอาหาร คุณไม่สามารถกินอาหารได้โดยไม่มีเกลืออยู่ในนั้นนิดหน่อย คุณไม่สามารถมีประเทศที่ปลอดภัยหากไม่มีการเฝ้าระวัง แต่ถ้าคุณตัดสินใจตักเกลือห้าช้อนชาใส่ลงไปในอาหารเมื่อไหร่ อาหารก็เป็นพิษ เรื่องการเฝ้าระวังก็เช่นกัน มันจำเป็นในปริมาณน้อย แต่จะมีผลย้อนกลับหากมีมากเกินไป

แล้วแนวทางที่ดีที่สุดควรเป็นแบบไหน

ควรใช้ระบบและมาตรฐานแบบเปิด (open source and open standard) เพราะคุณจะสามารถพิสูจน์และตรวจสอบระบบได้ ถ้าคุณตรวจสอบหรือพิสูจน์ไม่ได้ นั่นหมายความว่าคุณจะไม่รู้ว่ามันทำงานอย่างไร ส่วนต่อไปคือข้อมูลที่ถูกขอและส่งต่อในระบบนิเวศเมื่อทำธุรกรรมจะต้องมีจำนวนน้อยที่สุด

อีกสิ่งที่จำเป็นคือ คุณต้องมี Human in the Loop (ความสัมพันธ์หรือปฏิสัมพันธ์ของมนุษย์ในระบบนั้น) หมายความว่า คุณควรรู้ว่าในขั้นตอนนั้นๆ มีเจ้าหน้าที่รัฐหรือพนักงานเอกชนคนไหนเป็นคนรับผิดชอบ และถ้ามีอะไรผิดพลาดคุณควรจะหาคนรับผิดรับชอบได้

ความรับผิดรับชอบนั้นแยกได้ว่า หนึ่ง เห็นตัวคนที่รับผิดชอบ สื่อมวลชนสามารถชี้นิ้วไปได้และบอกว่าคนนี้รับผิดชอบกับความผิดพลาดนั้น สอง การเป็นผู้จ่ายค่าปรับ ส่วนนี้สำคัญกับภาคเอกชน และสุดท้ายคือคนที่ต้องติดคุกหากมีเรื่องร้ายแรงเกิดขึ้น เช่นสิทธิมนุษยชนของบางคนได้รับผลกระทบ ดังนั้น เมื่อคุณจะออกแบบระบบฐานข้อมูลประจำตัว คุณต้องถามว่า ‘ใครเป็น Human in the loop’ นั่นเป็นกุญแจหลักของการออกแบบ

หลักการต่อไปของระบบข้อมูลประชาชนที่ดีคือต้องกระจายจากศูนย์กลาง ไม่ควรมีจุดล้มเหลวจุดใหญ่จุดเดียว การจัดการข้อมูลแบบระบบนิเวศนั้นดีกว่าการรวมศูนย์ นอกจากนั้นระบบควรจะรับมือและฟื้นตัวจากเหตุร้ายแรงที่สุดได้ ในระหว่างที่คุณออกแบบระบบก็ควรตั้งคำถามไปพลางว่า ถ้าระบบโดนแฮ็กจะทำอย่างไร หรือถ้าอาชญากรเอาระบบนี้ไปใช้ล่ะ คุณจำเป็นต้องคำนึงถึงความเป็นไปได้ที่ร้ายแรงที่สุดและต้องออกแบบระบบมารับมือมัน

แล้วมองในแง่สังคม คนทั่วไป คุณกังวลเรื่องอะไรบ้าง

ปัญหาหลักตอนนี้คือ แนวคิดที่รายล้อมระบบข้อมูลประชาชนดิจิทัลคือการย้ำให้พลเมืองต้องโปร่งใสกับรัฐ พวกเขา (รัฐ) ต้องการให้พลเมืองส่งข้อมูลทุกอย่างให้กับรัฐ แต่ว่ารัฐไม่ให้ข้อมูลใดๆ กับพลเมือง ในระบบข้อมูลประชาชนที่ดี รัฐควรจะมีความโปร่งใสกับพลเมือง

ผมจะยกตัวอย่างให้ฟัง สมมติว่าผมเป็นพนักงานรัฐที่ทุจริต ผมจะเขียนลงไปในบันทึกว่าคุณมาหาผมที่ออฟฟิศในวันนี้ นี่คือเลขประจำตัวประชาชนของคุณที่ขอกู้เงิน หรือไม่ก็ได้รับเงินอุดหนุนจำนวน 2,000 บาท ผมก็สามารถเอาเงิน 2,000 บาทเข้ากระเป๋าผมแบบไม่มีใครพิสูจน์ได้ และคุณก็ปฏิเสธไม่ได้ด้วย เพราะว่าเลขประจำตัวของคุณอยู่ในบันทึกของรัฐ แต่ถ้าคุณใช้มันให้ดี เราจะมีเครื่องอ่านสมาร์ทการ์ดที่พลเมืองจะใส่บัตรและกดรหัส หลังจากคุณดึงบัตรออกเจ้าหน้าที่ก็จะใส่สมาร์ทการ์ดของเขาเข้าไปและกดรหัส นั่นจะทำให้มีบันทึกในระบบอิเล็กโทรนิกส์และถูกเซ็นโดยเจ้าหน้าที่รัฐและพลเมือง จะไม่มีใครปฏิเสธได้แล้วว่ามีการพบกันจริงๆ ในระบบข้อมูลประจำตัวที่ดีนั้น ทั้งคู่จะต้องแสดงตัวตน แต่ในระบบที่ไม่ดีจะมีแต่เจ้าหน้าที่รัฐที่ถามหาหลักฐานประจำตัวและคุณจะไม่มีการบันทึกว่าเกิดอะไรขึ้นบ้าง

ความเป็นส่วนตัวและการคุ้มครองนั้นควรมีสัดส่วนแปรผันกับอำนาจ ความโปร่งใสและการกำกับควบคุมควรมีสัดส่วนโดยตรงกับอำนาจ คนที่มีอำนาจหรือคนรวยต้องมีความโปร่งใสมากกว่าคนอื่นและมีความเป็นส่วนตัวน้อยกว่าคนอื่น คนที่ไม่มีอำนาจหรือคนเปราะบางควรจะมีความเป็นส่วนตัวมากขึ้น

ถ้าคุณดูนโยบายด้านฐานข้อมูลแบบเปิด (โอเพ่นดาต้า) หรือกฎหมายเสรีภาพด้านข้อมูลข่าวสารจะพบว่าข้อมูลส่วนบุคคลเป็นข้อยกเว้นในกฎหมายเหล่านั้น ข้อมูลรัฐที่ไม่เป็นส่วนตัวเท่านั้นที่สามารถถูกแบ่งปันกันได้ในโอเพ่นดาต้า แต่ถ้าคุณไปดูกฎหมายความเป็นส่วนตัวก็จะพบว่ามีข้อยกเว้นในเรื่องประโยชน์ต่อสาธารณะ นั่นหมายความว่า ถ้าคุณเป็นเจ้าหน้าที่รัฐหรือนักการเมืองคนสำคัญ สิ่งที่คุณคุยในห้องนอนก็อาจสำคัญกับประเทศทั้งประเทศ นั่นหมายความว่าคุณไม่มีความเป็นส่วนตัวในการพูดคุยเรื่องลับ

ความเป็นส่วนตัวนั้นเป็นข้อยกเว้น แต่ผลประโยชน์สาธารณะมันเป็นข้อยกเว้นของข้อยกเว้นอีกที สมมติว่านายกฯ มีปัญหาสุขภาพร้ายแรงที่ทำให้เขาหรือเธอไม่เหมาะที่จะดำรงตำแหน่งอีกต่อไป ข้อมูลส่วนตัวนั้นก็เป็นข้อยกเว้นของข้อยกเว้น ถ้าการได้รู้ว่านายกฯ ป่วยหนักเป็นประโยชน์ต่อสาธารณะมันก็ควรถูกเปิดเผย การลองทำบททดสอบด้านผลประโยชน์สาธารณะน่าจะช่วยเรื่องการจัดการแกนสมมาตรเชิงอำนาจระหว่างกฎหมายสองชุด

ในการช่วยเหลือคนจน คุณควรมีกฎหมายความโปร่งใสและนโยบายโอเพ่นดาต้าที่ดี เพื่อคุ้มครองคนจนและคนเปราะบาง คุณต้องมีกฎหมายความเป็นส่วนตัว และถ้าคุณมีการทดสอบเรื่องผลประโยชน์สาธารณะในกฎหมายทั้งสองชุด กฎหมายเหล่านั้นก็จะไม่ถูกใช้ขูดรีดคนจน

ความมั่นคงจะอยู่ร่วมกับเสรีภาพและความเป็นส่วนตัวได้อย่างไร

กฎหมายข้อมูลประจำตัวดิจิทัลจะต้องมีสอดรับกับกฎหมายความเป็นส่วนตัวและนโยบายโอเพ่นดาต้า แต่ปัญหาก็คือกฎหมายความเป็นส่วนตัวยังเป็นเรื่องใหม่มากๆ ในภูมิภาคนี้ ไทยเพิ่งผ่าน พ.ร.บ. คุ้มครองข้อมูลส่วนบุคคล ที่อินเดียยังไม่มีในระดับชาติ ก็ยังคงมีงานที่ต้องทำอยู่ ศาลต้องทำหน้าที่หาคำนิยาม หน่วยงานกำกับดูแลต้องมีแนวทางกำกับที่จำเพาะมากๆ ภาคอุตสาหกรรมต้องมีแนวทางกำกับตัวเองและแนวปฏิบัติที่ดีที่สุด ภาคประชาสังคมเองก็ต้องช่วยภาคส่วนอื่นๆ ด้วยการถามคำถามหนักๆ

มันต้องใช้เวลา อย่างยุโรปก็มีเส้นทางการมีกฎหมายคุ้มครองข้อมูลยาวนานถึง 35 ปี นั่นเป็นเหตุผลที่ยุโรปมีการคุ้มครองที่ดีกว่า ในภูมิภาคของพวกเราก็จะใช้เวลาต่อสู้ถึง 35 ปีเช่นกัน ดังนั้น ประชาสังคมจะต้องเตรียมตัวในการต่อสู้เป็นเวลา 35 ปี และหลังจากนั้น ลูกหรือลูกของลูกเราจะเห็นระบบนิเวศข้อมูลประชาชนที่ปลอดภัยกว่านี้

รัฐบาลควรทำอะไรบ้าง

การผ่านกฎหมายอย่างเดียวนั้นไม่เพียงพอ ที่ (รัฐบาล) ทำในไทยคือแค่ผ่านกฎหมาย ตอนนี้คุณต้องสร้างคณะกรรมการที่เป็นอิสระ มีงบประมาณมากพอที่จะจ้างวิศวกรและนักกฎมายที่ดีที่สุด คณะกรรมการควรเริ่มบังคับใช้ข้อบังคับอย่างช้าๆ ศาลเองก็ควรพัฒนาองค์ความรู้ ผู้พิพากษาจะต้องเรียนรู้ว่าเกิดอะไรขึ้นบ้างในประเทศอื่นๆ ระบบกฎหมายต้องเตรียมพร้อมกับข้อกังวลใหม่ๆ

เทคโนโลยีช่วยได้แค่ไหน

เทคโนโลยีเป็นแค่ส่วนหนึ่งของการแก้ปัญหา คุณยังต้องกังวลเรื่องกฎหมายและบรรทัดฐานทางสังคม อะไรที่คนธรรมดาเขาทำกัน ถ้าทุกคนยังคงยินดีกับการส่งสำเนาบัตรประชาชน คุณก็ต้องไปเปลี่ยนมัน รัฐบาลมีประสบการณ์มากกับการยกระดับบรรทัดฐานทางสังคม

รัฐบาลต้องใช้อำนาจที่มีในการเปลี่ยนแนวปฏิบัติ เรื่องแนวทางการคุ้มครองความเป็นส่วนตัวก็เหมือนการสูบบุหรี่ พวกนักสูบส่วนมากก็รู้อยู่แล้วว่าการสูบบุหรี่นั้นทำให้เกิดมะเร็งและปัญหาอื่นๆ แต่ก็จะยังสูบต่อไปจนกว่าหมอจะบอกว่าเป็นมะเร็ง รัฐบาลก็ต้องทำให้พลเมืองเกิดความกลัวในสิ่งที่จะเกิดขึ้นเพื่อให้ประชาชนเลิกไม่เอาใจใส่เรื่องข้อมูลส่วนบุคคล

ส่วนสุดท้ายคือตลาด บรรษัทก็ต้องเริ่มสร้างนวัตกรรม เช่น ธนาคารควรออกมาพูดได้ว่าระบบของเราดีกว่าที่อื่น เราไม่ใช้ไบโอเมทริกซ์ เป็นต้น กฎหมายต้องทำให้เกิดการแข่งขันระหว่างบรรษัทในเรื่องความปลอดภัย ความเป็นส่วนตัว เมื่อเราเห็นบรรทัดฐาน กฎหมาย เทคโนโลยี และการแข่งขันทางเทคโนโลยี วันนั้นเราจะเริ่มเห็นทางออก ผมถึงบอกว่ามันจะใช้เวลา 30-40 ปี ไม่ก็นานกว่านั้น

ระบบข้อมูลประจำตัวดิจิทัลที่ดีเกี่ยวอะไรกับประเทศเป็นประชาธิปไตยไหม

ผู้คนถามคำถามยากๆ หลายคำถามในระบอบประชาธิปไตย และนั่นเป็นประโยชน์ แต่สิ่งที่เราต้องการจริงๆ คือประชาธิปไตยที่ปกครองโดยรัฐธรรมนูญ (Constitutional democracy) เพราะคุณไม่สามารถเดินไปถามคนทุกคนเพื่อหามติต่อคำถามทางเทคนิค

คุณต้องมีการอภิปรายสาธารณะที่โปร่งใสเยอะๆ แต่คุณไม่สามารถตัดสินใจกันด้วยการโหวต การไปถามว่า ‘มีกี่คนอยากใช้สแกนลายนิ้วมือ มีกี่คนอยากใช้สแกนใบหน้า’ ไม่ใช่วิธีออกแบบระบบข้อมูลประจำตัวดิจิทัล มันจะต้องวางอยู่บนหลักของรัฐธรรมนูญบางประการเช่นความถูกต้องตามกฎหมาย ความจำเป็น ความได้สัดส่วน หลังจากนั้นคุณจะต้องมีแนวทางที่เสนอโดยวิศวกรและนักกฎหมาย จากนั้นจึงให้มีการถกเถียงและอภิปราย

คุณตัดสินโดยอิงเสียงข้างมากไม่ได้เพียงเพราะคนส่วนมากบอกว่าพวกเขารู้สึกว่าการสแกนใบหน้ามันง่ายมาก คุณก็ไม่สามารถบอกว่าจะนำการสแกนใบหน้าไปใช้กับทุกอย่างเพียงเพราะมันปลดล็อกไอโฟนง่ายดี เพราะในวันพรุ่งนี้เทคโนโลยีเดียวกันอาจถูกนำไปใช้เพื่อสลายการชุมนุมก็ได้ แม้ทุกคนจะรักหลงการสแกนใบหน้าในประชาธิปไตยของคุณ แต่รัฐธรรมนูญยังคงต้องปฏิเสธมันและบอกว่ามันไม่จำเป็น ไม่ได้สัดส่วน มันควรถูกแบน หรือไม่ก็ใช้ในวัตถุประสงค์ที่จำเพาะ

ช่วยอธิบายว่าทำไมการเฝ้าระวังอาจเป็นการทำให้คนหลบเข้าไปอยู่ในมุมมืดมากขึ้น

มันเป็นผลที่เกิดขึ้นโดยไม่ตั้งใจ อย่างถ้าคุณไปบล็อกเนื้อหาที่คนชอบมากๆ คนก็อาจจะหันไปใช้ TOR หรือ VPN (วิธีการเข้าถึงเนื้อหาที่ถูกบล็อก) ซึ่งนั่นไม่ใช่ความตั้งใจของคุณ ถ้าคุณไม่พัฒนาระบบข้อมูลประชาชนที่ดี ประชาชนก็จะเริ่มทำตัวเหมือนอาชญากร แต่พวกเขาไม่ใช่อาชญากร เพียงแค่เขาไม่ชอบการออกแบบระบบเท่านั้น คุณไม่สามารถบังคับให้คนทำพฤติกรรมแบบนั้นหรือแบบนี้ได้ ดังนั้นการเป็นประชาธิปไตยจึงสำคัญ ในระหว่างที่คุณพัฒนาเทคโนโลยีคุณก็ควรถามพวกเขา (ผู้ใช้) ไปด้วยว่ามันใช้ได้หรือไม่ ทำให้เกิดการอภิปรายขึ้น

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/e2de2de01e41e1ae1ae23e30e1ae1ae02e49e2de21e39e25e1be23e30e0ae32e0ae19e14e34e08e34e17e31e25-e04e38e22e01e31e1ae1ce39e49e40e0ae35e48e22e27e0ae32e0de2be32e41e19e27e17e32e07e40e2be21e32e30e2ae21

Fostering Strategic Convergence in US-India Tech Relations: 5G and Beyond

Justin Sherman and Arindrajit Basu — 2019-07-05T02:19:09Z

The 2019 G-20 summit underscores the importance of fostering strategic convergence in U.S.-India tech relations.

The article by Justin Sherman and Arindrajit Basu was published in the Diplomat on July 3, 2019.

As world leaders gathered for the G-20 summit in Osaka, Japan this past weekend, a multitude of issues from climate to trade to technology came to the fore. Much of the focus was on U.S.-China interactions at the summit, as the two nations are locked in both a trade war and broader technological and geopolitical competition. Despite the present focus on the U.S. and China, however, it is crucial to not overlook another bilateral relationship of ever-growing importance in the process: The tech relationship between the United States and India.

Certainly, the two countries have many disagreements on some technology issues. But this is a geopolitical relationship that is both strategically important for each country, and a vital opportunity for the two largest democracies in the world to collectively combat Chinese-style digital authoritarianism.

Huawei and 5G

First, with respect to national security and 5G roll-outs, the U.S and India are not on the same page. The United States, for several months now, has been on a diplomatic messaging tour of the world to try to convince — with great resistance (some would argue failure) — allies, partners, and potential partners alike to ban Chinese firm Huawei from supplying components of 5G networks. Many officials across Europe, the Middle East, South America, and elsewhere have been reluctant to ban Huawei per the U.S. recommendation, and India is no exception. Indeed, National Security Advisory Board Chairman P.S. Raghavan told The Hindu that “5G is becoming a fault line in the technology cold war between world powers” and that India must avoid getting caught in these fault lines.

In large part, U.S. diplomatic messaging here has fallen short due to heavy conflations of national security- and trade-related risks; and Trump only contributed further to this fact with his latest reference to Huawei, during the G-20, as a potential trade war bargaining chip. The sheer population of India, however, combined with its fast growing technology sectors and desire to digitize, makes the country an important market player when it comes to the 5G revolution. U.S.-India engagement on 5G issues must be managed effectively through robust articulation of each country’s national interests underscored by a clean segregation of trade and security questions in the discussion. This partnership has the potential to wield great influence in the global market, including in ways that could prioritize or deprioritize certain 5G equipment suppliers (like Huawei).

Data Sovereignty and Data Privacy

Data sovereignty is another hot area in which the U.S.-India tech relationship demands careful negotiation. Over the past year, the Indian government has introduced a range of policy instruments which dictate that certain kinds of data must be stored in servers located physically within India — termed “data localization.” While there are a number of policy objectives this gambit ostensibly seeks to serve, the two which stand out are (1) the presently cumbersome process for Indian law enforcement agencies to access data stored in the U.S. during criminal investigations, and (2) extractive economic models used by U.S. companies operating in India.

A range of conflicting developments emerging from the G-20 summit underscore this fact. India, along with the BRICS grouping, focused on the development dimensions of data governance and re-emphasized the need for data sovereignty — broadly understood as the sovereign right of nations to govern data in their national interest for the welfare of their citizens. President Trump reigned in his focus on the need for cross-border data flows and, in direct opposition to some proposals that have emerged from India, explicitly opposed data localization. While India did not sign the Osaka Declaration on the Digital Economy that promoted cross-border data flows, the importance of cross-border data flows in spurring the global economy did find its way into the Final G-20 Leaders Declaration — which, of course, both countries signed.

Geopolitically, the importance of India’s data governance stance cannot be overstated as it could pave the way for the approach adopted by other emerging economies — most notably the BRICS countries. Likewise, the U.S. has important thinking to do around such questions as what shape a national data privacy law could take. Even though the two countries’ views on data may be quite different from one another, the seats that India and the U.S. have at the table for global data governance discussions — alongside others like Japan, China, and the European Union — underscore the value of meaningful interactions and mutual trust and respect on this issue.

Norms for a Democratic Digital Future

Finally, as the United Nations Group of Governmental Experts and the Open-Ended Working Group meet to resurrect the norm-formulation process for fostering responsible state behavior in cyberspace, India has some homework to do. Even though it has been a member of five out of the six Group of Governmental Experts set up thus far, India is yet to come out with a public statement delineating its views on the applicability of International Law applies in cyberspace. Further, India has also failed to articulate a cohesive digital strategy — instead relying on a patchwork of hastily rolled out and often ill-conceived regulatory policies, some of which commentators in the West have hastily labeled as digital authoritarianism. The U.S., for its part, amidst a cutback to diplomatic cyber engagement (as part of cutbacks to diplomacy writ large), could also up its support of international engagement on these issues. Its recent repeal of net neutrality protections could also be argued as a step back from long-time international norm promotion around internet openness.

Through a combination of domestic policy gambits and foreign policy maneuvers, both states need to draw lines in the sand that safeguard human rights, international law, and democracy online, while arriving at some balance with each other’s national interests.

A primary example lies with artificial intelligence (AI). AI has found increasing use in digital authoritarianism, as dictators use automated, intelligent systems to boost their surveillance capabilities. The Chinese government has arguably been at the forefront of this enhanced level of authoritarian rule for the digital age.

In addition to focusing on AI applications for everything from natural language processing to self-driving cars — through investments, strategies, policy documents, and so on — Beijing has also been deploying AI in the service of large-scale human-rights abuses. Chinese strategy papers on AI, while similarly emphasizing many commercial or benign applications and raising attention to such issues as algorithmic fairness, concurrently have discussed using AI for “social governance,” censorship, and surveillance. To combat the rising intersection of AI and digital authoritarianism, the U.S. and India could wield enormous leverage — as the two largest democracies in the world — in governing these technologies in a democratic fashion that counters dangerous arms-race narratives and uses of AI for surveillance and repression.

The same goes for paying attention to technology exports and diffusion to human-rights abusers. For instance, companies incorporated in China, among those incorporated elsewhere, have been heavily involved in exports of dual-use surveillance technologies to other countries, including those with questionable or outright poor human-rights records. Although companies incorporated in democracies may engage in such practices as well, most democracies take steps to curtail these practices as much as possible, such as through the multilateral Wassenaar Arrangement — which lays out export controls around conventional weapons and dual-use goods and technologies. The U.S. has long been a party to this agreement, and India officially joined in 2018. Arguments persist about the extent to which Beijing is involved in these dual-use surveillance technology exports, but these exports may only increase going forward as companies increasingly sell not just internet surveillance tools but also dual-use AI tools. In this way, too, India and the U.S. could play an important role in countering the spread of such capabilities to human-rights abusers and standing against the spread of digital authoritarianism in the process.

The relationship here is, therefore, one that requires careful navigation for its significant geopolitical, economic, and ideological consequences. For the future of the technological relationship between the world’s largest democracies—and the extent to which they respect each other’s strategic autonomy while converging on issues of mutual interest—could determine the future of global digital governance.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/blog/the-diplomat-justin-sherman-and-arindrajit-basu-july-3-2019-fostering-strategic-convergence-in-us-india-tech-relations-5g-and-beyond

ISOC Report

akriti — 2019-07-03T12:44:43Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/files/isoc-report.pdf

Facebook’s Libra: A bit too ambitious?

Rajmohan Sudhakar — 2019-07-02T05:14:56Z

Power desperately finds ways to propagate at the slightest hint of losing lustre, which the social network is beginning to experience at the moment.

The article by Rajmohan Sudhakar was published in the Deccan Herald on June 30, 2019. Sunil Abraham was quoted.

A social network must remain a social network and first prove it is indeed one. Not a bank. Damning revelations concerning ethics, privacy and transparency notwithstanding.

For a tech giant with an exclusive window to our private lives, launching its own currency is of course the natural course, to coax us back into compliance, away from brewing skepticism.

Facebook’s sketchy white paper on Libra, its proposed virtual currency, probably drawing much from the libertarian Bitcoin, is no doubt an attempt to capitalise on the 2.4 billion users it has collected in such a short span, eventually to wield a grip on the still vulnerable global financial system gradually recovering from a crisis.

However, the brute power of big tech looms large over sovereign nation states.

In his piece in The Atlantic, professor Eric Posner of the University of Chicago Law School writes Libra will replicate all the current problems generated by Facebook. “In the name of eliminating inefficiency and injustice in the financial system around the globe, Facebook’s new cryptocurrency threatens to replay what’s become a familiar story—of tech companies blithely reshaping the world around them, and significantly increasing their power over people’s lives, while being accountable to no one,” the professor goes on to say.

Power finds ways to propagate at the slightest hint of losing lustre, which the social network is beginning to experience at the moment.

To salvage that lost credibility, Facebook has teamed up with a group of corporates including Visa, Uber, Spotify, PayPal and the like to form the Libra Association, a Geneva-based not-for-profit, just to disrupt and dominate the global economic future.

Given the social network’s massive reach, the proposal, if realised, could transform international payments. That said, the intent is suspect.

“The main concern with Facebook entering the cryptocurrency market is a question of competition law. Facebook can use its market dominance in online advertising, end-to-end encrypted messaging and social media to engage in anti-competitive behaviour, warns Sunil Abraham of The Centre for Internet and Society, a Bengaluru-based not-for-profit.

Facebook stands 90th in the world in terms of GDP, along with many other firms of such standing which would want to effect and dictate global monetary policy if the project goes ahead and realises its commercial goal, which in all likelihood is very much possible. Because, Facebook has built its applications and networks already. It doesn’t require to sign people up. Lambs for slaughter indeed.

The argument that the network puts forward of uplifting billions excluded from the financial ecosystem in the emerging world, in earnest is a genuine cause. But, one doesn’t need a brand new private currency pepped up by a big tech consortium for that. For instance, in India, where the network has at least 300 million users, Libra cannot operate within the existing norms. Moreover, a foreign private entity controlling the sovereign is rather dystopian.

“So far, India has taken quite a conservative policy towards cryptocurrencies because of concerns from a counter-terrorism and taxation perspective. It is perhaps good that policymakers were waiting and watching. Now the policy will have to address the challenge posed by Facebook entering this market,” notes Abraham.

“Cryptocurrency is ‘virtual money’ which should only be used for non-financial purposes along the lines of loyalty points, airline miles, etc. which could be exchanged for real cash transactions such as discounts. It poses the danger of fraud. If Facebook uses Libra to clock up loyalty points, that’s fine. But can’t link it to your bank account,” cautions Kiran Mazumdar-Shaw.To digress, bitcoin works as people trust it over government-regulated money. It has no reserve. It appreciates if more people are using it. Now, Facebook is offering a tweak. Unlike Bitcoin, Libra will have a reserve set up by the consortium. In short, don’t trust the government, not the liberal bitcoin, but a private entity with a reserve.
Facebook’s argument may be convincing provided the clout, security infrastructure and reach. But what is worrying is Facebook-led big tech now wants to be a virtual country, with its own economy, not having to bow down to nation states and regulators, because they think they are powerful enough to do so.
This would definitely have banks and regulators in a fix. “While Facebook might have a surveillance friendly position on KYC requirements for users, it might be in greater consumer interest for the government to ensure there is an interoperable competitive oligopoly of cryptocurrency service providers that prevent the winner takes all phenomenon,” observes Abraham.
What’s Libra anyway?
Libra is a virtual currency proposed by a Facebook-led private consortium, with a reserve, unlike the Bitcoin. That means Libra would have an initial capital funded by the consortium to help make it a stable currency such as the dollar. Users could trade globally enjoying lower costs, enhanced speed and high security - on platforms run by Facebook (Calibra) and associates. According to Facebook, Libra is intended to ensure financial inclusion. But how this will be achieved in countries like India, where the currency would not charm the people, government or regulators easily, is not yet quite clear.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/deccan-herald-june-30-2019-rajmohan-sudhakar-facebook-s-libra-a-bit-too-ambitious

Facebook sees its salvation with its cryptocurrency Libra

nishant — 2019-07-02T03:58:08Z

Facebook’s Libra is designed to take control of our digital lives.

The article by Nishant Shah was published in the Indian Express on June 30, 2019.

In the early days, when we were still discussing the possible implications of building a data-surveillance system like Aadhaar in India, one of the persistent narratives was that in return, Aadhaar will build the infrastructure that gives legal and financial identity to the homeless, underserved, and the unbanked populations of the country. I remember how, at one consultation, Nandan Nilekani had jokingly mentioned that the single entry login framework of Aadhaar is easy to understand as the “Facebook of government services”. There were actual rumours that Aadhaar was seeking to collaborate with Facebook to see if we could log in to the public delivery systems using Facebook’s technical infrastructure.

The probable Aadhaar-Facebook collaboration never happened, but the other idea of Aadhaar enabling mobile payment, financial inclusion through digital outreach, and the possibility of leapfrogging an entire demography into digital transactions, has a different take. Aadhaar did not necessarily build a public infrastructure for banking. However, in establishing a unique identity, it did pave the way for the notorious demonetisation that pushed people into virtual and cashless transactions, and ironically, opening up the Indian market for the Chinese-controlled Paytm app to take over. Paytm is a clear symptom of China’s digital global dominance where TenCents and Alibaba are monopolising the world financial systems by becoming the de facto digital financial delivery systems for the emerging financial inclusion markets.

A little late in the game, but perhaps with a blockchain advantage, Facebook has entered this business of converting unique identification and engagement into a financial service, with the announcement of their new cryptocurrency endeavour, Libra. Much like those early days of Aadhaar, Facebook has positioned Libra as a pro-poor facilitator of financial inclusion for the large user base who are going to be connected to the Internet for the first time. The progressions of its interest in becoming the naturalised platform for all digital activities, as opposed to its presence as a space for sharing cute cat pictures and passive aggressive videos of relationships, is clear.

By launching Libra — the details are still scarce, but it seeks to create its own currency for the next generation, in collaboration with companies like Uber and Visa — Facebook has thrown its hat into a complete Black Mirror control of our digital lives. They want the user to first get connected to the Internet through Internet.org. Next, they want to control the websites that the users can use for free, by making Facebook the default entry point into digital data sharing. They would then collect and sell the data mined from these free services, and target the users to buy and consume using money developed by Libra. It is a fascinating, if not an ominous, cradle-to-grave scenario.

Currently, Facebook, in its humanitarian guise, is putting forth Libra as a .org service that selflessly seeks to transform the lives of financially excluded populations, who, in one fell swoop, would be online, on Facebook, and using Facebook’s currency in one single access point. However, it is clear to see that Libra is not a service for social good — Facebook is converting its advertisement-based exploitation of user data into clear financial goals. Remember, how we darkly used to laugh that data is the new currency? Well, here is Facebook’s Libra proving that data is not just the new currency, it can be the currency.

Facebook’s wealth has entirely been predicated on data as currency and attention as economy. The last few years have been a revelation of how Facebook has capitalised on its data and attention monopoly. In this new step, Facebook is no longer interested in using data to facilitate the financial expansion — with Libra, Facebook is going to become an actual broker of the money that we use. And once we have bought enough of this currency and use it in our everyday transactions, it can never devalue, because if it’s false, the biggest loser will always be the newly banked individual whose first financial identity is not going to be a banking account but Facebook.

In Libra, Facebook sees its salvation. It has long been critiqued that Facebook is facing obsolescence and threat from other social media networks and Libra is yet another way by which Facebook diversifies its portfolio and secures its future by making it the default service for how we live, work, talk, and love.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/raw/indian-express-nishant-shah-june-30-2019-facebook-sees-its-salvation-with-its-cryptocurrency-libra

June 2019 Newsletter

praskrishna — 2019-07-16T16:00:11Z

The Centre for Internet & Society Newsletter for June 2019.

Highlights for June 2019

Rohini Lakshané and Shweta Mohandas have updated their paper 'Joining the Dots in India's Big-Ticket Mobile Phone SEP Litigation' which chronicles mobile device SEP litigation in India. All developments in the lawsuits filed in the Delhi High Court and complaints made to the CCI that were published in reliable sources till 20 September 2018 are mentioned in this paper. Christ University in association with CIS-A2K organized the Wikimedia Education SAARC Conference 2019, from 20 - 22 June 2019, at Christ University, Bengaluru. Forty-nine Wikimedians from four countries (Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh, and India) participated in the event. Subodh Kulkarni in his report reveals that the event discussed challenges pertaining to retention and quality and methodologies to evaluate and measure the work being done on Wikipedia. CIS and Internet Society organized an event on the impact of consolidation in the Internet economy. The round-tables focused on the policies and regulation and technical evolution of the Internet. The report by Akriti Bopanna and Gurshabad Grover contributed to the Internet Society’s 2019 Global Internet Report on Consolidation in the Internet Economy. An excerpt from an essay by Sadaf Khan, written for and published as part of the Bodies of Evidence collection of Deep Dives was mirrored on the website. The Bodies of Evidence collection, edited by Bishakha Datta and Richa Kaul Padte, is a collaboration between Point of View and the Centre for Internet and Society, undertaken as part of the Big Data for Development Network supported by International Development Research Centre, Canada.

CIS and the News

The following news pieces were authored by CIS and published on its website in May:

5G Aspirations and Realities (Shyam Ponappa; Business Standard; June 6, 2019).
Staying silent about cyberbullying is no longer an option (Nishant Shah; Indian Express; June 16, 2019).
Facebook sees its salvation with its cryptocurrency Libra (Nishant Shah; Indian Express; June 30, 2019).

CIS in the News

CIS was quoted in these news articles published elsewhere:

Plugging into India’s broadband revolution (Navadha Pandey; Livemint; June 4, 2019).
Banking on artificial intelligence: In hiring drive, Bots are calling the shots now (Anjali Venugopal; Economic Times; June 4, 2019).
Fragmenting Cybersecurity Norms through the Language(s) of Subalternity: India in the East and the Global Community (Riccardo Vecellio Segate; Columbia Journal of Law; June 6, 2019).
Interpreting the Outer Space Treaty's Non-Appropriation Principle: Customary International Law from 1967 to Today (Abigail D. Pershing; Yale Journal of International Law; June 6, 2019).
No Fintech company meets every single privacy requirement under IT Act: CIS report (Shilpa S. Ranipeta; Newsminute; June 10, 2019).
Facebook to pay Indians to give up privacy: Experts raise questions (Geetika Mantri; Newsminute; June 14, 2019).
Chasing fame and fun 15 seconds at a time: Why TikTok has India hooked (Tora Agarwala, Surbhi Gupta, and Karishma Mehrotra; Indian Express; June 23, 2019).
Facebook’s Libra: A bit too ambitious? (Rajmohan Sudhakar; Deccan Herald; June 30, 2019).

Access to Knowledge

Our Access to Knowledge programme currently consists of two projects. The Pervasive Technologies project, conducted under a grant from the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), aims to conduct research on the complex interplay between low-cost pervasive technologies and intellectual property, in order to encourage the proliferation and development of such technologies as a social good. The Wikipedia project, which is under a grant from the Wikimedia Foundation, is for the growth of Indic language communities and projects by designing community collaborations and partnerships that recruit and cultivate new editors and explore innovative approaches to building projects.

Copyright & Patent

Research Paper

Joining the Dots in India's Big-Ticket Mobile Phone SEP Litigation (Rohini Lakshané and Shweta Mohandas; June 30, 2019).

Wikipdedia

As part of the project grant from the Wikimedia Foundation we have reached out to more than 3500 people across India by organizing more than 100 outreach events and catalysed the release of encyclopaedic and other content under the Creative Commons (CC-BY-3.0) license in four Indian languages (21 books in Telugu, 13 in Odia, 4 volumes of encyclopaedia in Konkani and 6 volumes in Kannada, and 1 book on Odia language history in English).

Blog Entries

What is Wikimedia Education SAARC Conference? (Sailesh Patnaik; June 5, 2019).
Karavali Wikimedians at All India Radio, Mangaluru (Bharathesha Alasandemajalu; June 13, 2019).
Wikimedia Education SAARC Conference 2019 (Subodh Kulkarni; June 22, 2019).
SVG translation workshop Kannada (Gopala Krishna; June 29, 2019).

Jobs

CIS-A2K team is seeking applications for the following posts:

Event Organized

Wikimedia Education SAARC conference (Christ University; Bangalore; June 20 - 22, 2019).

Openness

Innovation and creativity are fostered through openness and collaboration. The advent of the Internet radically defined what it means to be open and collaborative. The Internet itself is built upon open standards and free/libre/open source software. Our work in the Openness programme focuses on open data, especially open government data, open access, open education resources, open knowledge in Indic languages, open media, and open technologies and standards - hardware and software.

Event Hosted

Discussion on Open Standards with Bernd Erk and Jiten Vaidya (CIS, Bangalore; June 20, 2019).

Participation in Event

Rootconf 2019 (Organized by Has Geek; NIMHANS Convention Centre, Bangalore; June 21 - 22, 2019). Karan Saini participated in the event.

Internet Governance

As part of its research on privacy and free speech, CIS is engaged with two different projects. The first one (under a grant from Privacy International and IDRC) is on surveillance and freedom of expression (SAFEGUARDS). The second one (under a grant from MacArthur Foundation) is on restrictions that the Indian government has placed on freedom of expression online.

Privacy

Blog Entry

The Impact of Consolidation in the Internet Economy on the Evolution of the Internet (Akriti Bopanna and Gurshabad Grover; July 3, 2019).

Event Organized

Setting the Agenda: A Behavioural Science approach to Data Privacy (Organized by Centre for Social Behaviour Change; Ashoka University and the Busara Center for Behavioral Economics, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi). Amber Sinha attended the meeting.

Participation in Events

Pranesh Prakash as Resource Person for ITD seminar on Competition (Organized by International Institute for Trade and Development; Bangkok; June 24 - 26, 2019). Pranesh Prakash was also a speaker in the session on Consumer Protection and Digital Rights- Defining Welfare and Fair Competition.

Cyber Security

Participation in Events

The Global Nature of Cybersecurity in a Changing World (Organized by Hewlett Foundation; San Diego; June 20 - 22, 2019).
Workshop on Cyber-Ethics: Values-driven Innovative Solutions (Organized by Embassy of Switzerland; Bangalore; June 28, 2019). Arindrajit Basu moderated a discussion on Cyber-Ethics.

Free Speech

Participation in Events

ICANN Masterclass (Organized by ICANN, Bangalore; June 19, 2019). Akriti Bopanna attended the event.
ICANN 65 (Organized by ICANN; Morocco; June 24 - 27, 2019). Akriti Bopanna attended the event.

Telecom

The growth in telecommunications in India has been impressive. While the potential for growth and returns exist, a range of issues need to be addressed for this potential to be realized. One aspect is more extensive rural coverage and the second aspect is a countrywide access to broadband which is low at about eight million subscriptions.

Article

5G Aspirations and Realities (Shyam Ponappa; Organizing India Blogspot; June 6, 2019).

Researchers at Work (RAW)

The Researchers at Work (RAW) programme is an interdisciplinary research initiative driven by an emerging need to understand the reconfigurations of social practices and structures through the Internet and digital media technologies, and vice versa. It aims to produce local and contextual accounts of interactions, negotiations, and resolutions between the Internet, and socio-material and geo-political processes:

Essay

Data bleeding everywhere: a story of period trackers (Sadaf Khan; June 11, 2019). This was written for and published as part of the Bodies of Evidence collection of Deep Dives.

Participation in Event

Unpacking video-based surveillance in New Delhi (Organized by the University of Manchester, England; June 14, 2019). Aayush Rathi and Ambika Tandon presented their research on 'Urban Data, Inequality and Justice in the Global South'.

Blog Entries

Patreon: Understanding the Intersection of Art, Artiste, and Labour (Upasana Bhattacharjee; June 1, 2019).
#ArchivesForStorytelling (Aliyeh Rizvi, Bhanu Prakash, Dinesh, Malini Ghanathe, and Venkat Srinivasan; June 1, 2019).
#DigitalIdentities (Anjali K Mohan, Harish Boya, Janaki Srinivasan, Khetrimayum Monish Singh, and Sarita Seshagiri; June 11, 2019).

About CIS

The Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) is a non-profit organisation that undertakes interdisciplinary research on internet and digital technologies from policy and academic perspectives. The areas of focus include digital accessibility for persons with disabilities, access to knowledge, intellectual property rights, openness (including open data, free and open source software, open standards, open access, open educational resources, and open video), internet governance, telecommunication reform, digital privacy, and cyber-security. The academic research at CIS seeks to understand the reconfigurations of social and cultural processes and structures as mediated through the internet and digital media technologies.

► Follow us elsewhere

Twitter: http://twitter.com/cis_india
Twitter - Access to Knowledge: https://twitter.com/CISA2K
Twitter - Information Policy: https://twitter.com/CIS_InfoPolicy
Facebook - Access to Knowledge: https://www.facebook.com/cisa2k
E-Mail - Access to Knowledge: a2k@cis-india.org
E-Mail - Researchers at Work: raw@cis-india.org
List - Researchers at Work: https://lists.ghserv.net/mailman/listinfo/researchers

► Support Us

Please help us defend consumer and citizen rights on the Internet! Write a cheque in favour of 'The Centre for Internet and Society' and mail it to us at No. 194, 2nd 'C' Cross, Domlur, 2nd Stage, Bengaluru - 5600 71.

► Request for Collaboration

We invite researchers, practitioners, artists, and theoreticians, both organisationally and as individuals, to engage with us on topics related internet and society, and improve our collective understanding of this field. To discuss such possibilities, please write to Sunil Abraham, Executive Director, at sunil@cis-india.org (for policy research), or Sumandro Chattapadhyay, Research Director, at sumandro@cis-india.org (for academic research), with an indication of the form and the content of the collaboration you might be interested in. To discuss collaborations on Indic language Wikipedia projects, write to Tanveer Hasan, Programme Officer, at tanveer@cis-india.org.

CIS is grateful to its primary donor the Kusuma Trust founded by Anurag Dikshit and Soma Pujari, philanthropists of Indian origin for its core funding and support for most of its projects. CIS is also grateful to its other donors, Wikimedia Foundation, Ford Foundation, Privacy International, UK, Hans Foundation, MacArthur Foundation, and IDRC for funding its various projects.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/june-2019-newsletter

Chasing fame and fun 15 seconds at a time: Why TikTok has India hooked

Tora Agarwala, Surbhi Gupta, and Karishma Mehrotra — 2019-07-05T02:13:39Z

How TikTok, an app owned by a Chinese firm, has become a playground for India’s young.

The article by Tora Agarwala, Surbhi Gupta, and Karishma Mehrotra appeared in Indian Express on June 23, 2019. Nishant Shah was quoted.

“Kaam nai niki? Do you have no other work?” At a banner printing shop in Nagaon, a town in Assam, the middle-aged shopkeeper was bemused. It was the strangest order he had received in a while.

For one, the banner was for a “TikTok” meetup. He had not the slightest inkling of what that was. Second, the two boys who had introduced themselves as hailing from Jamuguri and Raha, smaller towns in the state, insisted that the text incorporate a spelling mistake. “Instead of M-E-E-T up, please write M-E-A-T up,” he was told. The shopkeeper grudgingly obliged and the boys rode off on their bikes. It would be ready the next day.

“This is going to go viral,” Dhurbajit Medhi said triumphantly to his friend PK Nath. They had only known each other for a month, having “met” on TikTok. In April, they sat face-to-face for the first time at a small restaurant in Raha, in Nagaon district, where Medhi lived. Nath had travelled 110 km to meet him.

Medhi was 23, a singer who had dropped out of college because of a death in the family. Nath, about 30, was known in his neighbourhood in Jamuguri for two things: his gela maal dukaan (grocery store) and his penchant to make people laugh.

On TikTok, both have followers in thousands. Over a few months, they would chat often, appreciating each other’s videos. “On a sad day, I would scroll through Nath da’s feed and it would make me laugh without fail,” says Medhi, who joined TikTok about a year ago. Many comments on his videos are from girls. “Some say ‘cute’ and some say bhaal laagise (You’re looking good),” says Medhi, who is reasonably tall and sports a goatee on his boyish face.

Over the year, Medhi has learnt the tricks of the TikTok trade. “There are two kinds of videos which get attention here in Assam: either you do sad, romantic songs. Or you do fotuami — slapstick humour,” says Medhi, who has made a niche for himself in the former category. He owns an Mi phone, worth Rs 11,000, which he bought a year ago by saving money through his work at his father’s tea shop. “My mother is okay with me making these videos. But she says, ‘Do all this, but think about your life also.’ I get her point but maybe I can make a career out of this,” he says.

After all, TikTok is not as easy as Facebook. It involves an element of skill. “Do you know how difficult it is to get one TikTok like? On Facebook, you just put a photo and the likes pour in. Here, we have to work hard.” Medhi admits he was naïve initially. “I would make photo-collages from my trips to Kaziranga and add some background music.” But that would not have worked. “The viewer takes into account everything: is our lip-sync matching? Are our clothes suited to the mood of the music? Are our expressions accurate?”

Today, Medhi has over 400 videos, many of which feature him mouthing lyrics to the songs sung by Assamese musician Zubeen Garg. Sometimes, he sings in his own voice too — a secret talent he has nurtured but not had the opportunity to explore. “In Upper Assam, there is an appreciation for the arts and music. But here in middle Assam, it is different. People would mock, ‘Eeeh gayok hobo ahise. Look at him trying to be a singer,’” says Medhi.

It is these aspirations, which often get mowed down by the traditionalism that comes with living in small towns and villages that TikTok is giving oxygen to. The short-form video app has seen a phenomenal growth since its rebranding from Musical.ly in 2018, garnering 200 million users in India alone. Its hallmark is simple: it woos your attention with 15-second videos (they make go up to 60 seconds too) of lip-syncing teenage girls, dancing boys, family pranks and other such stylised moments. The mobile app’s owner, a Chinese internet company called ByteDance, was reportedly awarded a round of major investment from Japanese SoftBank last year, making it the world’s most valuable startup.

TikTok’s rapid capture of India — it skyrocketed past traditional social media mammoths, like Facebook, on global download charts in 2018 — is a testament to how quickly Chinese apps have begun to give American tech companies a run for their money in one of the world’s most important markets. TikTok has given a megaphone to rural Indian life in a way that no other app has been able to; American apps such as Facebook have been restricted to a primarily upper-class user base.

“We believe that TikTok filled the gap by bringing people from across the deepest pockets of India online and giving them a platform to express themselves,” said ByteDance’s global public policy director Helena Lersch. Since the company introduced in-feed advertisements and branded editing tools last year, it’s attracted the likes of Pepsi, Myntra, and Dunzo.

If more proof were needed that TikTok has planted itself into the circuitry of desire and aspiration, it came by way of a news report last fortnight. A young man in Delhi, who worked at a restaurant, was arrested for snatching an iPhone XS Max — he wanted to shoot good-quality TikTok videos. Another 19-year-old from Delhi, Salman Zakir, was shot by his neighbour allegedly in the course of making a TikTok video.

But what is the big deal about TikTok? How have 15-second fragments of people being people colonised the attention of so many? Scrolling through the app for the first time, one is struck by how random it is, and how the attention economy has shrunk your mindspan to a quarter of a minute. You could easily tire of teens dancing, making faces and lip-synching in super-tiny skits and video memes. Or, you could watch an entire generation occupy this playground with their energy and creativity, using 15 seconds to mix, mash and play versions of themselves. Preparing a face to meet other excited, silly faces has never been so addictive.

Social media has put the self at the centre, making opinions out of rants, photographers of anyone with a phone camera, and journalists of citizens. TikTok takes the humdrum, turns it into a form of talent and injects into it the velocity of the fast-travelling video.

But, more importantly perhaps, it taps into a confidence in the young — about their lives, abilities and even their humble backgrounds — that was unthinkable a generation ago.

For sure, TikTok could not have spread this way five years ago either. Eighteen-year-old Devanshu Mahajan, an undergraduate student of commerce at Delhi University’s School of Open Learning, agrees. He found himself exploring the internet only after the entry of Reliance Jio in the telecom market. “Before that we used to have 1 GB data for a month. Suddenly, we had 1 GB to spend in a day,” says the Delhi resident. Last year, he started posting videos on TikTok, most of which seemed to disappear into nowhere. “I got so angry that I uploaded a rant about the lack of response, and suddenly it got viral. Then, I started giving my own twist to trending sounds/beats and songs, and these videos started becoming popular,” says Mahajan, who has over eight lakh followers now.

Most of his popular posts are about Indian families (“Indian parents wish for boys only to send them to the market to buy milk and vegetables endless times”), school life and being single. They are not particularly witty, but belong to the tradition of native humour that once would make judges mysteriously ROFL on shows like The Great Indian Laughter Challenge. “I make my videos at home, I have no tripod or light, there is one window where I put my phone and act,” says Mahajan, who uses an Mi Y3 phone. With a spiky haircut and a lean frame, he is the picture of ordinariness. “People either say I’m too thin, or comment about my nose or looks. But I make a story out of those comments too. If I can make fun of myself, nothing can affect me,” he says.

“It may not be like YouTube where one can earn money, but because of this app, I feel like a star now,” says Musaib Bashir Bhat, 27. He joined TikTok seven months ago and his 300 videos in Kashmiri have earned him 73,000 followers already. He is also recognised on the streets of Srinagar.

Fame is the drug that drives TikTok users, but, for now, at least, this is a following rooted in the local. The app is a Babel of many tongues, and each region has its distinct self-expression — in its aesthetic, looks or music. It hasn’t been monopolised by Hindi film music or Punjabi pop.

Ranjan Barman, an 18-year-old living in a small village in Lakhimpur, Assam, loves acting. “I know I can’t be an actor in real life— but at least on TikTok I can,” says the college-goer who joined the app four months ago. He is now nearing his one millionth heart — a commendable feat for someone who is new to the TikTok universe. His popularity, he suspects, could have something to do with the props he uses in his videos. Barman owns 22 gamusa shirts, or shirts fashioned out of the traditional Assamese cloth, and says that whenever he wears them, his videos get more play. “In Assam, people respect the gamusa. It touches sentiments,” he says.

But how substantial is this fame? What kind of recognition do TikTokers seek? Last month, Mahajan called for a meet-and-greet with his “fans” at a west Delhi mall. Thirty people showed up. “I hadn’t expected anyone to turn up. People clicked photos and videos, but I didn’t feel like a celebrity,” he says.

While TikTok fame comes from the number of followers one has, an important barometer is also the number of hearts you receive. For example, Medhi has only 4,000 followers, but his videos have received 74,500 hearts. The heart tally is an aggregate of the number of likes the creator has garnered across every video he has uploaded. “It is just one viral video you need — and then you are set,” says Medhi, who hasn’t hit the jackpot yet, but is optimistic. “Like all things in life, this, too, takes time,” he says.

TikTok has given Aizawl’s Adeline Pach much more than the 5,12,000 followers one sees on her profile. A cancer-survivor, Pach started using it in 2015, when it went by the name Musical.ly, while recovering from her illness. “It was silly, goofy stuff — but it helped take my mind off things,” she says. Even today, she suffers from a number of health issues. But TikTok “distracts her”.

Pach’s skilful “transition” videos (where one frame would blend to another seamlessly), started getting featured on the app’s homepage. “People liked the way I edited my videos. For example, if I was saying and wearing something in one frame, the next would be in another location, with me doing something else in another outfit,” says Pach, adding that earlier TikTok was more about skill, and now people “blindly heart goofy content.”

As Pach, now in her late twenties, kept getting featured, her followers shot up — and for first time in her life, the introvert found herself interacting with people — “and enjoying it. It gave me the confidence I never had.”

In 2017, Pach attended her first TikTok meetup in Mumbai. “That had about 70 people but the next one which took place in Bengaluru had 600,” she says. She performed a rap song by Nicki Minaj in front of a packed auditorium. “Suddenly I was fearless.”

For many, TikTok holds out the hope of bigger things to come — a career in music and acting. When he was a teen, Ambish KB’s acting talents — he mimicked his teachers’ mannerisms and got them to laugh — made him almost famous in school. In college, his obsession with films would make him watch first-day, first-show releases of leading Malayalam superstars like Mammootty and Mohanlal. He also held positions in the Ernakulam district unit of the all-Kerala Mammootty fans association. “It’s safe to assume that I spent more time in theatres than in college,” says Ambish, 27, an accountant with a fashion design firm in Kochi.

He still has not given up on his acting dreams. For three years now, he has been scouring for small roles, approaching directors, producers and scriptwriters, even as he maintains a job on the side. Not surprisingly, he has taken to TikTok like a duck to water. His account doesn’t boast an envious number of followers (572 at last count) but his videos, most of which are comedy re-enactments of popular scenes from Malayalam cinema, have collected thousands of views and a flood of reactions. He says his videos are all home-produced and mostly filmed in the dead of night once his parents are fast asleep. Many of them are also collaborations with his wife; she’s not mad about cinema like he is, but she likes the fun interface of TikTok. To the point that, at weddings, their relatives call them, “Oh look, here come the TikTok people!”

But more than anything, Ambish believes TikTok could hold his ticket to the film industry. “It’s a medium for people like us to display our talent. Who knows, if my video goes viral and if a casting director happens to notice, I might click,” says Ambish, who spends at least eight hours a day on TikTok. His inspiration is a fellow TikTok user, Fukru, who supposedly landed a role in a film after his dance videos went viral. “He would post videos every day, just random ones of him dancing. Now he’s got a role in the next film by director Omar Lulu. You never know,” Ambish says.

Ambish is not prepared to leave his job yet, as he understands the film industry is unpredictable. He doesn’t have the means to travel for auditions to faraway towns. But he knows he has a powerful device at his disposal that could get him there: his Huawei P20 Lite smartphone and the TikTok app on it.

While future sociologists might mine TikTok to understand the changing mores of a new generation, fears of data mining and privacy intrusions of the app have often been voiced. This year, the US Federal Trade Commission fined the company $5.7 million for illegally collecting the personal data of children. In 2018, Indonesia’s government temporarily banned the platform for “negative”, mostly pornographic and blasphemous, content. The government lifted the ban after the company complied with local laws and stepped up local content moderation.

In April, the Madras High Court made a similar interim takedown order, asking Google and Apple to remove TikTok from their app stores, citing pornographic and child exploitation content. Three weeks later, the court lifted the ban after the Supreme Court asked it to address the company’s plea against the takedown, and the app fell from most downloaded to fourth most in India. The company has admittedly decided to “show less skin” here than its other markets. “It’s a bit of a case-to-case basis. There is no clear line I can share with you now. If there is a sexually-explicit video, we take it down. And we are doing this a bit quicker in India,” said Lersch.

Writing in these pages, our columnist Nishant Shah warned about TikTok’s “embrace of artificial intelligence and big data analytics.” “From the minute you sign up for it, giving up your personal information and data to extreme mining which bears the same pitfalls of privacy and surveillance that all other big data apps do, TikTok starts presenting content to you. This is not content created by friends, or colleagues… Instead, this is content created by people you don’t know at all, and brought to you by algorithms that know, even without you telling them what you might like.

The more time you spend … going through complex tutorials to make your own 15-second fun video, the more the machine learning algorithms learn you,” wrote the co-founder of the Centre for Internet and Society. While critics point out that the infantilised world that the app peddles is dangerous to the very personal liberty that it seems to showcase, it’s not an argument that is winning.

But wait, what happened to the “meatup” banner? When Medhi and Nath had met, they rued the little regard their family and friends had for their pursuit. “My friends think I am wasting time,” says Medhi, the only TikToker in Raha. Both knew they had to do something.

They went ahead and organised the first state-wide TikTok meetup in Assam, slated for this Sunday. While there have been meetups before, this is the first time TikTokers from every corner of the state will be in attendance. They expect about 500. How did they manage to do it? “Only negative things go viral on the internet,” says Medhi, “That is why we decided to spell ‘meetup’ as ‘meatup’.”

The day the banner was ready and picked up from Nagaon, both Medhi and Nath took a picture of it and put it on the app. As expected, there was an uproar. “Everyone started sharing it. My phone number was on the banner and I would get 10 calls a day. “They would say: Don’t you know how to spell ‘meetup’? Most made fun of me but I didn’t care. Our job was done. The word had spread.”

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/indian-express-june-23-2019-chasing-fame-and-fun-15-seconds-at-a-time

Unpacking video-based surveillance in New Delhi

Aayush Rathi and Ambika Tandon — 2019-06-20T05:13:25Z

Aayush Rathi and Ambika Tandon presented at an international workshop on 'Urban Data, Inequality and Justice in the Global South', on 14 June 2019, at the University of Manchester. The agenda for the workshop and the slides from the presentation by Aayush and Ambika are available below.

Agenda of the workshop: Download (DOCX)

Slides from the presentation: Download (PDF)

The aim of the workshop was to present findings from case studies on urban data justice commissioned by the Sustainable Consumption Institute and Centre for Development Informatics at the University of Manchester, on aspects of justice in data systems in cities across the world. Aayush and Ambika presented their study on video-based surveillance in New Delhi, which was conducted across a period of 3 months earlier this year. The study aimed to assess the extent to which CCTV surveillance systems in Delhi support the needs of women in the city, including lower class women and those from informal settlements. The study will be published as a working paper by the University of Manchester in the coming months.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/raw/unpacking-video-based-surveillance-in-new-delhi-urban-data-justice

Workshop on 'Urban Data, Inequality and Justice in the Global South'

Admin — 2019-07-06T01:30:16Z

Aayush Rathi and Ambika Tandon presented our research on video-based surveillance in New Delhi at a workshop on urban data, inequality, and justice in the global South at the University of Manchester on 14 June 2019.

The agenda for the workshop and the presentations made by CIS can be accessed here. The research was conducted as part of a grant from the University, as part of a project on justice in data systems within cities. It will bepublished as a working paper by the university in July-August.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/workshop-on-urban-data-inequality-and-justice-in-the-global-south

AI and Healthcare Report

pranav — 2019-06-11T14:23:51Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/ai-and-healthcare-report

Plugging into India’s broadband revolution

Navadha Pandey — 2019-06-05T14:02:48Z

After many false starts, the plan to wire India’s digital future may finally take off with Jio GigaFiber’s entry.

The article by Navadha Pandey was published in Livemint on June 4, 2019. Sunil Abraham was quoted.

All through 2018, 58-year-old Ashok Kumar Rai’s Lucknow-based small architecture firm used to spend a princely sum of ₹11,800 each month for the privilege of a good broadband internet connection. “We used to send building walk-through files to clients every day and the size of each file could go up to 1GB (gigabytes)," he says. Doling out cash for reliable internet was a necessity. All that changed when a new player, Atria Convergence Technologies Ltd (ACT), came to Rai’s upmarket Gomti Nagar neighbourhood in Lucknow. In the summer of 2019, Rai’s internet access speed has shot up from 4 to 150 Mbps (megabits per second). And the monthly bill has come crashing down to about ₹1,000.

For far too long, India’s internet action lay centered in its metros, leaving out even relatively big cities like Lucknow. The fledgling online access push into smaller cities and rural India happened primarily via mobile data transmitted over wireless spectrum. Home broadband was nowhere in the picture. But all that seems set for some dramatic change. If the country’s richest man, Mukesh Ambani, has his way, high-speed broadband will become a reality in at least 1,600 cities.

In the process, he aims to also leapfrog India from its current rank—134—in fixed-line broadband penetration to the top five with the help of Jio GigaFiber.

The dream of a broadband revolution, however, has its fair share of detractors. Bhaskar Ramamurthi, for example, who helms the Centre of Excellence in Wireless Technology (CWEiT at Indian Institute of Technology Madras (IIT Madras), says: “Fiber penetration will take a long time in India."

The logic is simple: unlike mobile towers, fiber needs to reach each home physically. China’s broadband boom happened because it has rebuilt nearly its entire housing stock in the last 15 years, fuelled by a construction-led growth bubble. “In India, initially only all the upcoming new buildings may get connected to fiber-based (fast) internet," says Ramamurthi.

But India’s untapped millions are about to set off a race. And this journey, which will clearly not be a cakewalk, has huge rewards in store. Sample this: India has 1.16 billion mobile subscribers but just 18.42 million wired broadband subscribers. And many of them, like Rai, are data hungry. There is an existing playbook: what happened to mobile broadband after 2014.

In 2014, the cost of one GB of mobile data was ₹270. Now, it is ₹10 per GB. As a result, mobile data consumption has soared. In late-2014, an average user on Airtel’s network (India’s largest telecom operator back then) used 622 megabytes (MB) of data in a month. By late-2018, the number of users had tripled, but, despite a broader base, average data usage stood at 10GB a month.

First-mover advantage

The expansion in wired broadband access may have far-reaching implications beyond a mere spike in data usage. When Mukesh Ambani, chairman and managing director of Reliance Industry Ltd which owns Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd, declared optical fibre based fixed-line broadband as “the future" last July, the real play was not on the infrastructure itself, but the services that would ride on top—from smart home experiences to new forms of e-commerce. The revenue and the first-mover advantage lie in who gets to tap into the “ecosystem"—of how a household connects to the wider world to buy, watch, and exchange.

Essentially, new businesses could emerge to feed the “ecosystem". And some existing small and medium-scale businesses may finally become viable enough to expand and go big. Netflix, for example, emerged as one of the world’s largest video streaming platform, riding on top of the US broadband boom. But India already has a crowded pack of 34 web video streaming entertainment platforms, most of which have cropped up to sustain the attention of mobile data guzzling Indians. With wired broadband following mobile usage expansion, unlike in most other countries, India’s new-age internet businesses are likely to be unique and different.

Home-based surveillance and security systems could be one space that could gain significant traction, says Sunil Abraham, executive director of the Bengaluru-based think-tank Centre for Internet and Society. “If there are 40 families (in a high-rise apartment) who have babies and need surveillance facilities, each apartment going for an individual connection from a telecom service provider would involve a huge amount of money. But a fibre-based intranet or peer network could connect all 40 flats for a much smaller price," he says.

There could also be unintended consequences for the country’s digital gender divide. Only 29% of India’s current internet users are women, according to a recent Unicef report. If the cost of wired broadband begins to crash—thereby increasing the number of homes which have access—women who will never get access to a phone (due to the cost of device and patriarchy) will finally be able to see things on the internet, says Nandini Chami, a researcher at IT for Change, a non-governmental organization. “How this negotiation will happen inside the house, we will have to wait and watch," she says. Household-level access would also confuse corporate entities trying to “hyper-profile" users since multiple people will be accessing the internet through shared devices at home, she adds.

But as internet access improves, making the digital economy more vital, Chami says, governments would have an important role in ensuring women get to use the internet “on terms that are empowering". “We can think of innovative models when fixed broadband becomes cheap. The household is not the space for this. It can be libraries which have special times for young girls or digital labs for women. We need to rethink the missed opportunity of the BharatNet and the national optic fibre network. Internet access should not stop at just the panchayat office. We must think of different points of access, particularly for women," Chami adds.

The possibility of many of these radical changes in both the social and business realms will, of course, entirely rely on the pace at which India goes broadband. Despite the rapid expansion in mobile internet, data originating from mobile devices still account for only 20% of India’s data consumption. That is why what happens in the wired broadband space will matter increasingly. And that is also why Jio is betting big on expanding the existing wired user base (18 million) to 50 million.

The Jio gameplan

Jio is currently running beta trials for GigaFiber in New Delhi and Mumbai, providing 100GB of data at 100 Mbps for free, except for the ₹4,500 one-time deposit for a router. While the landline will come with unlimited calling facility, television channels will be delivered over the internet (Internet Protocol Television, or IPTV). The packaged trio of fast Internet, landline telephony, and television access will remain free for a while—similar to what had happened in the mobile phone services segment in 2016. After commercial launch, the per month cost is expected to be ₹600, roughly half of what similar services cost currently.

Jio’s rival Bharti Airtel Ltd has decided that it is not interested in the entire pie but just the creamy top layer. It will focus on premium customers and expand its broadband services across India’s top 100 cities, instead of copying Reliance Jio’s ambitious plan to create a fibre-optic network across the country. To achieve this, Airtel, which already has 2.36 million fibre customers, will stay focussed on high-rise buildings rather than horizontal deployment, as this business model is more economical and logical.

The dark horse in this race is, of course, ACT with its existing 1.42 million customers. Its presence is much smaller with just 18 cities, largely in the south India and the newly expanded zones of Delhi, Jaipur and Lucknow. On the ACT fibre network, average data consumption per user is already at 130GB a month.

“We have seen a 150% increase in average consumption in the last 18 months," says Bala Malladi, chief executive officer, ACT. “People are now looking at higher speeds and the experience is taking precedence over cost. In fact, even in the hinterland, people want higher speeds and non-buffered experience," he adds.

But why hasn’t fibre penetration gone up if the demand is booming? Why did India miss the bus when other countries like the US have an 80% fibre penetration?

Policy paralysis

Firstly, fibre is expensive to lay, unlike a SIM card which can be given away for free. Moreover, India till a few years ago was mostly a voice calls market and not a data market. Secondly, municipalities in India have complicated right-of-way (RoW) procedures which act as a big hurdle for digging and laying fibre. This is one of the reasons why even government (such as the Delhi government) plans to set up citywide surveillance and Wi-Fi hotspots have failed.

“The centre has finally issued a very good RoW model, but now every state has to come up with its own policy modelled on the central guidelines. They are taking their own sweet time," says Rajan Mathews, director general, Cellular Operators Association of India (COAI).

The lack of forward movement on these fixable policy issues assumes significance given the government’s focus on fibre in its National Digital Communications Policy-2018, which has a target of attracting $100 billion worth of investments in digital communications.

The policy’s goals include universal broadband for all, creating four million jobs in digital communications, and raising the share of digital communications in India’s gross domestic product (GDP) to 8% (from less than 6% in 2017). Deployment of five million public Wi-Fi hotspots by 2020 through a National Broadband Mission is also on the agenda. The key goal, however, is to provide 1 Gbps (gigabit per second) connectivity to all gram panchayats by 2020 and 10 Gbps by 2022.

The sad reality is that the last five years were an absolute failure in laying fibre in the country. BharatNet, the flagship mission to connect 250,000 gram panchayats with broadband, which was being implemented by Bharat Broadband Network Ltd (BBNL), a special purpose vehicle set up under the department of telecommunications (DoT) in February 2012, has been a disappointment, to say the least.

The government has completed laying optical fibre cables across more than 100,000 gram panchayats in the first phase and had aimed to complete connecting the remaining 150,000 councils by March 2019. The second phase has seen “zero progress", according to government officials close to the matter. Pained by poor utilization of digital infrastructure, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (Trai) suggested auctioning BharatNet infrastructure on an “as is where is" basis after a meeting held in December at the prime minister’s office to take stock of the mission.

To start with, the DoT plans to monetize fibre assets built by the government under its flagship mission BharatNet through outright sale to private players or by leasing these assets for a 20-year period after a bidding process. If successful, it could boost connectivity in Indian villages, which have so far been kept out of the digital dividend.

Bigger cities, however, will have a different consumption story. With intra-city fibre coverage leading to improved penetration, wired broadband would not just offer an enhanced content viewing experience, but also open doors for internet of things, or IoT. “Home security is going to become a big business going forward, riding on fibre. Even gaming will see a lot of traction as you can enjoy a 4K game in real-time, thanks to low latency and high speed of an optic network," Malladi of ACT says.

The looming question, however, is how much investment can operators put in given the current low tariff environment in the telecom sector. Big players are stressed for funds and are diluting their non-core assets to generate funds to keep networks afloat. “If you are looking at what will happen in the next three years... I believe that there is a business case to be made and tariffs should sustain it (the investment)," Mathews says.

Whether that happens or not could become an important footnote in India’s growth story. The far-reaching implications of fast internet access pushed billionaire tech entrepreneur Elon Musk, chief executive officer of Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX), to launch 60 internet-beaming satellites last month. The grand scheme is a response to the practical constraint of laying fibre, a concern which is more pressing in India’s vast landmass.

Unlike Musk, the country’s broadband dreams, however, still remain rooted to the ground—in the simple tech of optic fibre. And the success or failure of those dreams will be written by how fast the fibre network expands.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/news/livemint-navadha-pandey-june-4-2019-plugging-into-indias-broadband-revolution

SIF Concept Note

Admin — 2019-06-05T04:13:13Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/files/sif-concept-note

May 2019 Newsletter

praskrishna — 2019-06-26T01:40:33Z

The Centre for Internet & Society Newsletter for the month of May 2019

Highlights for May 2019

Omidyar Network is investing in in establishing a three-region research alliance co-led by the Institute for Technology & Society, Brazil , the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Technology Law, Kenya, and the Centre for Internet & Society (CIS), India on appropriate use of Digital Identity. CIS will look at the policy objectives of digital identity projects, how technological policy choices can be thought through to meet the objectives, and how legitimate uses of a digital identity framework may be evaluated. The term Fintech is generally used to describe innovative technology and technological processes being used in the financial services sector. Vipul Kharbanda has presented a detailed analysis of RBI’s Draft Framework on Regulatory Sandbox for Fintech. Centre for Internet & Society's 'Access to Knowledge' wing (CIS-A2K) signed a MoU with PAH Solapur University, Maharashtra to promote content generation in Wikimedia projects among the institutions under University affiliation and develop a platform in the university for outreach programs on digital knowledge, language and technologies, FOSS, unicode, etc. Timely and affordable access to scientific research remains a problem in this digital day and age. Most countries including India, continue to struggle with implementing open access. The latest international initiative (created in Europe) to remedy this problem is Plan S. This has been positioned as a strategy to implement immediate open access to scientific publications from 2021 which India is considering adopting. Anubha Sinha in an article unpacks the disorderly growth of open access in India, and discusses the gap between the Plan's vision and current Indian scenario in some respects Shweta Mohandas was nominated to curate Genderlog's Twitter handle (@genderlogindia). She tweeted about topics related to gender and data, more specifically around AI, big data, privacy and surveillance. Sumandro Chattapadhyay and Tim Davies co-authored a chapter titled Open Data and Land Ownership in State of Open Data book which was recently launched at World Bank. The authors have thrown light on how the lessons from the land ownership field highlight the political nature of data, and illustrate the importance of politically aware interventions when creating open data standards, infrastructure, and ecosystems. The Bodies of Evidence collection, edited by Bishakha Datta and Richa Kaul Padte, is a collaboration between Point of View and CIS as part of the Big Data for Development Network supported by International Development Research Centre, Canada. Can data ever know who we really are? This is an excerpt from an essay by Zara Rahman, written for and published as part of the Bodies of Evidence collection of Deep Dives.

CIS and the News

The following news pieces were authored by CIS and published on its website in May:

How privacy fares in the 2019 election manifestos | Opinion (Aayush Rathi and Ambika Tandon; May 1, 2019).
Democracy, Digital India and Networks (Shyam Ponappa; Business Standard; May 1, 2019).
Why the TikTok ban is worrying (Gurshabad Grover; Hindustan Times; May 2, 2019).
Digital Native: Narendra Modi’s interview by Akshay Kumar is a PR masterpiece (Nishant Shah; Indian Express; May 5, 2019).
Will the WTO Finally Tackle the ‘Trump’ Card of National Security? (Arindrajit Basu; The Wire; May 8, 2019).
Digital Native: Three things we need to realise about what TikTok is doing to us (Nishant Shah; Indian Express; May 19, 2019).
Open Data and Land Ownership (Sumandro Chattapadhyay; State of Open Data; May 22, 2019).
Can EVM vulnerabilities be used to game the Indian election? (Karan Saini; Kaarana Blog; May 22, 2019).
The Huawei bogey (Gurshabad Grover; Indian Express; May 30, 2019).

CIS in the News

CIS was quoted in these news articles published elsewhere:

Cyber criminals hide in the ‘dark web’ to remain anonymous (Tushar Kaushik; Economic Times; May 2, 2019).
BJP outspends Congress, others in social media advertising (Vidhi Choudhary; Hindustan Times; May 3, 2019).
Three emerging market think tanks to collaborate on Good ID recommendations with Omidyar backing (Chris Burt; Biometric Update; May 8, 2019).
"Aadhaar Reduced Agency in Citizens and Empowered Those in Positions of Authority" (Martin Moore; News Click; May 20, 2019).
In Parts of India, Internet Shutdowns Are a Fact of Life (Megha Bahree; Top10VPN; May 21, 2019).
Artificial Intelligence: Consumer Experiences in New Technologies (Consumer International; May 28, 2019).

Access to Knowledge

Copyright & Patent

Blog Entry

Should India adopt Plan S to realise Open Access to Public-funded Scientific Research? (Anubha Sinha; May 29, 2019).

Wikipdedia

Blog Entries

Wikipedia assignments workshop for Post Graduate students in PAH Solapur University (Subodh Kulkarni; May 3, 2019).
Wikisource Workshop at Vigyan Ashram, Pabal (Subodh Kulkarni; May 26, 2019)
MoU between PAH Solapur University & CIS-A2K (Subodh Kulkarni; May 31, 2019).

Jobs

CIS-A2K team is seeking applications for the following posts:

Events

Train-the-Trainer 2019 (Organized by CIS-A2K; Vishakhapatnam; May 31 - June 2, 2019).
Wikimedia Education SAARC conference (Organized by Christ University (Deemed to be University) with the association of CIS-A2K; Christ University; Bangalore; June 20 - June 22, 2019).

Media Coverage

Ahmedabad Wikisource Workshop (Vishwavihar; May 13, 2019).
Youths come forward to augment Assamese Wikisource project (NE Now News; May 17, 2019).
Wikipedia looks to ramp up its Indian language content (Tushar Kaushik; May 28, 2019).
Project Tiger: Wikipedia ropes in locals to contribute articles in Indian languages (Tushar Kaushik; May 29, 2019).

Openness

Publication

Open Data and Land Ownership (State of Open Data; Sumandro Chattapadhyay; May 22, 2019).

Internet Governance

Digital Identity

Announcement

Announcement of a Three-Region Research Alliance on the Appropriate Use of Digital Identity (Amber Sinha; May 13, 2019).

Event Organized

Picking ‘Wholes’ - Thinking in Systems Workshop (Organized by CIS; New Delhi; May 27 - 28, 2019).

Gender

Blog Entry

Workshop on Feminist Information Infrastructure (Ambika Tandon; edited by Gurshabad Grover and designed by Saumyaa Naidu; May 9, 2019).

Free Speech

Participation in Events

Stockholm Internet Forum 2019 (Organized by Stockholm Internet Forum 2019; Stockholm; May 16 - 17, 2019). Gurshabad Grover was a panelist in the discussion on 'Influencing Internet Governance' co-organised by Article 19.
Consilience 2019 (Organized by the Law and Technology Society; National Law School of India University, Bangalore; May 25, 2019). Gurshabad Grover was a panelist on the discussion on 'Online Content Regulation: Global Perspectives and Solutions'.

Privacy

Research Paper

An Analysis of the RBI’s Draft Framework on Regulatory Sandbox for Fintech (Vipul Kharbanda; May 8, 2019).

Participation in Events

Data Empowerment And Protection Architecture (DEPA) Workshop (Organized by iSPIRT Foundation; May 18, 2019). Pranav Manjesh Bidare attended the workshop.
ABLI Privacy Workshop (Organized by Asian Business Law Institute; Singapore; May 21 - 22, 2019). Elonnai Hickok participated in the event.
HillHacks 2019 (Organized by HillHacks; Bir, Himachal Pradesh; May 24 - 26, 2019). Karan Saini was a speaker.

Artificial Intelligence

Participation in Events

Society 5.0 and Artificial Intelligence with a Human Face (Organized by Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations; India Habitat Centre, New Delhi). Radhika Radhakrishnan attended a roundtable consultation.
AI for Good Workshop (Organized by Swissnex India and Wadhwani AI; Bangalore; May 22, 2019).
MWC19 Shanghai AI and Trust in APAC and China (Organized by Digital Asia Hub; MWC Shanghai; June 27, 2019). Sunil Abraham will be making a presentation at the summit on AI and Trust in APAC and China. Sunil has been invited as a speaker on panel ‘Framing AI for Digital Upstarts’.

Cyber Security

Participation in Event

Shining light into darkness: Encouraging greater transparency of government offensive practices in cyberspace (Organized by Rights Con; Tunis; June 12, 2019). Sunil Abraham will be attending a conversation on encouraging greater transparency of government offensive practices in cyberspace.

Telecom

Article

Democracy, Digital India and Networks (Shyam Ponappa; Organizing India Blogspot; May 1, 2019).

Participation in Event

Live [Closed]: TRAI Open House Discussion on OTT Regulation - Delhi (Organized by TRAI; New Delhi; May 20, 2019). Anubha Sinha attended the event.

Researchers at Work (RAW)

Essay

Can data ever know who we really are? (Zara Rahman; May 22, 2019).

Blog Entries

War Driving in Lhasa Vegas (Oxblood Ruffin; May 11, 2019).

#DotBharatAdoption (Dr. Amit Prakash, K.A. Dayanand, Dr. Srinivasan Ramani, Dr. V. Sridhar, and Vivek Pani; May 11, 2019).
#MaterialisingWriting (Dibyadyuti Roy, Indrani Roy, Padmini Ray Murray, and Puthiya Purayil Sneha; May 21, 2019).
The Shadow that Social Media Casts: The Doubled Offlines of Online Sociality (Karandeep Mehra; May 21, 2019).

About CIS

► Follow us elsewhere

Twitter: http://twitter.com/cis_india
Twitter - Access to Knowledge: https://twitter.com/CISA2K
Twitter - Information Policy: https://twitter.com/CIS_InfoPolicy
Facebook - Access to Knowledge: https://www.facebook.com/cisa2k
E-Mail - Access to Knowledge: a2k@cis-india.org
E-Mail - Researchers at Work: raw@cis-india.org
List - Researchers at Work: https://lists.ghserv.net/mailman/listinfo/researchers

► Support Us

► Request for Collaboration

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/may-2019-newsletter