Is technology hurting our intelligence?

Technology

We’ve all heard the stories of cars being driven into bodies of water because the driver trusted the navigation system. Could technology be making us less intelligent? Trust in tech is the topic of discussion for Arizona State University professor Katina Michael from the School for the Future of Innovation in Society and Alex Halavais, an associate professor in the School of Social and Behavioral Sciences at ASU.

In this segment:

Katina Michael, Arizona State University professor from the School for the Future of Innovation in Society; Alex Halavais, an associate professor in the School of Social and Behavioral Sciences at ASU

Source: Tech episode: https://azpbs.org/horizon/2019/08/is-technology-hurting-our-intelligence/

Source: Whole episode: https://www.pbs.org/video/8-14-19-stock-market-technology-slavery-ze40pa/

Citation: Katina Michael and Alex Halavais with Ted Simons, August 14, 2019, “Is technology hurting our intelligence?”, Arizona Horizon, PBS: Channel 8, https://azpbs.org/horizon/2019/08/is-technology-hurting-our-intelligence/

Facial Recognition and Scope Creep in Australian Proposal

'Before we know it…': worries over feature creep

But surveillance expert Professor Katina Michael pointed to an established trend of technology creeping up in scope and said The Capability would be no exception.

She expected the system to slide down a slippery slope of privacy erosion, eventually being used for petty crime, civil cases and a whole range of purposes unrelated to terrorism.

"It's a farce," she said.

"Before we know it'll be used for breath tests and speeding, it will be used to open a bank account … licences are our primary ID — so does that mean everywhere we've been using them for identity, all the clubs and pubs, will have access to it?

"Even car insurance — [people will think] 'we are using it for drivers' licences, maybe we should also use it for third-party compulsory insurance. And then we need it for health insurance'."

Your face 'may end up on some third-party selling list'

Ms Michael was equally concerned about systematic errors causing potential mistaken identities and leading to people being wrongly accused or suspected of crime.

"It's not going to take long for these systems to be hacked, no matter what security you have in place and once it's hacked, that's it — everyone's facial images will end up on some third-party selling list and possibly on the internet for accessibility."

"Yeah, people put photos on Facebook, but not in that kind of systematic, calculated way.

"Some Australian citizens are going to be completely freaked out."

Original Source: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-05/facial-recognition-coag-privacy-concerns-about-the-capability/9017494

Citation: Jake Evans and Clare Sibthorpe, "Facial recognition: Feature creep may impose government's software in our lives, expert warns", ABC News, October 5, 2017. Available: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-05/facial-recognition-coag-privacy-concerns-about-the-capability/9017494

Biometric Behavioural Analytics

– Professor Katina Michael – Professor at the School of Computing and Information Technology at University of Wollongong chats to Trevor Long and Nick Bennett on Talking Technology about facial recognition technology and whether it could distinguish between twins.

Tech-Focus-1-file069593.jpg

Citation: Katina Michael speaks with Trevor Long and Nick Bennett, "Can twins fool facial recognition technology?", Talking Technology on Talking Lifestyle at 8.40pm-9.00pm, September 7, 2017.

Original source: https://omny.fm/shows/talking-technology/can-twins-fool-facial-recognition-technology

Would you Microchip Your Hand?

Description: Katina Michael - Professor at the School of Computing and Information Technology at the University of Wollongong - chats to Trevor Long and Nick Bennett on Talking Technology about the ethical implications of Swedish workers getting RFID tags inserted into their hands to give them access to doors and photocopiers at work.

Source here

Citation: Katina Michael with Trevor Long and Nick Bennett, April 7, 2017, "Would You Microchip Your Hand", Talking Technology, Talking Lifestyle, https://omny.fm/shows/talking-technology/would-you-micro-chip-your-hand, Macquarie Media Ltd.

Does Google Maps New Update Breach Our Privacy?

Google Maps have announced their latest feature that allows for a user to share their location with others, by tracking their location in real time on the map. While the app aims to assist its users , the question lies whether the feature enables privacy concerns? Joining me on the line to discuss how the new feature can be abused, is Katina Michael, Associate Dean at International Faculty of Engineering and Information Sciences at University of Wollongong.

Produced by Brooke Taylor

East Para Primary School pupils to have fingerprints scanned: does it really work?

biometrics in schools.jpg

Does biometric ID in schools work? No. There is no evidence to suggest that biometrics introduces better recording keeping systems which are more accurate. In the case of East Para Primary, a private school in South Australia, we learn that a dual automatic and manual system will be run in parallel to allow children who don't wish to be fingerprinted to opt-out. Of course, student can opt out for any number of reasons, including philosophical, cultural, health and religious reasons. Consultation has not been made widely enough, this much is obvious. Students risks have not been considered. Paradoxical in this interview was that the school counsellor, a well-meaning person, cannot see the potential for psychological harm through the use of biometric IDs. What are we teaching our young people? To accept enslavement? To accept forced enrolment? This is very surprising to say the least. I know as a school helper to my kids' school, that I can often forget to sign in. The school is supportive to point this out, and ask parents to return to the front desk if they have forgotten to "sign in". Whether I had a biometric to sign in or not, would not remind me to go to the front desk. So ID does not work for its intended purpose in this instance. Biometric ID systems have been in wide use since the 1970s. Most schools who have adopted and then abandoned the system soon after because the system doesn't work, acknowledge that it does nothing for better records. Good record management is a cultural issue which technology will not solve. People also often point to emergencies as why they need to institute pervasive technology. Unfortunately this does not work either because having someone's ID does not mean that they are definitely ON or OFF the premises. Lastly, the most disturbing issue? That we are teaching our kids to accept new technologies because we think they are good for us. We are also teaching them to give away their privacy and not be concerned about it. This is the most grievous issue I have with the whole East Para case study.

Citation: Sonya Feldhoff, Bob Greaves and Katina Michael. "East Para Primary School pupils to have fingerprints scanned: does it really work?" Afternoons 891 ABC Adelaide (2015), Available at: http://works.bepress.com/kmichael/525/

UAVs Pros Cons in Toronto: safety and dialogue are keys to legitimacy

Monday, July 22, 2013

UAVs Pros Cons in Toronto: safety and dialogue are keys to legitimacy

Ian Hannah of Avrobotics.ca displayed his professional hexcopter at the UAVs Pros Cons Symposium in Toronto.

One of the biggest drone-related stories to make the rounds is about a little Colorado town that is attempting to institute a $100 reward for anyone who shoots down an unmanned aircraft. I'll not post a link to this story, or name the actual town, since it appears this is little more than a stunt to attract media attention to the town.

The townspeople may or may not be "real" about their proposed law, given the likelihood of people being injured by gunfire or falling drones, but fear of unmanned aircraft systems (dronephobia?) is real. This fear is rooted in a disconnect between popular media, and the actual uses and potential for the technology.

UAVs Pros-Cons was an effort bring expert knowledge to the public, while at the same time providing a discussion of many of the legitimate concerns over drones and their uses.

Hosted June 30 at Ryerson University's Ted Rogers School of Business Management in downtown Toronto, this was the first public event organized by DronesForGood.

Ian Hannah, a certified pilot and owner/operator of aerial photography provider Avrobotics.ca, displayed his professional-grade hexcopter, which is equipped with a high-end camera gimbal system for a digital SLR camera. Ian has uploaded some samples of what's possible with his equipment on Vimeo.

I also brought one of the four fixed-wing drones from the Drones for Schools initiative, which is one of the 32 programs originating from the five-year National Science Foundation grant EnLiST (Entrepreneurial Leadership in STEM Teaching and learning). These unmanned aircraft are designed to take aerial photo mosaics and photomaps.

Ian and I answered questions, and gave talks on drones and their many peaceful uses in media, agriculture, and scientific research.  For the final talk of the symposium, I explored the portrayal of drones in the media, how that clashes with reality, and discussed the origin of the word "drone." I also gave examples of how drones can provide communities valuable data in times of crisis, and what kind of special ethical considerations drone journalists may have to consider.

Nikola Danaylov of the Singularity Weblog documented the talks, and posted them free to the public. More info about the symposium is available on the Ubverveillance blog. 

In talking with Ian at the symposim, there was one message which seemed most urgent. He described to me how he was once invited by a colleague out to a soccer field, which are fairly common around airports given how the noise level makes most development unsuitable.

Ramona Pringle, a professor of media at Ryerson, facilitated the public discussion on UAVs at the symposium.

This person had a drone, and a rather expensive one. Ian estimated it was worth about $10,000. His colleague fired up the motors, and the drone immediately rose into the airspace near the airport, dashed over a busy road, and crashed nearby. It was all over fairly quick.

We have a code of ethics which we abide by on DroneJournalism.org, which specifically mentions that an operator must be familiar with his aircraft and operate it in a safe fashion. Obviously, there are going to be people who do not use common sense when operating these devices.

Ian is a proponent of certification, and after hearing about that incident, I have to say I'm a proponent as well. There are concerns in the UAV community that such a regulatory structure could be manipulated by "big players," which would needlessly direct people to specific, expensive hardware, thus blocking access to the skies.

Should everyone own a drone? Given the things I've seen and heard, I'm not so sure. We have public roads, but we don't let just anyone drive on them.

University of Toronto professor Andrew Clement spoke about the lack of compliance on private security cameras, and how drone surveilance could even further complicate this situation.

One thing I am sure about is the operational environment needs a lot of improvement in terms of safety. Without a safe operating record, journalists and small unmanned operators will have an exceptionally difficult time persuading the public to let us fly. And this is on top of all the sensationalist reports we've been struggling against.

I write a lot about openness of data on this website. Adding certifications may restrict some from flying, but that doesn't mean that the data those aircraft obtain has to be closed-source. The key might prove to be skilled operators, but who fly in the public interest by keeping their data available on the internet.
 

Avner Levin, Chair of the Law & Business Department at the Ted Rogers School of Management at Ryerson University, speaking about "drones for bad" and the threat to privacy.

UAVs Pros Cons was sponsored by in part by DroneJournalism.org and DronesForGood.com. Ryerson University and the Privacy & Cyber Crime Institute at the Ted Rogers School of Business Management provided patronage of this event. Convenors for this event included Katina Michael (Wollongong), Alexander Hayes (DronesForGood.com), Susannah Sabine (DronesForGood.com), Rob Manson (MOBLabs), Jai Galliot (jaigalliott.com), and myself.

Photos here are courtesy of Alexander Hayes, via Flickr. Below are video from talks by Ian and myself. More videos are available on the Singularity Weblog. 

By Matt Schroyer at 9:00 AM

Tags: Alexander Hayes Andrew Clement Avner Levin Avrobotics.ca drones Ian Hannah Katina Michael ,pros cons Ramona Pringle Ryerson sUAS Toronto UAS UAVs UAVs Pros Cons

Citation: Matthew Schroyer, July 22, 2013, "UAVs Pros Cons in Toronto: safety and dialogue are keys to legitimacy", Mental Munition Factory, http://www.mentalmunition.com/2013/07/uavs-pros-cons-Toronto.html