Digital Harms - Crowd Sourcing the Concept

Digital Harms - Crowd sourcing the concept

Thursday 22B

Convener: Jeff Orgel

Notes-taker(s): Jeff Orgel

Tags for the session - technology discussed/ideas considered:

Discussion notes, key understandings, outstanding questions, observations, and, if appropriate to this discussion: action items, next steps:

Where are the boundaries of legal reach in terms of differing cultures?

It could be very beneficial to have verbiage to categorize / tag the delivery of harms; terms suggested “medium” / “vector” / “commonly seen as”. Could be helpful for people e assess which of those factors fit into their relationship with I/T systems.

The idea of the Blinding Identity Taxonomy (BIT) came up as a hard test standard for protecting PPI. Risk overlays and sensitivity was recognized as rather unique and it would be great to offer individuals the ability to craft these variables and adjust their threshold to PPI influences almost to the level of a sort of Relational Digital DNA.

The concept of simple nouns and verbs being used early on in the surfacing and structuring references to such sorts of harms may help keep the simplicity in play in the arena of complex interplay of factors. It would help keep understanding of these factors more familiar as people think up and down the stack of expressing their thoughts and asking questions.

The concept of negatives harms possibly, and in some cases certainly, carrying a benefit as a secondary effect was explored. Example: someone spoofs me and makes me look like a genius. A shaky benefit but a maybe a benefit…somewhat – maybe? A tenuous badge of honor for sure and maybe a setup to collapse reputation after the unwarranted credit is taken? …and around and around we go then…

Frankly a fantastic gathering and much more. For a group sanctioned recording of the audio file please request @ jeffo@whatisyourrealit.com . I will look to make it available to this space as well.