# data[].attributes.body
It is a website recently launched that aims to help seniors to navigate through the Internet. it is really well done and helps them with whatever they want to do. However, I do not believe that many seniors first, own a computer, and second actually see the point of mastering the Internet.

# data[].attributes.body
"A pair of lens-less frames with a tiny computer attached to the right earpiece, to capture any chance encounter, and broadcast it to millions in seconds." This is one product that certainly did not go through the value-driven design, more after the current trend among youth and young adults to record and broadcast memorable moments of their lives at the cost of privacy of others. Luckily, consumers knew better than adopt this product.
"The end of privacy can feel a bit like climate change: two dystopian futures we’re hurtling towards with no exit in sight. They both feel impossible to resist, impossible to change with our individual decisions. But only one of them actually is. While real solutions to climate change live or die in the hands of a small number of mega-corporations, security and privacy is actually something we can all impact. Unlike switching to a metal straw, drawing lines in the sand for always-on listening devices does make a difference. A legal difference even."
https://www.wired.com/story/google-glass-reasonable-expectation-of-privacy/

# data[].attributes.body
So, they're going to sell us books cheaply. Cool. No wait, what's this torrent of data pouring out the door...

# data[].attributes.body
Originally a cobbled together website, with access to data enabling people to book train tickets in advance and online (at the time, enough value to make it usable/viable). Through a user-centric iterative design approach became the slick app which it is today. Note: One issue that users face is that application developers/producers either don't know when to stop or else seem unable to stop evolving product. So, the cadence of change stops matching the appetite/need for it.

# data[].attributes.body
I remember Tay, Microsoft’s AI powered bot launched in 2016 that, in a matter of only a few hours, became racist, xenophobic and what not clearly demonstrating that back in the days, we launched AI products without really understanding the importance of the data it would be fed. Microsoft shut it down only 16h after its launch and it’s been a great learning for the industry but imagine if SMEs where to build COVID related bots without the necessary care into its design (which am afraid is actually happening)? Dealing with people’s most sensitive data, what would be the repercussions?

# data[].attributes.headline
Stakeholder Reaction on Fake Social Media Accounts

# data[].attributes.subject
Stakeholder Reaction on Fake Social Media Accounts

# data[].attributes.body
It is curious that this phenomenon, we could even call it a type of hacking, has only occurred recently in Social Media. The main consideration is not that they are fake, but that they are impostors. This has implications on just how identity is established online. The laxity of credentials needed to open an email account is mainly responsible for this. It leads to social engineering, but in contrast with online banking you do not need proof of identity to become someone else. This should have been addressed from the get go, since it has profound effects on human dignity of everyone who goes online.

# data[].attributes.body
The app that residents of Qatar were mandated to use by the Qatari government in a response to COVID19, collected a considerable amount of data beyond what was conveyed to users, and was then found to have significantly poor level of security. Other users could get the data from other users, including; location, health, national ID and name. Once the flaw was discovered and highlighted to the authorities, it was supposedly fixed. More info is in this
article; https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/27/qatar-contact-tracing-app-1m-people-sensitive-data-at-risk-coronavirus-covid-19.

# data[].attributes.body
That's a company we should pay close attention. The values not only for stakeholders, but for the global society itself calls for very, VERY responsible research.

# data[].attributes.body
caAnother example (which also includes Elon Musk) is the Starlink satellite constellation conducted by SpaceX. There were murmurs about the sustainability of the design because it would create more 'space junk', but that was all. However, a few weeks ago the project blew up in the news because you were actually able to see some of the satellites in the evening sky. There was such a stark divide from people who think this a wonderful step forward for advancing wifi access for everyone. However, there were others who were horrified for them polluting our night skies. It is definitely fair to be skeptical of such systems because it is detrimental to some ground base (specialist) telescopes and also SpaceX did not take into account the high reflectivity of the satellites (oversight from the company). However, the public didn't take into that the constellation was not at its desired altitude yet and so more they were likely to be visible.

# data[].attributes.body
In societies where race, caste and religion are markers of discrimination, any data-driven project for distribution of government benefits such as social services, government jobs and appointments to jobs is likely to be unfair and prejudiced. it has been demonstrated in many countries

# data[].attributes.body
Before Coronavirus and COVID19, video consultations in health care wasn’t necessarily common practice, something that has changed now, but if we go back to when the first types of those services were created, I think we can find some examples of where this sort of inquiry should have been implemented in the development process.

One of the first larger App GP services in the UK, though well designed and well presented, initially failed to clearly explain to users that then when signed up the platform / App, the basically gave up their current local GP service and therefore their current doctor. The implication of that, might not initially be terrible, but in the long run, it meant that local GP services were losing patients and as an outcome of that, also revenue as money they are allocated are based on the number of patients they have or see.

Another implication could be that less technically savvy people will still be using their brick and mortar clinic, but those people could possibly be considered a less desirable patient group that is more costly to the GP Service.

Yet one more implication was that the promise of easier workdays and higher pay, pulled away doctors from local clinics to the App platform, leaving local communities with a significant lack of qualified and available health care providers, something that again, affected disadvantaged areas and social groups more negatively.

Furthermore, when it transpired that all conditions were not able to be treated digitally and patients still needed to see someone in person, they turned to A&Es for things that were not emergencies and then increased the burden and load there, as they no longer had access to a local GP clinic.

Finally, I would also mention as the healthcare app had a tier system of non-paid and premium service, again, those financially better off would receive a faster and more premium service.

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/babylon-health-nhs

--
http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/news/gp-topics/it/gp-campaign-group-calls-for-babylon-boycott-until-full-impact-is-known/20038256.article
--
https://www.ft.com/content/93843cfc-788c-11e9-bbad-7c18c0ea0201

# data[].attributes.body
I read once about Neuralink, one of Elon Musk's new technological efforts. Neuralink is said to  aims towards improving brain-machine interfaces, record memories, and make other technological advancements to do with the brain.  This means that at some point machine will need to be connected to the human brain to achieve the outlook targeted.

I worry about the ethics of connecting human brains to machines, and using AI to make human brains function better. Quite a number of questions needing answers. Has the potential side effect been considered? How can these be avoided? How does the benefits of the technology ethically map to the values proposed.

I personally feel that people who would be users of this technology should have been carried along from the conceptualisation stage of development.
https://onezero.medium.com/neuralinks-technology-is-impressive-is-it-ethical-812afb38b19e

# data[].attributes.body
An example I can think of is the design and implementation of ReSPECT documentation in our hospital.The process is geared towards making  individualised recommendations for a person’s clinical care in emergencies when they are not able to decide for themselves or communicate their wishes. This process develops a shared understanding of a person’s condition, circumstances and future outlook depending on their preferences for their care and treatment. This results in making and recording agreed clinical recommendations. This process can involve multiple stakeholders and capturing everyone's views, bias and preferences was a challenging proposition. The team developing the form spent several sessions with clinicians using the form to identify the 'usability' in various situations and took extensive notes of the hurdles encountered. They were then able to work on the algorithms in the development lab to facilitate smoother transition prior to launch. This I thought was a good example of value sensitive design.

#DataEthicsMOOC
@BayesCentre

# data[].attributes.body
1. Double click anywhere on the board to add a new note

2. Add your name and comment

3. Add any relevant links, images or attachments

4. Spend time reviewing your peers' posts and comment on and 'like' your favourites