- Air-L - lists.aoir.org

Re: [Air-l] metaphors for internet security
by Allan A Friedman 03 Jun '03

03 Jun '03

From: jeremy hunsinger <jhuns(a)vt.edu> >the problem with the body metaphor is that it is quite hard to seize >total control of someone's body and mind... but it isn't that hard to >take control of a computer, even without any virus, etc. True, but I really liked the body metaphor, especially from the threat model perspective and looking at how people behave. I would venture that people approach computer security risks more from a hygiene perspective: * Many people have a vague idea of how [security flaws/illnesses] happen * There is a lot of misinformation, made manifest through behavior that an expert would consider irrational. * It's correlated to a degree of trust: we won't get infected by people we're close to * There are plenty of media scares that lead to * Over-estimation of rare risks (credit card theft, getting AIDS by using a public restroom), and an under-estimation of the damage from common behavior (not washing hands, opening an unexpected attachment) * The overall system has proven to be very resilient, but it's very easy to concieve of catastrophes. ...and we can even prescribe secure behavior in terms of hygiene: * Don't download or open files that you don't know to be clean * Use professional [security/medical] services every so often * Keep informed from _reliable_ news sites /\llan Allan Friedman Pre-Doctoral Candidate, Public Policy Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University

2 1

Re: [Air-l] metaphors, toasters and daily lives
by K.S.O-Riordan＠sussex.ac.uk 03 Jun '03

03 Jun '03

Hi all Maren wrote: -- Begin original message -- > So what metaphors are already out there? There must be some, at least > in the advertisement world. Can't think of any at the moment. > Probably not easy that combines public and private aspects.Can't think > of any at the moment. > Probably not easy that combines public and private aspects. -- End original message -- This seems to bring us back to the body as always representative of combining public and private and this would raise (would it?) the question of 'appropriate' metaphors - the ones which are out there seem to draw on illness and war (as pointed out before) which are marketing rhetoric for security sytems but are not 'appropriate' to the body. The everyday life thread then seems to tie in (at a tangent) with the other question - what ways of expressing internet security are not seen as metaphor yet? If the question is then how do we already express everyday security I would think about save, copy, transfer and shutdown as ways into this? All the best Kate O'Riordan

2 1

metaphors, toasters and daily lives
by Maren Hartmann 03 Jun '03

03 Jun '03

Hello Jeremy et al. I also think this recent thread on the metaphors of Internet security is very interesting (my comments might come a bit late, since I only receive the digest version of messages - sorry for any potential dublication). What I am missing in the debate thus far is a consideration of what Jeremy originally set out to look for: the metaphoric aspects of this 'habituation'. Usually the metaphors change exactly at that point when use becomes more habitual and less strange or exotic. Thus what you automatically switch on every morning is not an information superhighway anymore. But Jeremy was asking not about existing metaphors for Internet security, but about the invention or introduction of some new ones. Thus the process is reversed: think about something you are already used to doing and then add the 'appropriate' metaphor. Thus we tend to be careful and relate it to things we know rather well (someone's car - Jeremy's toaster (which however does not appear (!) as a daily threat to most of us, I would think, while Internet security is an issue we do think about)). So what metaphors are already out there? There must be some, at least in the advertisement world. Can't think of any at the moment. Probably not easy that combines public and private aspects. Another point was to agree with Pille on the domestication concept as a rather useful one (where the term ritual can also be added to habitual -- adds yet another quality of use, esp. in terms of media technologies). One problem here is though - as was discussed at the recent EMTEL conference in London - that the research into domestication thus far deals more with the changes use practices in the sense of everyday life than with the different versions of content. The concept itself combines both aspects of use, but research has often concentrated on the daily life aspects (where, who, how often, when,...). Thus combining the two is the challenge, it seems. Maren [Can I also use this to say that it is a pity that a panel, which had metaphors as its main focus, has unfortunately been rejected by the AoIR-conference organisers. This is not to say that I do not respect the procedures and all the work that has gone into them (a lot!). It's just to say that maybe we could get this together for the conference after this coming one, since it seems that it could have been a good session :-)] -- Maren Hartmann - Researcher @ SMIT - Vrije Universiteit Brussel Pleinlaan 2 - 1050 Brussel - Belgium phone (work): + 32 2 629 2572 - fax: + 32 2 629 2861

1 0

RE: Re: [Air-l] Evaluation Logs
by ericgoldman＠onebox.com 03 Jun '03

03 Jun '03

The liability of individual posters would be treated like any other allegedly defamatory statement. The fact that the comments are web-published does little to change the application of traditional defamation law. (In addition to the issues raised by Charles, there is also a minor set of issues relating to how the single publication rule applies online). However, the website operator's liability is subject to a cyberspace-specific law: 47 USC 230. In short, this law provides an effectively blanket immunity for the operator from any defamation in the postings of third parties. Contrary to what some would believe/want, this law applies irrespective of the operator's knowledge (i.e., the operator may be fully aware of the posting, but still will not have any liability). While 47 USC 230 has not been specifically interpreted in the context of teacher reviews, there has been at least one lawsuit in this area (see, e.g., http://www.gfn.com/archives/story.phtml?sid=5184) and there are cases applying the immunity to other forms of "consumer reviews" (see, e.g., Schneider v. Amazon.com, http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=wa&vol=2001_app/4679…) Eric. -- Eric Goldman Marquette University Law School ericgoldman(a)onebox.com Personal home page: http://eric_goldman.tripod.com -----Original Message----- From: Charles Ess <cmess(a)lib.drury.edu> Sent: Tue, 03 Jun 2003 07:23:32 -0500 To: <air-l(a)aoir.org> Subject: Re: [Air-l] Evaluation Logs Interesting thread! (Aren't they all?) My _hunch_ would be that the issues involved would be analogous to publishing comments about a person in a newspaper or other public venue - and thus would depend in some measure on the laws and practices regarding libel (in the case of libelous comments that could be proven to be untrue). The complicating factors: 1) whether or not professors can be seen as "public" figures (in which case, at least in the U.S., as I understand it, pretty much anything goes); 2) whether the forum is seen as a public venue (hence, the laws apply) like a newspaper, or more like a private one (at least in the U.S., especially in light of 1st amendment rights of free speech, again, anything goes); and 3) how these laws and practices vary from country to country. On all of these matters, there are _real_ experts on the Air list (you know who you are - smile!): I hope they'll pitch in and contribute their insights. While I agree that such a site/process is not necessarily bad - at the same time, I would hope that no one would take such a site as anything more than a "customer satisfaction" measure - and that, among purely self-selected customers (probably those really enthusiastic about and those really pissed off at a certain professor). Given the real anonymity of the comments and ratings, this information _could_ be useful, if read carefully - but I don't see anything at the site suggesting such caveats. At the same time,: this seems to take the "student as consumer" model to a new height -or low, insofar as, in my view, such a model is pretty much opposite to what I think higher education, at least as rooted in liberal arts traditions, should be about. Perhaps this is why I received the lowest ratings in my university for "easiness"? (smile) In any case, looking forward to hearing from our real experts on this - Charles Ess Distinguished Research Professor, Interdisciplinary Studies Drury University 900 N. Benton Ave. Voice: 417-873-7230 Springfield, MO 65802 USA FAX: 417-873-7435 Home page: http://www.drury.edu/ess/ess.html Co-chair, CATaC: http://www.it.murdoch.edu.au/catac/ Exemplary persons seek harmony, not sameness. -- Analects 13.23 > From: Homero Gil de Zuniga <hgildezuniga(a)wisc.edu> > Reply-To: air-l(a)aoir.org > Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2003 03:27:15 -0500 > To: air-l(a)aoir.org > Subject: RE: [Air-l] Evaluation Logs > > That was funny. Regarding your question, I don't exactly know where the > limit is but I guess that as long as they don't infringe any basic human > being rights, they should be fine. I also would imagine that it depends > on peoples' perception. In any case, it was interesting finding me > rated... :) Probably the fact that they said I was good and evidently > HOT (just kidding) made me see it not necessarily and intrinsically > bad... More thoughts? Anybody with a cyberspace- law-policy background? > Hernando? > > Cheers, > > HGZ > > Homero Gil de Zuniga > > http://www.homero.educations.net > Project Assistant for the Journalism & Mass Communication Department > www.journalism.wisc.edu > UNIVERSITY of WISCONSIN-MADISON > http://www.wisc.edu > PO BOX 260022 > 53726 Madison > WI, USA > e-mail: hgildezuniga(a)wisc.edu > > Office: (608) 263-7852 > > "It is nice to be important... but it is much more important to be > nice". > > -----Original Message----- > From: air-l-admin(a)aoir.org [mailto:air-l-admin@aoir.org] On Behalf Of > EGodard > Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 12:05 AM > To: air-l(a)aoir.org > Subject: [Air-l] Evaluation Logs > > I apologize if this has already been discussed here; I haven't seen it, > and > have looked through the archive. > > What thoughts have ye on sites such as http://www.ratemyprofessor.com? > Are > there legal boundaries to what the site can allow? Are things said there > contestable against the author and/or the site? > > Given relatively small numbers of evaluators per professor evaluated, I > would presume there to be negative bias. Interestingly, however, the FAQ > for > that site in particular claims 60% positive ratings. > > -eg

2 1

How widely spread is filesharing - statistical data needed
by Jeppe Bo Pedersen 03 Jun '03

03 Jun '03

Hi, I'm in the middle of a project examining the phenomenon of filesharing, - especially why it is so popular compared to official download services, even though it takes place under heavy fire from the entire entertainment business (both in courtrooms and through more or less radical actions by the rightful owners of the shared content). But before I dig into both the obvious user-oriented as well as the deeper grounded cultural and network-specific reasons, that can reveal some level of clarity, I would like to know if there exists any statistical data on the usage of filesharing, e.g. - How many share files on a regularly basis (eg. daily, weekly, monthly)? - What is the usage growth rate? - What filetypes are the most popular (music, software, films - listed in percentages/GB )? ...and answers that lies within the area of those questions KaZaa has achieved the 230 millions of downloads-mark on Download.com, and the different organisations that represents the entertainment business (RIAA, BSA and others) has released their statistical data on piracy to follow their views on the matter. But I need some more exact figures on filesharing specifically, and would appreciate any help available through this mailing list for Internet researchers. And is this field quantitatively examined in a properly manner at all? In addition, I would like to know if any other researchers share this interest? In that case don't hesitate to contact me. I'm new to this list, so I'm sorry if this request crosses earlier threads on the list, but please bare with me if that is the case. Thanks in advance and kindest regards Jeppe Bo Pedersen Student, MA in Mediastudies University of Copenhagen, DK www.media.ku.dk

1 0

Looking for Celebrity Blogs
by kaye＠trammell.com 02 Jun '03

02 Jun '03

I'm compiling a list of celebrity-run blogs. So far, I have a list of 15+ blogs, but I know that there must be more out there. My definition of "celebrity" is pretty loose, so if you know of a celebrity blog, please e-mail me the celebrity name & a working URL. You may e-mail the celebrity blog leads to me at kaye(a)trammell.com. Thanks in advance for sharing the info with me! Kaye Trammell University of Florida ___________________________________________________ Kaye takes over the Web at http://kaye.trammell.com

1 0

RE: [Air-l] metaphors for internet security
by Kris Gowen 02 Jun '03

02 Jun '03

A file cabinet or office? L. Kris Gowen, Ph.D. Senior Research Associate Introducing FACCT's New Clearinghouse A resource for the latest information, tools and research on consumer-centered health care. http://www.facct.org -----Original Message----- From: jeremy hunsinger [mailto:jhuns@vt.edu] Sent: Monday, June 02, 2003 12:18 PM To: air-l(a)aoir.org Subject: [Air-l] metaphors for internet security I was thinking today about what metaphors might be appropriate for internet security. I was considering primarily metaphors based on current technology. If you had to think that the internet security was most like a the security issues surrounding another technology, would you think that it was more like keeping a house secure, or a wallet? a car secure or a toaster secure? thoughts? other ideas? _______________________________________________ Air-l mailing list Air-l(a)aoir.org http://www.aoir.org/mailman/listinfo/air-l

1 0

CFP on Contemporary Anti-War Mobilizations - Corfu, Greece, November 6-7, 2003
by Moses Boudourides 02 Jun '03

02 Jun '03

The following announcement might be of some interest for some people in the list. Apologies for multiple copies. --Moses A. Boudourides Associate Professor Department of Mathematics University of Patras 265 00 Rio-Patras Greece Tel.: +30-2610-996318 Fax: +30-2610-996318, +30-2610-992965 http://www.math.upatras.gr/~mboudour **************************************************************************** CALL FOR PAPERS CONTEMPORARY ANTI-WAR MOBILIZATIONS Agonistic Engagement Within Social Movement Networks A two day workshop to be held in Corfu, Greece, November 6-7, 2003 The network perspective is often discussed in relation to social movements and collective action. Key elements of the latter, such as actors, agencies, organizations, institutions etc. witnessing, participating, confronting or allying with social movements, can be studied in their networked entanglements - consensual or conflictual, deliberative or agonistic - at any level of collective action - local, national or global. This international workshop seeks to explore a particular form of contemporary social movements: anti-war mobilizations and peace movements, increasingly connected with networked forms of collective action in the era of globalization. In particular, we seek papers addressing one or more of the following questions: * How are national, subnational and transnational mobilizations articulated to each other specially when they put forward distant issues an in the case of the contemporary anti-war movements? * What sort of networked patterns or organizational forms emerge from such movements and how these expanded network structures are configuring or are configured within broader political processes and global information flows? * Do the recent episodes of anti-war collective action cluster in emerging cycles and waves of protest? Is their diffusion affected by the geographic scale or on any other underlying heterogeneities? * What kind of data or/and ethnomethodological work could properly map the anti-war movement? * What sort of causal models or agent-based simulations of evolving dynamic and self-organizing networks could describe the dynamics of these mobilizations? * How do policies and politics over anti-war mobilizations relate to each other? What is the response of the authorities or the state to this type of contentious action? What is the interaction between anti-war protest and repression? * How is globalization connected with the upsurge of global terrorism together with many other types of violence (state, racial, ethnic, cultural or gender-based)? * How do the modern states of emergency and risk society react against the threads or accidents of network vulnerabilities, failures or collapses? * Could modern movements as global anti-war protests be viewed as a particular instance of reflexive remodernization? * How public deliberation and pluralist democracy can foster inside the radical agonistics against globalization? * Can the democratization of science or the idea that 'another science is possible' be advanced and sustained within these mobilizations? The Workshop will be organized by Dr Iosif Botetzagias (iosif_botetzagias(a)yahoo.co.uk) and Prof Moses Boudourides (mboudour(a)upatras.gr) University of Patras, Greece. There are no registration fees and delegates interested in participating will soon receive information about hotels in Corfu and traveling within Greece. Abstracts up to 250 words should be sent by email to one of the organizers by July 15, 2003.

1 0

final week of nominations
by jeremy hunsinger 02 Jun '03

02 Jun '03

We are in the beginning of the final week of the nominations period for the Association of Internet Researchers Elections with a week and a half to go. Nominations can be made by sending an email to nominate(a)aoir.org, and you should feel free to cc this list when nominating someone. We encourage everyone to participate by nominating yourself or others. only members of AoIR are eligible to be elected, but anyone may nominate someone. for more information: http://www.aoir.org/pipermail/air-l/2003-May/003876.html The current nominees are: Vice President Dr Matthew Allen Associate Professor Internet Studies Curtin University of Technology Charles Ess Distinguished Research Professor, Interdisciplinary Studies, Drury University Treasurer Alexander Halavais Assistant Professor School of Informatics University at Buffalo, State University of New York Secretary Ulla Bunz, Assistant Professor Department of Communication Rutgers University Graduate Student Rep Open Seat Tracy Kennedy Doctoral Student Sociology University of Toronto Lois Ann Scheidt MPA MIS SPHR CCP Doctoral Student School of Library and Information Science Indiana University Open Seat Klaus Bruhn Jensen Professor of Film and Media Studies University of Copenhagen Annette N. Markham, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Communication University of Illinois Chicago Monica Murero University of Maastricht Dr. Kate O'Riordan Lecturer in Continuing Education (Media Studies) University of Sussex Dr. Anxo Cereijo Roibás, School of Computing, Mathematical & Information Sciences Faculty of Management & Information Sciences University of Brighton Gitte Stald, Assistant Professor Film & Media Studies University of Copenhagen Nils Zurawski University of Muenster

1 0

Workshop on Accessibility Issues for interactive TV
by A.C.Roibas＠bton.ac.uk 02 Jun '03

02 Jun '03

Call for participation Accessibility Issues for Interactive Television Workshop at HCI2003, University of Bath, U.K. Tuesday 9 September 2003 All day workshop Contributions (short papers, position statements) are invited for a workshop at HCI2003 on Accessibility Issues for Interactive Television. The workshop will be of interest to practitioners working in iTV production, government bodies, user groups and academics/HCI practitioners with interests in accessibility and iTV production. If you would like to take part, see the Workshop web site - http://www.it.bton.ac.uk/staff/lp22/HCI2003.html <http://www.it.bton.ac.uk/staff/lp22/HCI2003.html> - for more details. Background Interactive television gives the newly active viewer the opportunity to extend their use of the television to activities now familiar from the Internet. They can browse information on topics of interest, personalise their viewing choices, play interactive games, carry out e-commerce related activities (shopping, banking, betting, etc.), interacting with other viewers, and play an increasingly active role in broadcast programmes. Interactive television could be of particular use to the elderly (the biggest consumers of television, watching on average more than 5 hours a day) and the physically disabled (94% of visually impaired people watch television regularly), as it would allow them to access services from home. However usability and accessibility currently cause serious problems for many poten tviewers. Difficulties include use of the remote control handset by people with impaired motor control, perception of text and icons on screen by visually impaired or dyslexic people and the limitations of subtitles designed to include people with hearing difficulties. Goals The goals of the workshop are to develop an accessibility research agenda for iTV, to identify and extend the research community in this area and to investigate ways of creating productive connections with commissioners, producers and directors of iTV services to support the integration of accessibility into the design process. In the workshop we will encourage developers and HCI practitioners to share knowledge and experiences, exploring a range of issues including: * the particular accessibility issues raised by iTV * the issues involved in designing iTV so that it is accessible to as wide a range of viewers as possible * accessibility issues for input/output devices to iTV * the potential of personalisation for creating more accessible iTV * accessibility evaluation techniques for iTV programmes and services * the relevance of current accessibility knowledge to iTV * the potential of using multiple platforms to improve accessibility, e.g. iTV and mobile phone * the accessibility/usability relationship Format The workshop is designed as a one-day mix of presentations and small-and whole- group discussion, ending with a poster design session. Please send your contributions by 13 June to: usability(a)brighton.ac.uk <mailto:usability@brighton.ac.uk> (We are aware that the deadlines are tight. If you are considering to submit but have difficulty to do it in time, please send us an email). Participants will be selected on the basis of their interest in and familiarity with the topic. Contributions will be circulated beforehand and posted on the Workshop web site. ---------------------------------------------------- Dr. Anxo Cereijo Roibás, School of Computing, Mathematical & Information Sciences Faculty of Management & Information Sciences University of Brighton Watts Building, Moulsecoomb Brighton BN2 4GJ United Kingdom t +44(0)1273 64 2458 f +44(0)1273 64 2405 m +44(0)7814 491790 http://www.it.bton.ac.uk/staff/anxo/ <http://www.it.bton.ac.uk/staff/anxo/>

1 0