Difference between revisions of "Call for Topics 2019 - None / Other"

From IGF-USA Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "{{#cargo_query: tables=Submission2019 |fields=Timestamp,_pageName=Submission Number,Submission,Issue_Areas,Comments,SG |where=SG HOLDS 'None / Other' |order by=Timestamp A...")
 
 
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
[[Call for Topics 2019 - Submissions|<- Back to All Topics]]
 
{{#cargo_query:
 
{{#cargo_query:
 
  tables=Submission2019
 
  tables=Submission2019

Latest revision as of 13:59, 13 February 2019

<- Back to All Topics

Timestamp Submission Number Submission Issue Areas Comments SG
Timestamp Submission Number Submission Issue Areas Comments SG
2019-01-28 4:57:24 PM 2019 Submission 4 Internet shutdown and the Digits Right in Africa Access · Human Rights None / Other
2019-02-04 1:16:32 PM 2019 Submission 20 Standards for enforcement as to the differential between advertised Internet speed, actual speed, and attribution as to any differential. Access Enforcement as to speed differentials, and enhanced user confidence, may be best accomplished with a combination of private and public sector enforcement, including USG FTC, DOJ, and CFIUS action. None / Other
2019-02-11 9:20:26 AM 2019 Submission 50 1 IoT security

2 Importance of collaboration for rural & remote access 3 Unintended consequences of regulation

4 Impacts of consolidation
IoT · Access · IG · Competition 1) There is a growing, global call for IoT security, and in many countries it is an area without partisan disagreement. Governments, civil society, technologists, and others are actively working together to ensure that users are protected from malicious attacks and botnets are prevented. The Canada, Senegal, France and many others have take a multistakeholder approach to IoT security, enlisting the help of all stakeholder groups to ensure they do their part. In the United States, home to one of the largest markets for IoT devices in the world, there is no comprehensive plan, label, or education campaign for IoT security. What can the stakeholders present for the IGF USA do to push forward in this space? Links: http://iotsecurity2018.ca https://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2018/11/a-critical-first-step-for-iot-security-in-senegal/ https://www.internetsociety.org/news/press-releases/2019/internet-society-advances-iot-security-in-france/ https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/2018/iot-security-for-policymakers/ 2) In 2018, over half the world's population was said to have access to the Internet. And while that is a milestone to be celebrated, it makes the difference between those with and without Internet access even more stark. In the United States, rural, remote, and Indigenous communities are significantly less likely to have access to the Internet than their urban and non-Indigenous counterparts. And they can't get access alone. It will take coordination and collaboration between all stakeholder groups -- from local community members, to technology experts, civil society, the federal government, and more working together to close the digital divide in the US. This is a topic that was discussed at length at the 2018 Indigenous Connectivity Summit, and it will be discussed again at the 2019 Summit in Hawaii. This session could highlight times when collaboration has led to robust connectivity solutions in rural and remote areas, and what more the stakeholders in the room could do to ensure rural broadband is a reality. Links: https://www.internetsociety.org/indigenet/ https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/doc/2019/2018-indigenous-connectivity-summit-community-report/ https://www.internetsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/2018-Indigenous-Connectivity-Summit-Community-Report_EN.pdf 3) Today, almost every country in the world is currently in the business of “regulating the Internet.” But regulation of the Internet can have unintended consequences. One such consequence is extra-territorial application. Another one is how regulation can impact the infrastructure of the Internet, challenging the characteristics of its original design. This becomes particularly important for what it means for a resilient, global Internet. The Internet was not designed to recognize physical boundaries or to comply with only one actor’s rules. Resiliency is ensured through diversity of infrastructure and this diversity comes from nodes located globally, in different parts of the world. Internet regulation that is unfocused, uninformed and disproportionate can provide the wrong incentives for state actors to engage in a regulatory race that will only result in a fractured, less resilient Internet. As the United States considers new regulations on privacy, security, and other important issues, this workshop will seek to advance a conversation about how policy makers should balance the need for user protection with the need to protect the integrity of the infrastructure of the Internet. Links: https://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2018/10/splintering-the-internet-the-unintended-consequence-of-regulation/ https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/doc/2018/the-internet-and-extra-territorial-effects-of-laws/ 4) Consolidation is not a new phenomenon, but often an expected evolution as industries and markets mature. Opportunities to reduce costs, expand market share, and enhance scalability are intrinsic incentives in any economic domain where companies acquire competitors or subsume parts of the production chain. Globally, trends of consolidation in the Internet Economy – including growing forces of concentration, vertical and horizontal integration, and fewer opportunities for market entry and competition – may shape not just the ways in which the Internet is used by people around the world, but its future technical evolution in the next three to five years. Today, such trends of consolidation are visible in almost all parts of the Internet economy, from access provision to services at the application layer. Looking from the national to the global level, what are the underlying drivers of these trends? What are the implications for the Internet’s technical evolution and its users? Links: https://www.internetsociety.org/globalinternetreport/2018/concept-note/ https://future.internetsociety.org/ None / Other
2019-02-11 11:18:43 AM 2019 Submission 56 The desirability of creating new user-driven ecosystems, founded on trust and accountability, to overlay the current platform-centric Web. Trust · Alternative Tech The GLIAnet Project aims to build a trustworthy Web ecosystem, by using targeted market interventions to re-balance the existing user-platform dynamic. The project website is www.glia.net. A short overview can be found in a recent Fast Company piece, https://www.fastcompany.com/90293980/to-fix-the-web-give-it-back-to-the-users. Draft of a summary white paper is also available upon request. Topics for discussion at IGF-USA 2019 could include: the need for more trust, support, and accountability in the open Web; the pros and cons of using "countermediaries" as a bridge between users and online platforms/the Web; applying common law principles of fiduciary obligations to countermediaries; and mapping the ecosystem of technologies that users can employ as autonomy-enhancing tools. None / Other
2019-02-11 8:25:53 PM 2019 Submission 74 Moderation of user content on social media platforms Content Policy · TechLash As pressure has increased on social media to improve content moderation on their platforms, critics have argued that these efforts lack transparency and are too strict. A discussion on how social media platforms should balance these opposing pressures is key in educating the public, government, and civil society in the intricacies and challenges facing platforms that work to responsibly moderate content. None / Other