A late post from the week before. Also, I missed this last week’s conversation – apologies.
Deborah Finkle shared about the cyber security research program in the DOE here in Washington – how it is to run a research lab funded by the government and directed by their security concerns. (more…)
Karrie Karahalios presented some of her investigations for how to create “Social Catalysts”.
Her work is motivated by an interest in developing technologies that “catalyze interactions”, that can get people to talk. Her approach is to (a) explore social cues that are transmitted, (b) sense those cues, (c) visualize social patterns, and (d) encorporate all of the above into the media space. By doing this, she seeks to provide more cue variety, feedback, message personalization, turntaking, conversation repair, etc…
Here are four of her projects: (more…)
Debriefing on the First Annual Information Security Compliance and Risk Management Institute: Topics, Problems and Future Directions
Barabara Endicott-Popvsky, John Christiansen, Jane Winn
John detailed the “train-wreck” combination of technological development, information policies, and legal standards. In brief: Information technologies are new. Information protection standards are even newer. Information protection laws are generally newer still. Information protection laws are proliferating and overlap. (more…)
This post serves as a holder for continuing conversation based on the 11/20/06 Research Conversation moderated by Batya Friedman, titled Privacy By Design, rather than an accurate transcript of the conversation. Using Value Sensitive Design projects, Batya wants to ask, “what does it mean to do interdisciplinary work?” Post your follow-on comments related to the content of the talk or the Q&A time.
