• Crisis Text Line, from my perspective | danah boyd | apophenia
    http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2022/01/31/crisis-text-line-from-my-perspective.html

    Passionnant. Les questions que se pose danah boyd sur les questions éthiques liée à l’activité d’aide et de conseil par texto avec des personnes en grande difficulté mentales (appels à l’aide en situations de crise, voire de suicide). Comment et faut-il utiliser les données que constituent ces échanges ? Que veut dire « consentement » quand on a affaire à des personnes en situation de crise psychologique ? Comment former les conseillers qui répondent aux personnes en difficulté ? Peut-on trouver des patterns dans les échanges qui permettent de prioritiser les réponses en fonction de l’urgence détectée par algorithme ? Enfin, comment financer l’activité des organisations bénévoles et hors marché quand les entreprises et l’Etat ne donnent pas les moyens réels de remplir des missions sociales pourtant nécessaires ?

    Un très long texte, honnête dans son positionnement, ouvert dans ses questionnement, et bien loin des réponses en noir & blanc.

    Like everyone who cares about Crisis Text Line and the people we serve, I have spent the last few days reflecting on recent critiques about the organization’s practices. Having spent my career thinking about and grappling with tech ethics and privacy issues, I knew that – had I not been privy to the details and context that I know – I would be outraged by what folks heard this weekend. I would be doing what many of my friends and colleagues are doing, voicing anger and disgust. But as a founding board member of Crisis Text Line, who served as board chair from June 2020 until the beginning of January 2021, I also have additional information that shaped how I thought about these matters and informed my actions and votes over the last eight years.

    As a director, I am currently working with others on the board and in the organization to chart a path forward. As was just announced, we have concluded that we were wrong to share texter data with Loris.ai and have ended our data-sharing agreement, effective immediately. We had not shared data since we changed leadership; the board had chosen to prioritize other organizational changes to support our staff, but this call-to-action was heard loud and clear and shifted our priorities. But that doesn’t mean that the broader questions being raised are resolved.

    Texters come to us in their darkest moments. What it means to govern the traces they leave behind looks different than what it means to govern other types of data. We are always asking ourselves when, how, and should we leverage individual conversations borne out of crisis to better help that individual, our counselors, and others who are suffering. These are challenging ethical questions with no easy answer.

    What follows is how I personally thought through, balanced, and made decisions related to the trade-offs around data that we face every day at Crisis Text Line. This has been a journey for me and everyone else involved in this organization, precisely because we care so deeply. I owe it to the people we serve, the workers of Crisis Text Line, and the broader community who are challenging me to come forward to own my decisions and role in this conversation. This is my attempt to share both the role that I played and the framework that shaped my thinking. Since my peers are asking for this to be a case study in tech ethics, I am going into significant detail. For those not seeking such detail, I apologize for the length of this.

    Most of the current conversation is focused on the ethics of private-sector access to messages from texters in crisis. These are important issues that I will address, but I want to walk through how earlier decisions influenced that decision. I also want to share how the ethical struggles we face are not as simple as a binary around private-sector access. There are ethical questions all the way down.

    #danah_boyd #Crisis_Text_Line #Santé_mentale #Algorithmes #Formation #Données_médicales

  • Oculus Rift est-il sexiste ? - danah boyd
    http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2014/04/03/is-the-oculus-rift-sexist.html

    danah boyd revient sur une tribune provocatrice qu’elle a publié sur Quartz sur le sexisme des environnements de réalité augmenté. Dans les années 90, en testant des environnements de réalité virtuel, types CAVE, elle avait déjà constaté combien les femmes s’y sentaient souvent mal à l’aise... Faut-il croire qu’une réalité biologique différente s’y feraient jour. Des recherches sur un simulateur de maladie en environnement virtuel montrait également que les femmes semblaient tomber plus malades que les hommes dans ces environnements. Des chercheurs ont montré que les personnes prenant des androgènes (une hormone proche de la testostérone) avaient de meilleures habiletés spatiales pour faire pivoter des formes, comme c’est le cas dans Tetris par exemple. La chercheuse a également appris que la rétine (...)

    #genre #realiteaugmentee

  • danah boyd | apophenia » Why #Snapchat is Valuable: It’s All About Attention
    http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2014/03/21/snapchat-attention.html

    In a digital world where everyone’s flicking through headshots, images, and text without processing any of it, Snapchat asks you to stand still and pay attention to the gift that someone in your network just gave you. As a result, I watch teens choose not to open a Snap the moment they get it because they want to wait for the moment when they can appreciate whatever is behind that closed door. And when they do, I watch them tune out everything else and just concentrate on what’s in front of them. Rather than serving as yet-another distraction, Snapchat invites focus.

    #ados #jeunes

  • danah boyd | apophenia » meandering thoughts on the #NSA scandal
    http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2013/06/08/nsa-scandal.html

    On the flipside, I’m always astonished by how normative surveillance is in poverty-stricken communities. Surveillance is common place and many poor people are used to having to fork over tremendous amounts of personal information to get social services. And, in communities defined by practices like “stop and frisk,” the idea of not being watched and targeted is completely alien. So when these groups find out that the State is monitoring mediated interactions, why should they be surprised? Why should they react? From their perspective, it’s just another tool for the State to do what they’ve always been doing, only perhaps without the direct costs to dignity that many of these people face on a regular basis.

    #prism

  • Comment échoue la logique du rien à cacher - Zephoria
    http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2013/06/10/nothing-to-hide.html

    Chaque mois d’avril, danah boyd, comme bien de ses concitoyens, doit remplir sa déclaration d’impôt. Comme chacun d’entre nous elle le fait au mieux, tente de ne rien oublier... Et pourtant, si l’organisme des impôts américain décidait de faire un contrôle, ils trouveraient certainement quelque chose : oubli, erreur de calcul, etc. "La possibilité d’un contrôle est donc intimidant et effrayant, non pas parce que j’ai quelque chose à cacher, mais parce que prouver qu’on est innocent prend du temps, (...)

    #prism #surveillance #vieprivee

  • danah boyd | apophenia » thoughts on Pew’s latest report: notable findings on race and #privacy
    http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2013/05/22/pew-race-privacy.html

    Pew’s report shows an increase in teens’ willingness to share all sorts of demographic, contact, and location data. This is precisely the data that makes privacy advocates anxious. At the same time, their data show that teens are well-aware of privacy settings and have changed the defaults even if they don’t choose to manage the accessibility of each content piece they share. They’re also deleting friends (74%), deleting previous posts (59%), blocking people (58%), deleting comments (53%), detagging themselves (45%), and providing fake info (26%).

    My favorite finding of Pew’s is that 58% of #teens cloak their messages either through inside jokes or other obscure references, with more older teens (62%) engaging in this practice than younger teens (46%). This is the practice that I’ve seen significantly rise since I first started doing work on teens’ engagement with social media. It’s the source of what Alice Marwick and I describe as “social steganography” in our paper on teen privacy practices.

    Et surtout :

    While adults are often anxious about shared data that might be used by government agencies, advertisers, or evil older men, teens are much more attentive to those who hold immediate power over them – parents, teachers, college admissions officers, army recruiters, etc. To adults, services like Facebook that may seem “private” because you can use privacy tools, but they don’t feel that way to youth who feel like their privacy is invaded on a daily basis.

    #adolescents

  • « My internet is painfully public. »
    http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2013/02/02/mourning-and-public-ness.html

    I started blogging in a context where putting yourself out there enabled a small community of caring folks to listen and be supportive in all sorts of unique ways.

    Today, I don’t have that luxury. My internet is painfully public.

    On peut toujours avoir un nom de plume (qui n’en a pas), mais sa réflexion est intéressante, y compris dans la formulation.

  • “Real Names” Policies Are an Abuse of Power (danah boyd)
    http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2011/08/04/real-names.html

    The people who most heavily rely on pseudonyms in online spaces are those who are most marginalized by systems of power. “Real names” policies aren’t empowering; they’re an authoritarian assertion of power over vulnerable people. These ideas and issues aren’t new (and I’ve even talked about this before), but what is new is that marginalized people are banding together and speaking out loudly. And thank goodness. (...)

  • “Real Names” Policies Are an Abuse of Power - danah boyd
    http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2011/08/04/real-names.html

    The people who most heavily rely on pseudonyms in online spaces are those who are most marginalized by systems of power. “Real names” policies aren’t empowering; they’re an authoritarian assertion of power over vulnerable people. These ideas and issues aren’t new (and I’ve even talked about this before), but what is new is that marginalized people are banding together and speaking out loudly. And thank goodness.

    (...)

    Then along comes #Google+, thinking that it can just dictate a “real names” policy. Only, they made a huge mistake. They allowed the tech crowd to join within 48 hours of launching. The thing about the tech crowd is that it has a long history of nicks and handles and pseudonyms. And this crowd got to define the early social norms of the site, rather than being socialized into the norms set up by trusting college students (...) Tech folks are VERY happy to speak LOUDLY when they’re pissed off.

    #pseudonymes