Algorithmic Accountability: The Big Problems | SAP

Tom Slee (SAP); Algorithmic Accountability: The Big Problems; Their Blog; 2017-10.

tl;dr → You have problems, SAP has expertise in this practice area. Call now.

Original Sources

Yvonne Baur, Brenda Reid, Steve Hunt, Fawn Fitter (SAP); How AI Can End Bias; In Their Other Blog, entitled The D!gitalist; 2017-01-16.
Teaser: Harmful human bias—both intentional and unconscious—can be avoided with the help of artificial intelligence, but only if we teach it to play fair and constantly question the results.


  • The Canon is rehearsed.
  • General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)
    • European
    • “in effect in” 2018 (2018-05-28).

Anti-patterns, Negative (Worst) Practices

  • Bad statistics
  • Ill-defined scales
  • Bad Incentives
  • Lack of transparency

Five Axes of Unfairness
Unfairness ↔ Disparate Impact

  1. Target variables
  2. Training data
  3. Feature selection
  4. Proxies
  5. Masking


  • Explanation
  • Transparency
  • Audits
  • Fairness


  • Solon Barocas, self [Princeton]
    Trade: theorist.
  • Cynthia Dwork, self [Microsoft]
    Trade: pioneer [theorist]..
  • Seth Flaxman, staff, Oxford University.
    Trade: expert.
  • Bryce Goodman, staff, Oxford University.
    Trade: expert.
  • Cathy O’Neil, self.
    Trade: data scientist statistician who works on a Macintosh Computer and lives in San Francisco.
  • Frank Pasquale, professor, law [Maryland]
    Ttrade: educator.
  • Andrew Selbst, self [U.S. .Court of Appeals]
    Trade: theorist


As Google Fights Fake News, Voices on the Margins Raise Alarm | NYT

As Google Fights Fake News, Voices on the Margins Raise Alarm; Daisuke Wakabayashi; In The New York Times (NYT); 2017-09-26.

tl;dr → Google Bad. They change their indexing; publishers beholden to search-generated traffic sourcing schemes are affected.
and → <quote>The New York Times could not find the same level of traffic declines at all of those publications, based on data from SimilarWeb</quote> <ahem>then why write the article about a non-event?</ahem>


The voices on the margins,
The marginal voices.
  • Socialists, specifically, David North
  • SourceFesters
  • Breitbartists
  • Frank Pasquale


Frank Pasquale; The Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information; Harvard University Press; 2016-08-29; 320 pages; ASIN:0674970845: Kindle: $10, paper: $11+SHT; separately filled.


  • World Socialist Web Site (WSWS)
  • Project Owl, of Google
    • Announced 2017-04.
    • <google>algorithmic updates to surface more authoritative content</google>
      <ny-times>stamp out fake news stories from its search results</ny-times>
  • Google performs search results page rating
    • A panel method, of living humans.
    • The panel is paid-staff of Google.
    • N=10,000.
  • Search Quality Evaluator Guidelines; Google; 2013.
  • Alexa, of Amazon,
    not the robot, the web analytics shop.
    has independent traffic estimates.
  • David North (WSWS); open letter to Google, World Socialist Web Site (WSWS); 2017-08-25.
  • SimilarWeb, a web analytics firm.
  • some video, unattributed; hosted on SourceFed; 2016-06.
    tl;dr → accuses Google; asserts there is manipulation of the search results.
  • Four Times Google was Linked Directly to Hillary Clinton; Some Screeching Troll (SST); On Breitbart; 2017-08-14


  • is buried.
  • The New York Times (NYT) is not able to replicate or validate the claims of traffic falloff.
    <quote>The New York Times could not find the same level of traffic declines at all of those publications, based on data from SimilarWeb, a web analytics firm. </quote>


  • Michael Bertini, expert, iQuanti.
    iQuanti is a marketing agency.
  • Pandu Nayak, spox, fellow, Google.
  • David North, the editorial chairman, World Socialist Web Site
  • Frank Pasquale, professor, law, information law, University of Maryland.


In The New York Times (NYT)…

Pascale promotes three performances among Bracha, Pasquale, Calo & Tutt on the need for the Regulation of Computing

tl;dr → Sounding the alarum; The Signal is Given! Technology! Computers! Control Them! Bad! Stop Them! The panic is upon us!  Mend it! Don’t End It!

Via: A tweet, of @FrankPasquale


Oren Bracha, Frank Pasquale WHEN?

Oren Bracha, Frank Pasquale; Federal Search Commission? Access, Fairness, And Accountability In The Law Of Search; In Cornell Law Review, Volume 93 WHEN?; 62 pages (pages 1149→1149+62).


Should search engines be subject to the types of regulation now applied to personal data collectors, cable networks, or phone books? In this Article, we make the case for some regulation of the ability of search engines to manipulate and structure their results. We demonstrate that the First Amendment, properly understood, does not prohibit such regulation. Nor will such intervention inevitably lead to the disclosure of important trade secrets. After setting forth normative foundations for evaluating search engine manipulation, we explain how neither market discipline nor technological advance is likely to stop it. Though savvy users and personalized search may constrain abusive companies to some extent, they have little chance of checking untoward behavior by the oligopolists who now dominate the search market. Arguing against the trend among courts to declare search results unregulable speech, this Article makes a case for an ongoing conversation on search engine regulation.


    1. A New Hope?
    2. The Intermediaries Strike Back
      1. The New Intermediaries
      2. Search Engine Bias
  2. What Is Wrong With Search Engine Manipulation?
  3. Why Can’t Non-Regulatory Alternatives Solve The Problem?
    1. Market Discipline
    2. The Technological Fix: Personalized Search
  4. Potential Obstacles To Search Engine Regulation
    1. Will the First Amendment Bar Effective Regulation?
    2. Balancing Secrecy and Transparency
  5. Conclusion: Toward Regulation Of Search Engine Bias

tl;dr → Regulation is indicated. Heavy regulation, a fortiori is indicated. Yet these are entities are “publishers” and First Amendment rights appertain to them. This effectively blocks their regulation. Many intricate, advanced and creative analogies have been tried, to construe search engine serivces as “not a publisher.” But to no avail. And yet “we must at least try;” maybe someone will figure out how to do it.
and → <quote>The question, then, is whether a regulatory framework, either by statute or under the common law, could be crafted as to minimize these risks while preventing improper behavior by search engines.</quote>

Commencing with the frame…
“My God, I thought, Google knows what our culture wants!” attributed to John Battelle’s boosterist paean of a decade ago.
John Battelle, The Search: How Google And Its Rivals Rewrote The Rules Of Business And Transformed Our Culture; Penguin Random House; 2005-09-06; 336 pages; ASIN:1591841410; Kindle: $14, paper: $0.10+SHT.

Calo 2014

The case for a federal robotics commission; Ryan Calo; In Their Blog; 2014-09-15.
Ryan Calo,
Assistant Professor, University of Washington School of Law

tl;dr → There outta be a law.  Robots are like cars; Cars have laws. Robots are just as dangerous, only more so.
and → A new freestanding Federal Robot Commission (FTC) is warranted; made of the “best and the brightest.” Then, only then, will we be safe. These are perilous times of the new and the dangerous.


  • Introduction
  • Law & Robotics
    • Driverless Cars
    • Drones
    • Finance Algorithms
    • Cognitive Radio
    • Surgical Robots
  • FRC (Federal Robot Commission): A Thought Experiment
  • Objections
    • How are robots different from computers
    • Answer: robots have a body, they act on “reality.”
      <many-words>the difference between a computer and a robot has largely to do with the latter’s embodiment.</many-words>
  • Conclusion

Tutt 2016

Andrew Tutt; An FDA for Algorithms; In 69 Administrative Law Review 83 (2017); 2016-03-15 → 2017-04-20; 41 pages; ssrn:2747994


[545 words; his point, and he does have one… An application of a precautionary principle is indiciated; these are dangerous machines run by dangerous people.]

The rise of increasingly complex algorithms calls for critical thought about how best to prevent, deter, and compensate for the harms that they cause. This paper argues that the criminal law and tort regulatory systems will prove no match for the difficult regulatory puzzles algorithms pose. Algorithmic regulation will require federal uniformity, expert judgment, political independence, and pre-market review to prevent – without stifling innovation – the introduction of unacceptably dangerous algorithms into the market. This paper proposes that a new specialist regulatory agency should be created to regulate algorithmic safety. An FDA for algorithms.

Such a federal consumer protection agency should have three powers. First, it should have the power to organize and classify algorithms into regulatory categories by their design, complexity, and potential for harm (in both ordinary use and through misuse). Second, it should have the power to prevent the introduction of algorithms into the market until their safety and efficacy has been proven through evidence-based pre-market trials. Third, the agency should have broad authority to impose disclosure requirements and usage restrictions to prevent algorithms’ harmful misuse.

To explain why a federal agency will be necessary, this paper proceeds in three parts. First, it explains the diversity of algorithms that already exist and that are soon to come. In the future many algorithms will be “trained,” not “designed.” That means that the operation of many algorithms will be opaque and difficult to predict in border cases, and responsibility for their harms will be diffuse and difficult to assign. Moreover, although “designed” algorithms already play important roles in many life-or-death situations (from emergency landings to automated braking systems), increasingly “trained” algorithms will be deployed in these mission-critical applications.

Second, this paper explains why other possible regulatory schemes – such as state tort and criminal law or regulation through subject-matter regulatory agencies – will not be as desirable as the creation of a centralized federal regulatory agency for the administration of algorithms as a category. For consumers, tort and criminal law are unlikely to efficiently counter the harms from algorithms. Harms traceable to algorithms may frequently be diffuse and difficult to detect. Human responsibility and liability for such harms will be difficult to establish. And narrowly tailored usage restrictions may be difficult to enforce through indirect regulation. For innovators, the availability of federal preemption from local and ex-post liability is likely to be desired.

Third, this paper explains that the concerns driving the regulation of food, drugs, and cosmetics closely resemble the concerns that should drive the regulation of algorithms. With respect to the operation of many drugs, the precise mechanisms by which they produce their benefits and harms are not well understood. The same will soon be true of many of the most important (and potentially dangerous) future algorithms. Drawing on lessons from the fitful growth and development of the FDA, the paper proposes that the FDA’s regulatory scheme is an appropriate model from which to design an agency charged with algorithmic regulation.

The paper closes by emphasizing the need to think proactively about the potential dangers algorithms pose. The United States created the FDA and expanded its regulatory reach only after several serious tragedies revealed its necessity. If we fail to anticipate the trajectory of modern algorithmic technology, history may repeat itself.

What Big Tech’s monopoly powers mean | Book Forum

What Big Tech’s monopoly powers mean; Staff; Book Forum; 2017-08-31.

tl;dr → It is all very bad. Others opined; they recite. Pointers are given (Book Forum actaully is a book review meta-site, after all)


  • You Are The Product; John Lanchester; In London Review of Books; WHEN?
    (book) promotion

    • Tim Wu; The Attention Merchants: The Epic Scramble to Get Inside Our Heads From the Daily Newspaper to Social Media, How Our Time and Attention is Harvested and Sold; Vintage, reprint; 2017-08-19; 432 pages; ASIN:0804170045: Kindle: $14, paper: $12+SHT.
    • Antonio Garcia Martinez; Chaos Monkeys: Obscene Fortune and Random Failure in Silicon Valley Inside the Silicon Valley Money Machine; Harper; 2016-06-28; 528 pages; ASIN:0062458191: Kindle: $15, paper: $7+SHT.
  • Who Owns The Internet: What Big Tech’s monopoly powers mean for our culture; Elizabeth Kolbert; In The New Yorker; 2017-08-28; separately filled.
    (book) promotion

    • Jonathan Taplin; Move Fast and Break Things: How Facebook, Google and Amazon have Cornered Culture and What It Means for All of Us; separately filled.
    • Franklin Foer; World Without Mind: The Existential Threat of Big Tech; separately filled.
  • Will Amazon take over the world?; Frank Pasquale; In Boston Review; WHEN?
    (book) promotion

    • Nick Srnicek, Platform Capitalism, (series) Theory Redux, Polity; 2016-12-27; 120 pages; ASIN:1509504877: Kindle: $8, paper: $11+SHT.
    • Trebor Scholz, Nathan Schneider; Ours to Hack and to Own: The Rise of Platform Cooperativism, A New Vision for the Future of Work and a Fairer Internet; OR Books; 2017-08-15; 252 pages; ASIN:1944869336: Kindle: $12, paper: $13+SHT.
  • On the kerfluffle at New America vs Google vs Open Markets;
    a.k.a. patronage is a wonderful thing when it is given; patronage is mean and nasty suckage when it is withdrawn
    <advice>Don’t bite the hand that feeds ya!<advice>

  • The hated ones: Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google (AAFG)
    • Nationalise Google Facebook Amazon Data Monopoly Platform Public Interest; ; In The Guardian; 2017-08-13.
      Teaser: A crisis is looming. These monopoly platforms hoovering up our data have no competition: they’re too big to serve the public interest
      Riposte: let’s walk before we run; how about we nationalize The Guardian and see how that pans out before moving on to digest an organization that is run by adults?
      (book) promotion

      • Nick Smicek is a lecturer in digital economy, King’s College London.
      • Nick Srnicek, Platform Capitalism, Theory Redux, Polity; 2016-12-27; 120 pages; ASIN:1509504877: Kindle: $8, paper: $11+SHT.
    • Should America’s Tech Giant’s Be Broken Up?; Paula Dwyer; In Bloomberg; 2017-07-20.
      Teaser: Apple, Amazon, Google, and Facebook may be contributing to the U.S. economy’s most persistent ailments.
      tl;dr → Betteridge’s Law. Yes. Break ‘em up! Break ‘em up! Break ‘em up!
      (book&paper) promotions

      • Jonathan Taplin, age 70; Move Fast and Break Things: How Facebook, Google, and Amazon Cornered Culture and Undermined Democracy
      • David Autor (MIT) David Dorn (Zurich) Lawrence F. Katz (Harvard), Christina Patterson (MIT), John Van Reenen (MIT); The Fall of the Labor Share and the Rise of Superstar Firms; In Some Venue Surely, <sour>or maybe this is one of those half-decade duration “working papers” that the social scientists meditate upon before reporting out a “completed work” long after the effect has dematerialized <advice>give it a DOI number and be done with it, everyone else has already used or ignored the implications for policymakers concepts in the remediatory nostrums</advice></sour>; 2017-05-01; 74 pages; separately filled.
  • Trump damaged democracy, Silicon Valley will finish it off; Some Cub Reporter (SCR); In The Daily Beast; WHEN?
    Teaser: Donald Trump’s rise is, in a sense, just one symptom of the damage the are doing to America.

Toward a critical theory of corporate wellness | Gordon Hull & Frank Pasquale

Gordon Hull; More self-promotion: “Toward a critical theory of corporate wellness”; In His Blog; 2017-07-10.

tl;dr → employee wellness is but a surveillance-cum-control plane; a promotion of a forthcoming paper (you can read it for free if you’ve paid, which is a paywall)

Original Sources

Gordon Hull, Frank Pasquale; “Toward a critical theory of corporate wellness,”  In Biosocieties; soon.paywall.



In the U.S., “employee wellness” programs are increasingly attached to employer-provided health insurance. These programs attempt to nudge employees, sometimes quite forcefully, into healthy behaviors such as smoking cessation and exercise routines. Despite being widely promoted as saving on healthcare costs, numerous studies undermine this rationale. After documenting the programs’ failure to deliver a positive return on investment, we analyze them as instead providing an opportunity for employers to exercise increasing control over their employees. Based on human capital theory and neoliberal models of subjectivity that emphasize personal control and responsibility, these programs treat wellness as a lifestyle that employees must be cajoled into adopting, extending the workplace not just into the home but into the bodies of workers and entrenching the view that one belongs to one’s workplace. At the same time, their selective endorsement of health programs (many scientifically unsupported) produce a social truth of wellness framed as fitness for work. We conclude by arguing that the public health initiatives occluded by the private sector’s promotion of wellness programs would be a much better investment of resources.


  1. Ajunwa, I., Crawford, K. and Ford, J. (2016) Health and big data: An ethical framework for health information collection by corporate wellness programs. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 44(3): 474–480. Google Scholar
  2. Ajunwa, I., Crawford, K. and Schultz, J. (in press) Limitless worker surveillance. California Law Review. Google Scholar
  3. Alexander, J. (1988) The ideological construction of risk: An analysis of corporate health promotion programs in the 1980s. Social Science and Medicine 26(5): 559–567. DOI:10.1016/0277-9536(88)90389-9. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  4. Amoore, L. (2004) Risk, reward and discipline at work. Economy and Society 33(2): 174–196. DOI:10.1080/03085140410001677111. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  5. Baicker, K., Cutler, D. and Song Z. (2010) Workplace wellness programs can generate savings. Health Affairs 29(2): 304–311. DOI:10.1377/hlthaff.2009.0626. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  6. Barr, S.I., DiFrancesco, L. and Fulgoni, V.L. (2015) Association of breakfast consumption with body mass index and prevalence of overweight/obesity in a nationally-representative survey of Canadian adults. Nutrition Journal 15: 33. DOI:10.1186/s12937-016-0151-3. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  7. Basas, C.G. (2014) What’s bad about wellness? What the disability rights perspective offers about the limitations of wellness. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 39(5): 1035–1066. DOI:10.1215/03616878-2813695. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  8. Becker, G.S. (2007) Health as human capital: Synthesis and extensions. Oxford Economic Papers 59(3): 379–410. DOI:10.1093/oep/gpm020. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  9. Becker, G.S. (1975) Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis, with Special Reference to Education. New York: NBER/Columbia University Press. Google Scholar
  10. Bernard, T.S. (2015) The sticks and carrots of employee wellness programs. The New York Times.
  11. Binkley, S. (2009) The work of neoliberal governmentality: Temporality and ethical substance in the tale of two dads. Foucault Studies 6: 60–78. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  12. Binkley, S. (2014) Happiness as Enterprise: An Essay on Neoliberal Life. Albany: SUNY Press. Google Scholar
  13. boyd, d. and Crawford, K. (2012) Critical questions for Big Data. Information, Communication and Society 15(5): 662–679. DOI:10.1080/1369118x.2012.678878.
  14. Brown, W. (2015) Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism’s Stealth Revolution. New York: Zone Books. Google Scholar
  15. Burris, S. (Undated) Understanding how law influences environments and behavior, a web page. Temple University for Public Health Law Research.
  16. Cauchi, R. (2016) State employee health benefits, insurance, and costs. National Conference of State Legislatures. web page.
  17. Chaloupka, F.J., Yurekli, A. and Fong, G.T. (2012) Tobacco taxes as a tobacco control strategy. Tobacco Control 21: 172–180. DOI:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011-050417. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  18. Chowdhury, E.A., Richardson, J.D., Holman, G.D., Tsintzas, K., Thompson, D. and Betts, J.A. (2016) The causal role of breakfast in energy balance and health: A randomized controlled trial in obese adults. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 103(3): 747–756. DOI:10.3945/ajcn.115.122044. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  19. Conrad, P. (1988) Worksite health promotion: The social context. Social Science and Medicine 26(5): 485–489. DOI:10.1016/0277-9536(88)90381-4. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  20. Contreary, K.A., Chattopadhyay, S.K., Hopkins, D.P., Chloupka, F.J., Forster, J.L., Grimshaw, V., et al. (2015) Economic impact of tobacco price increases through taxation: A community guide systematic review. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 49(5): 800–808. DOI:10.1016/j.amepre.2015.04.026. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  21. Cooper, M. (2012) Workfare, familyfare, godfare: Transforming contingency into necessity. South Atlantic Quarterly 111(4): 643–661. DOI:10.1215/00382876-1724120. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  22. Corporate Health and Wellness Association. (n.d.) Worksite wellness – an investment in human capital. Corporate Wellness (Magazine).
  23. Crawford, K. (2016) Can an algorithm be agonistic? Ten scenes from life in calculated publics. Science, Technology and Human Values 41(1): 77–92. DOI:10.1177/0162243915589635. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  24. Crawford, R. (1980) Healthism and the medicalization of everyday life. International Journal of Health Services 10(3): 365–388. DOI:10.2190/3H2H-3XJN-3KAY-G9NY. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  25. Dale, K. and Burrell, G. (2013) Being occupied: An embodied re-reading of organizational ‘wellness’. Organization. DOI:10.1177/1350508412473865. Google Scholar
  26. Davies, W. (2015a) The Happiness Industry. New York: Verso. Google Scholar
  27. Davies, W. (2015b) Spirits of neoliberalism: ‘Competitiveness’ and ‘wellbeing’ as indicators of rival orders of worth. In: R. Rottenburg, S.E. Merry, S.-J. Park and J. Mugler (eds.) The World of Indicators: The Making of Governmental Knowledge Through Quantification (pp. 283–305). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  28. EEOC v. Flambeau. (2015). Google Scholar
  29. Ernst, M. (2011). Dangerous by Design.
  30. Esposti, S.D. (2014) When Big Data meets dataveillance: The hidden side of analytics. Surveillance Society 12(2): 209-225. Google Scholar
  31. Feldman, D.I., Al-Mallah, M.H., Keteyian, S.J., Brawner, C.A., Feldman, T., Blumenthal, R.S. and Blaha, M.J. (2015) No evidence of an upper threshold for mortality benefit at high levels of cardiorespiratory fitness. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 65(6): 629–630. DOI:10.1016/j.jacc.2014.11.030. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  32. Ferrie, J.E., Virtanen, M., Jokela, M., Madsen, I.E.H., Heikkilä, K., Alfredsson, L., Batty, G.D., Bjorner, J.B., Borritz, M., Burr, H., Dragano, N., Elovainio, M., Fransson, E.I., Knutsson, A., Koskenvuo, M., Koskinen, A., Kouvonen, A., Kumari, M., Nielsen, M.L., Nordin, M., Oksanen, T., Pahkin, K., Pejtersen, J.H., Pentti, J., Salo, P., Shipley, M.J., Suominen, S.B., Tabák, A., Theorell, T., Väänänen, A., Vahtera, J., Westerholm, P.J.M., Westerlund, H., Rugulies, R., Nyberg, S.T. and Kivimäki, M. (2016) Job insecurity and risk of diabetes: a meta-analysis of individual participant data. Canadian Medical Association Journal DOI:10.1503/cmaj.150942. Google Scholar
  33. Finkelstein, E.A. (2016) Effectiveness of activity trackers with and without incentives to increase physical activity (TRIPPA): A randomised controlled trial, Lancet 4(12): 983–995. Google Scholar
  34. Flegal, K.M. (2014) Metabolically healthy overweight and obesity. Annals of Internal Medicine 160(7): 515–516. DOI:10.7326/L14-5007-6. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  35. Forsberg, L. (2016) 2016 State health plan annual enrollment. presentation.
  36. Foster, R. (2016) The therapeutic spirit of neoliberalism. Political Theory 44(1): 82–105. DOI:10.1177/0090591715594660. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  37. Foucault, M. (1982) The subject and power. In: H.L. Dreyfus and P. Rabinow (eds.) Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics (pp. 208–226). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
  38. Foucault, M. (1985) The Use of Pleasure (R. Hurley, Trans.). New York: Vintage Books. Google Scholar
  39. Foucault, M. (2008) The birth of biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1978-79 (G. Burchell, Trans., M. Senellart ed.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar
  40. Foucault, M. (2011) The Courage of Truth (The Government of Self and Others II): Lectures at the Collège de France, 1983-1984 (F. Gros Ed.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar
  41. Frakt, A. and Carroll, A.E. (2014) Do workplace wellness programs work? Usually not. New York Times.
  42. French, M. (2014) Gaps in the gaze: Informatic practice and the work of public health surveillance. Surveillance Society 12(2): 226–243. Google Scholar
  43. Gillespie, T. (2013) The relevance of algorithms. In J.B. Pablo and K.A. Foot (eds.) Media Technologies: Essays on Communication, Materiality, and Society (pp. 167–193). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  44. Ginn, G.O. and Henry, L.J. (2003) Wellness programs in the context of strategic human resource management. Hospital Topics 81(1): 23–29. DOI:10.1080/00185860309598012. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  45. Goetzel, R. (2013) Workplace wellness programs: Continuing the discussion with Dinardo, Howitz, and Kelly. Health Affairs Blog. blog post.
  46. Greenfield, R. (2016) Employee wellness programs not so voluntary anymore. Bloomberg. article.
  47. Guthman, J. and Brown, S. (2016) Whose life counts: Biopolitics and the “bright line” of chloropicrin mitigation in California’s strawberry industry. Science, Technology and Human Values 41(3): 461–482. DOI:10.1177/0162243915606804. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  48. Hall, K.D., Chen, K.Y., Guo, J., Lam, Y.Y., Leibel, R.L., Mayer, L.E. et al. (2016) Energy expenditure and body composition changes after an isocaloric ketogenic diet in overweight and obese men. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. DOI:10.3945/ajcn.116.133561. Google Scholar
  49. Hamann, T.H. (2009) Neoliberalism, governmentality, and ethics. Foucault Studies 6: 37–59. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  50. Harcourt, B.E. (2011) The Illusion of Free Markets. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar
  51. Harvey, D. (2005) A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  52. Health Enhancement and Research Organization and Population Health Alliance. (2015) Program measurement and evaluation guide: Core metrics for employee health management.
  53. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-191, 110 Stat. 1936 (1996). Google Scholar
  54. Horwitz, J.R., Kelly, B.D. and DiNardo, J.E. (2013) Wellness incentives in the workplace: Cost savings through cost shifting to unhealthy workers. Health Affairs 32(3): 468–476. DOI:10.1377/hlthaff.2012.0683. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  55. Hull, G. (2015) Successful failure: What Foucault can teach us about privacy self-management in a world of Facebook and big data. Ethics and Information Technology 17(2): 89–101. DOI:10.1007/s10676-015-9363-z. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  56. Jeppsson, S. (2015) Obesity and obligation. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 25(1): 89–110. DOI:10.1353/ken.2015.0001. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  57. Jo, E. and Dolezal, B.A. (2016) Validation of the Fitbit ® Surge™ and Charge HR™ fitness trackers. pdf.
  58. Jost, T. (2007) Health Care at Risk: A Critique of the Consumer-Driven Movement. Raleigh, NC: Duke University Press. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  59. Kalecki, M. (1943) Political aspects of full employment. Political Quarterly 7: 322–331. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  60. Kitchin, R. (2014) Big Data, new epistemologies and paradigm shifts. Big Data and Society. DOI:10.1177/2053951714528481. Google Scholar
  61. Kotarba, J.A. and Bentley, P. (1988) Workplace wellness participation and the becoming of self. Social Science and Medicine 26(5): 551–558. DOI:10.1016/0277-9536(88)90388-7. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  62. Kronenfeld, J.J., Jackson, K.L., Davis, K.E. and Blair, S.N. (1988) Changing health practices: The experience from a worksite health promotion project. Social Sciences and Medicine 26(5): 515–523. DOI:10.1016/0277-9536(88)90384-X. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  63. LawAtlas. (2015) The Policy Surveillance Program.
  64. Lampert, R., Tuit, K., Hong, K.I., Donovan, T., Lee, F., Sinha, R. (2016) Cumulative stress and autonomic dysregulation in a community sample. Stress 19(3): 269–279. DOI:10.1080/10253890.2016.1174847. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  65. Langley, P. (2007) Uncertain subjects of Anglo-American financialization. CULTURAL CRITIQUE 65: 67–91. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  66. Lewis, A. (2015) Warning: Workplace wellness is hazardous to your health. Huffington Post. blog post.
  67. Lewis, A. and Khanna, V. (2014) Surviving workplace wellness with your dignity, finances, and major organs intact. The Health Care Blog. Google Scholar
  68. Lewis, A. and Khanna, V. (2015) Tag archive: “Wellness outcomes.” TheySaidWhat (blog). blog post.
  69. Lewis, A., Khanna, V. and Montrose, S. (2015) Employers should disband employee weight control programs. American Journal of Managed Care 21(2): e91–e94. Google Scholar
  70. Lupton, D. (in press) Lively data, social fitness and biovalue: the intersections of health self-tracking and social media. In: J. Burgess, A.E. Marwick, T. Poell, and J. Van Dijck (eds.) The Sage Handbook on Social Media. London: Sage. Google Scholar
  71. Lupton, D. (2016) The Quantified Self (London, UK: Polity Press). Google Scholar
  72. Martin, R. (2002) The Financialization of Everyday Life. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. Google Scholar
  73. Mattke, S., Liu, H., Caloyeras, J.P., Huang, C.Y., Van Busum, K.R. Khodyakov, D. and Shier, V. (2013) Workplace wellness programs study: Final report. report.
  74. Mayer, J. (2011) State for sale. The New Yorker.
  75. McGillivray, D. (2005) Fitter, happier, more productive: Governing working bodies through wellness. Cult Organization 11(2): 125–138. DOI:10.1080/14759550500091036. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  76. Miller, C.C. (2015) Stressed, tired, rushed: A portrait of the modern family. New York Times.
  77. McMahon, J. (2015) Behavioral Economics as Neoliberalism: Producing and Governing homo economicus. Contemporary Political Theory 14: 137–158. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  78. Mirowski, P. (2011) Science-Mart: Privatizing American Science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  79. Mirowski, P. (2013) Never Let a Serious Crisis go to Waste: How Neoliberalism Survived the Financial Meltdown. New York: Verso. Google Scholar
  80. Mitchell, M. (2016) The ‘Tyranny’ of Positive Thinking can Threaten Your Health and Happiness. Newsweek. Google Scholar
  81. Moraine, S. (2015) The Apple Watch’s invasive trackers. blog post.
  82. Morris, F.C., Solander, A.C. and Huelle, A.E. (2015) EEOC issues proposed wellness program amendments to ADA regulations.
  83. Moss, M. (2013) Salt, Sugar, Fat: How the Food Giants Hooked Us. New York: Random House. Google Scholar
  84. O’Connor, A. (2016) Coke and Pepsi Give Millions to Public Health, Then Lobby Against It. New York Times, October 11. Google Scholar
  85. Ortega, F.B., Lavie, C.J. and Blair, S.N. (2016) Obesity and cardiovascular disease. Circulation Research 118(11): 1752–1770. DOI:10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.115.306883. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  86. Owens, A. (2009) N.C. State health plan targets smokers and the obese.
  87. Pasquale, F. (2012) Accountable care organizations in the Affordable Care Act. Seton Hall Law Review 42(1371). Google Scholar
  88. Pasquale, F. (2013) Privacy, antitrust, and power. George Mason Law Review 20(1): 1009–1024. Google Scholar
  89. Pasquale, F. (2014a) Private certifiers and deputies in American Health Care. North Carolina Law Review 92(1661). Google Scholar
  90. Pasquale, F. (2014b) Redescribing health privacy: The Importance of information policy. Houston Journal of Health Law and Policy 14. Google Scholar
  91. Pasquale, F. (2014c) The hidden costs of health care cost-cutting: Toward a postneoliberal health-reform agenda. Law and Contemporary Problems 77(171). Google Scholar
  92. Pervaaz, V. (2016) What will workplace wellness look like in 2020? Corporate Wellness Magazine.
  93. Pew Research Center. (2015) Raising kids and running a household: How working parents share the load. blog post.
  94. Pongratz, L.A. (2006) Voluntary self-control: Education reform as a governmental strategy. Educational Philosophy and Theory 38(4): 471–482. DOI:10.1111/j.1469-5812.2006.00205.x. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  95. Read, J. (2009) A genealogy of homo-economicus: Neoliberalism and the production of subjectivity. Foucault Studies 6: 25–36. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  96. Rieder, G. and Simon, J. (2016) Datatrust: Or, the political quest for numerical evidence and the epistemologies of Big Data. Big Data and Society. DOI:10.1177/2053951716649398. Google Scholar
  97. Roman, P.M. and Blum, T.C. (1988) Formal intervention in employee health: Comparisons of the nature and structure of employee assistance programs and health promotion programs. Social Science and Medicine 26(5): 503–514. 10.1016/0277-9536(88)90383-8. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  98. Rose, N.S. (2007) Politics of Life Itself: Biomedicine, Power, and Subjectivity in the Twenty-First Century. Princeton: Princeton University Press. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  99. Rosenfeld, S. (2016) Online public schools are a disaster, admits billionaire, charter-school promoter Walton Family Foundation. Alternet.
  100. Ruppert, E. (2012) The governmental topologies of database devices. Theory Culture and Society 29(4–5): 116–136. DOI:10.1177/0263276412439428. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  101. Schnohr, P., O’Keefe, J.H., Marott, J.L., Lange, P. and Jensen, G.B. (2015) Dose of jogging and long-term mortality: The Copenhagen City heart study. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 65(5): 411–419. DOI:10.1016/j.jacc.2014.11.023. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  102. Schüll, N. (2016) Data for life: Wearable technology and the design of self-care. Biosocieties 11: 317–333. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  103. Simon, J. (2002) Taking risks: Extreme sports and the embrace of risk in advanced liberal societies. In: T. Baker and J. Simon (eds.) Embracing Risk: The Changing Culture of Insurance and Responsibility (pp. 177–208). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
  104. Soares, R.R. (2014) Gary Becker’s contributions in health economics. Journal of Demographic Economics 1(1). Google Scholar
  105. Stanley, J. (forthcoming, 2017) The Emergency Manager: Strategic Racism, Technocracy, and the Poisoning of Flint’s Children, The Good Society. promotion.
  106. Strandburg, K.J. (2005) Curiosity-driven research and university technology transfer. In: G.D. Libecap (ed.), University Entrepreneurship and Technology Transfer: Process, Design, and Intellectual Property (pp. 93–122). Oxford: Elsevier. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  107. Taylor, C. (1984) Foucault on freedom and truth. Political Theory 12(2): 152–183. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  108. Till, C. (in press) Commercialising bodies: The new corporate health ethic of philanthrocapitalism. In R. Lynch and C. Farrington (eds.) Critical Explorations of Health, Society and Technology Through Personal Medical Devices. Palgrave-Macmillan. Google Scholar
  109. Till, C. (2014) Exercise as labour: Quantified self and the transformation of exercise into labour. Societies 4(3): 446. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  110. Tomasetti, C. and Vogelstein, B. (2015) Variation in cancer risk among tissues can be explained by the number of cell divisions. Science 347(6217): 78–81. DOI:10.1126/science.1260825. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  111. Vander Schee, C. (2008) The politics of health as a school-sponsored ethic: Foucault, neoliberalism, and the unhealthy employee. Educational Policy 22(6): 854–874. DOI:10.1177/0895904807312471. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  112. Whitacre, P.T., Tsai, P. and Mulligan, J. (2009) The Public Health Effects of Food Deserts. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Google Scholar
  113. Wiley, L.F. (2013) Shame, blame, and the emerging law of obesity control. University of California Davis Law Review 47(1): 121–188. Google Scholar
  114. Wiley, L.F. (2014) Access to health care as an incentive for healthy behavior? An assessment of the Affordable Care Act’s personal responsibility for wellness reforms. Indiana Health Law Review 11(2): 635–712. Google Scholar
  115. Winnubst, S. (2015) Way Too Cool: Selling Out Race and Ethics. New York: Columbia University Press. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  116. Winslow, L. (2015) The Undeserving Professor: Neoliberalism and the Reinvention of Higher Education. Rhetoric and Public Affairs 18(2): 201–245. CrossRef, Google Scholar
  117. World Health Organization (1948) WHO definition of health. web page.

A Memo From MMT’s Legal Department | naked capitalism (New Economic Perspectives)

A Memo From MMT’s Legal Department; ; In naked capitalism, syndicated from New Economic Perspectives; 2017-07-18.
Devin Smith, staff, an economist, Corps of Engineers, United States Army.


  • 1st International MMT Congress, 2017-09
    to be held at the University of Missouri-Kansas City.
  • A recital of
    • affiliated persons
    • promotional events


  • Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
  • Job Guarantee
  • Tax obligations create money
  • Tax obligations require wages.
  • Modern Money Network
    • founded 2012
  • Federal Reserve System
  • Rethinking Economics New York
    • a conference
    • Student-organized
    • Sponsors
      • Law School, Columbia University
      • Law School, New York University
      • Economics Department, The New School
  • Association for the Promotion of Political Economy and Law (APPEAL)


Has a moneyness sense

Treasury currency
Commodity Futures Trading Commission commodity
Internal Revenue Service property


<quote>“[A] renewed emphasis on a key legal insight (the government cannot default on debt it issues in its own currency) can lead to an adjustment to economic theory (MMT), which in turn informs a new legal proposal to get past the current, futile […] debate.
It’s a movement from legal insight to economic insight back to legal insight, or L – E – L.
… The legal foundations of MMT make it both scientifically, and normatively, a better theory of our economic system than the dominant paradigms of monetary policy.”</quote>, attributed to Frank Pasquale, circa 2014.

<quote>“Modern money theory explains that political and legal systems for creating, regulating, and distributing money are fundamental to economic prosperity and stability, necessarily shaping (not “distorting”) and facilitating private exchanges of goods and services.
… the economic costs and benefits of public money creation depend on the contingent, complex value-laden questions of how that money is spent and invested and how effectively taxes and other forms of regulation help steer economic and political activity toward the productivity, stability, and legitimacy that will help maintain currency value.”</quote>, attributed to Martha McCluskey, circa 2016.


  • Rania Antonopoulos, Alternate Minister for Combatting Unemployment, Greece
  • Marshall Auerback
  • David Bholat, staff, Advanced Analytics Division, Bank of England
  • Richard Clarida, (former) Assistant Secretary, U.S. Treasury
  • Mathew Forstater
  • James K. Galbraith
  • Philip Harvey
    • Professor, Law, Rutgers University
    • (author) Rep. John Conyers H.R. 1000 towards full employment
      Versions: 114th Congress and many others
  • NAME Innes
  • Stephanie Kelton
  • NAME Knapp
  • NAME Keynes (surely you jeste)
  • Martha McCluskey, Professor, Law, University at Buffalo
  • Frank Pasquale, Professor, Law, University of Maryland
  • Zoltan Pozsar, (former) Senior Advisor, U.S. Treasury Department
  • Amar Reganti, ex-Deputy Director, Office of Debt Management at United States Treasury
  • Beardsley Ruml, Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, once upon a time (at least in 1946-01)
  • Joseph Sommer, Legal Counsel, New York Federal Reserve Bank
  • Pavlina Tcherneva
  • Alexis Tsipras, (now-)Prime Minister, Greece,
  • Adair Turner, (former) Chairman, U.K. Financial Services Authority
  • Matias Vernengo, (former) Economic Research Director, Central Bank of Argentina.
  • Randy Wray


The Princeton Web Transparency And Accountability Project | Narayanan, Reisman

Arvind Narayanan, Dillon Reisman; The Princeton Web Transparency and Accountability Project; In Tania Cerquitelli, Daniele Quercia, Frank Pasquale (editors); Transparent Data Mining for Big and Small Data; Springer; 2017.

tl;dr → There be dragons. Princeton was is there. Tell it! Testify!


When you browse the web, hidden “third parties” collect a large amount of data about your behavior. This data feeds algorithms to target ads to you, tailor your news recommendations, and sometimes vary prices of online products. The network of trackers comprises hundreds of entities, but consumers have little awareness of its pervasiveness and sophistication. This chapter discusses the findings and experiences of the Princeton Web Transparency Project, which continually monitors the web to uncover what user data companies collect, how they collect it, and what they do with it. We do this via a largely automated monthly “census” of the top 1 million websites, in effect “tracking the trackers”. Our tools and findings have proven useful to regulators and investigatory journalists, and have led to greater public awareness, the cessation of some privacy-infringing practices, and the creation of new consumer privacy tools. But the work raises many new questions. For example, should we hold websites accountable for the privacy breaches caused by third parties? The chapter concludes with a discussion of such tricky issues and makes recommendations for public policy and regulation of privacy.


  • Marvin Minsky
  • expert systems
  • Machine Learning
  • Artifical Intelligence
  • Big Data
  • Netflix
  • Self-Driving Cars
  • collect data first, ask questions later
  • surveillance infrastructure
  • Kafkaesque
  • data and algorithmic transparency
  • Workshop on Data and Algorithmic Transparency
  • Princeton Web Transparency and Accountability Project (WebTAP)
    Princeton Web Census
  • Privacy scholar
  • Ryan Calo
  • The Party System
  • first party
  • third party
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Facebook Like Button
  • The Beauty and the Beast Project
  • Panopticlick
  • Anonymous
  • Pseudonymous
  • biases
  • discrimination
  • targeted political messaging
  • price discrimination
  • market manipulation
  • AdChoices
  • ad blockers
  • Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
  • Optimizely
  • A/B Testing
  • OpenWPM (Open Web Privacy Measurement)
  • FourthParth
  • FPDetective
  • PhamtomJS
  • Firefox
  • Tor
  • Facebook Connect
  • Google Single Sign-On (SSO)
  • longitudinal studies
  • HTML5, Canvas API
  • canvas fingerprinting
  • AddThis
  • AudioContext API
  • WebRTC API
  • Battery Status API
  • NSA (National Security Agency)
  • Snowden
  • Cookies
  • transitive cookie linking
  • cookie syncing
  • Google
  • Facebook
  • Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
  • Cross-Device Tracking
  • header enrichment (by ISPs)
  • Ghostery
  • AdBlock Plus
  • uBlock Origin
  • machine learning classifier (for tracking behavior)
  • Big Data (they used Big Data and Machine Learning Classifiers)
  • Nudge (a book)
  • Choice Architecture
  • 3rd Part Cookies, blocking 3rd party cookies
  • Do Not Track
  • Battery API
  • Internet Explorer
  • zero sum game
  • power user interfaces
  • PGP (Pretty Good Privacy)
  • Cookie Blocking
  • <buzz>long tail (of innovation)</buzz>
  • Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA)
  • child-directed websites.
  • American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
  • Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
  • Personally-Identifiable Information (PII)
  • shift of power, from 3rd parties to publishers
  • Columbia University
  • Carnegie Mellon University
  • Internet of Things (IoT)
  • WiFi
  • cross-device tracking
  • smartphone app
  • Fairness, Accountability and Transparency in Machine Learning (FAT-ML)
  • Princeton


  • “The best minds of our generation are thinking about how to make people click on ads” attributed to Jeff Hammerbacher


  • Crevier D (1993) AI: The tumultuous history of the search for artificial intelligence. Basic Books, Inc.
  • Engle Jr RL, Flehinger BJ (1987) Why expert systems for medical diagnosis are not being generally used: a valedictory opinion. Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine 63(2):193
  • Vance A (2011) This tech bubble is different. Bloomberg
  • Angwin J (2016) Machine bias: Risk assessments in criminal sentencing. ProPublica
  • Levin S (2016) A beauty contest was judged by AI and the robots didn’t like dark skin. The Guardian
  • Solove DJ (2001) Privacy and power: Computer databases and metaphors for information privacy. Stanford Law Review pp 1393–1462
  • Marthews A, Tucker C (2015) Government surveillance and internet search behavior. ssrn:2412564
  • Hannak A, Soeller G, Lazer D, Mislove A, Wilson C (2014) Measuring price discrimination and steering on e-commerce web sites. In: Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Internet Measurement Conference, ACM, pp 305–318
  • Calo R (2013) Digital market manipulation. University of Washington School of Law Research Paper 2013-27 DOI 10.2139/ssrn.2309703 ssrn:2309703
  • Mayer JR, Mitchell JC (2012) Third-party web tracking: Policy and technology. In: Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, IEEE, pp 413–427
  • Angwin J (2010) The web’s new gold mine: Your secrets. The Wall Street Journal
  • Lerner A, Simpson AK, Kohno T, Roesner F (2016) Internet jones and the raiders of the lost trackers: An archaeological study of web tracking from 1996 to 2016. In: Proceedings of the 25th USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 16)
  • Laperdrix P, Rudametkin W, Baudry B (2016) Beauty and the beast: Diverting modern web browsers to build unique browser fingerprints. In: Proceedings of the 37th IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (S&P 2016)
  • Eckersley P (2010) How unique is your web browser? In: International Symposium on Privacy Enhancing Technologies Symposium, Springer, pp 1–18
  • Acar G, Van Alsenoy B, Piessens F, Diaz C, Preneel B (2015) Facebook tracking through social plug-ins. Technical report prepared for the Belgian Privacy Commission
  • Starov O, Gill P, Nikiforakis N (2016) Are you sure you want to contact us? quantifying the leakage of pii via website contact forms. In: Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies 2016(1):20–33
  • Krishnamurthy B, Naryshkin K, Wills C (2011) Privacy leakage vs. protection measures: the growing disconnect. In: Proceedings of the Web, vol 2, pp 1–10
  • Su J, Shukla A, Goel S, Narayanan A (2017) De-anonymizing web browsing data with social networks, manuscript
  • Barocas S, Nissenbaum H (2014) Big data’s end run around procedural privacy protections. In Communications of the ACM 57-11:31-33
  • Shilton K, Greene D (2016) Because privacy: defining and legitimating privacy in ios development. In IConference 2016 Proceedings
  • Storey G, Reisman D, Mayer J, Narayanan A (2016) The future of ad blocking: Analytical framework and new techniques, manuscript
  • Narayanan A (2016) Can Facebook really make ads unblockable? In Freedom to Tinker
  • Storey G (2016) Facebook ad highlighter.
  • Reisman D (2016) A peek at A/B testing in the wild. In Freedom to Tinker
  • Acar G, Juarez M, Nikiforakis N, Diaz C, Gürses S, Piessens F, Preneel B (2013) Fpdetective: dusting the web for fingerprinters. In: Proceedings of the 2013 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer & Communications Security, ACM, pp 1129–1140
  • Englehardt S, Narayanan A (2016) Online tracking: A 1-million-site measurement and analysis. In: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer & Communications Security
  • Selenium HQ (2016) Selenium browser automation faq.
  • Acar G, Eubank C, Englehardt S, Juarez M, Narayanan A, Diaz C (2014) The web never forgets. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS ’14) DOI 10.1145/2660267.2660347
  • Mowery K, Shacham H (2012) Pixel perfect: Fingerprinting canvas in html5. In Proceedings of W2SP
  • (Valve) VV (2016) Fingerprintjs2 — modern & flexible browser fingerprinting library, a successor to the original fingerprintjs.
  • Olejnik Ł, Acar G, Castelluccia C, Diaz C (2015) The leaking battery. In: International Workshop on Data Privacy Management, Springer, pp 254–263
  • Englehardt S, Narayanan A (2016) Online tracking: A 1-million-site measurement and analysis. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS ’16)
  • Doty N (2016) Mitigating browser fingerprinting in web specifications.
  • Soltani A, Peterson A, Gellman B (2013) NSA uses Google cookies to pinpoint targets for hacking. In Washingtno Post.
  • Englehardt S, Reisman D, Eubank C, Zimmerman P, Mayer J, Narayanan A, Felten EW (2015) Cookies that give you away. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW ’15) DOI 10.1145/2736277.2741679
  • Angwin J (2016) Google has quietly dropped ban on personally identifiable web tracking. ProPublica
  • Reitman R (2012) What actually changed in Googles privacy policy. Electronic Frontier Foundation
  • Simonite T (2015) Facebooks like buttons will soon track your web browsing to target ads. MIT Technology Review
  • Federal Trade Commission (2015) Cross-device tracking.
  • Maggi F, Mavroudis V (2016) Talking behind your back attacks & countermeasures of ultrasonic cross-device tracking, In Proceedings of Blackhat
  • Angwin J (2014) Why online tracking is getting creepier. ProPublica
  • Vallina-Rodriguez N, Sundaresan S, Kreibich C, Paxson V (2015) Header enrichment or ISP enrichment? In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Hot Topics in Middleboxes and Network Function Virtualization (HotMiddlebox ’15) DOI 10.1145/2785989.2786002
  • Disconnect (2016) Disconnect blocks new tracking device that makes your computer draw a unique image.
  • Foundation EF (2016) Privacy badger.
  • Thaler RH, Sunstein CR (2008) Nudge: improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. Yale University Press
  • Fleishman G (2015) Hands-on with content blocking safari extensions in ios 9. Macworld.
  • Blink, Chromium (2016) Owp storage team sync.
  • Lynch B (2012) Do not track in the windows 8 setup experience – microsoft on the issues. Microsoft on the Issues
  • Hern A (2016) Firefox disables loophole that allows sites to track users via battery status. The Guardian
  • Mozilla (2015) Tracking protection in private browsing.
  • Mozilla (2016) Security/contextual identity project/containers.
  • Federal Trade Commission (2012) Google will pay $22.5 million to settle FTC charges it misrepresented privacy assurances to users of apple’s safari internet browser.
  • Federal Trade Commission (2016) Children’s online privacy protection rule (“COPPA”).
  • New York State Office of the Attorney General (2016) A.G. schneiderman announces results of “operation child tracker,” ending illegal online tracking of children at some of nation’s most popular kids’ websites.
  • American Civil Liberties Union (2016) Sandvig v. Lynch.
  • Eubank C, Melara M, Perez-Botero D, Narayanan A (2013) Shining the floodlights on mobile web tracking a privacy survey.
  • CMU CHIMPS Lab (2015) Privacy grade: Grading the privacy of smartphone apps.
  • Vanrykel E, Acar G, Herrmann M, Diaz C (2016) Leaky birds: Exploiting mobile application traffic for surveillance. In Proceedings of Financial Cryptography and Data Security 2016
  • Lécuyer M, Ducoffe G, Lan F, Papancea A, Petsios T, Spahn R, Chaintreau A, Geambasu R (2014) Xray: Enhancing the webs transparency with differential correlation. In: Proceedings of the 23rd USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 14), pp 49–64
  • Lecuyer M, Spahn R, Spiliopolous Y, Chaintreau A, Geambasu R, Hsu D (2015) Sunlight: Fine-grained targeting detection at scale with statistical confidence. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, ACM, pp 554–566
  • Tschantz MC, Datta A, Datta A, Wing JM (2015) A methodology for information flow experiments. In: Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE 28th Computer Security Foundations Symposium, IEEE, pp 554–568
  • Datta A, Sen S, Zick Y (2016) Algorithmic transparency via quantitative input influence. In: Proceedings of 37th IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy
  • Chen L, Mislove A, Wilson C (2015) Peeking beneath the hood of uber. In: Proceedings of the 2015 ACM Conference on Internet Measurement Conference, ACM, pp 495–508
  • Valentino-Devries J, Singer-Vine J, Soltani A (2012) Websites vary prices, deals based on users information. In The Wall Street Journal 10:60–68
  • Guide ASU (2016) Ui/application exerciser monkey.
  • Rastogi V, Chen Y, Enck W (2013) Appsplayground: automatic security analysis of smartphone applications. In: Proceedings of the third ACM Conference on Data and Application Security and Privacy, ACM, pp 209–220
  • Enck W, Gilbert P, Han S, Tendulkar V, Chun BG, Cox LP, Jung J, McDaniel P, Sheth AN (2014) Taintdroid: an information-flow tracking system for realtime privacy monitoring on smartphones. In ACM Transactions on Computer Systems (TOCS) 32(2):5
  • Ren J, Rao A, Lindorfer M, Legout A, Choffnes D (2015) Recon: Revealing and controlling privacy leaks in mobile network traffic. arXiv:1507.00255.
  • Razaghpanah A, Vallina-Rodriguez N, Sundaresan S, Kreibich C, Gill P, Allman M, Paxson V (2015) Haystack: in situ mobile traffic analysis in user space. arXiv:1510.01419.
  • Sweeney L (2013) Discrimination in online ad delivery. Queue 11(3):10
  • Caliskan-Islam A, Bryson J, Narayanan A (2016) Semantics derived auto-matically from language corpora necessarily contain human biases. arxiv:1608.07187.



Big Data Tells Mortgage Traders an Amazing Amount About You | Bloomberg

Big Data Tells Mortgage Traders an Amazing Amount About You; Matt Scully; In Bloomberg; 2017-06-29.

  • Wall Street startup gives mortgage bond traders vivid data
  • Consumer rights watchdogs raise concerns about privacy



  • New York
  • Founders
    • Hans Thomas
    • Guhan Kandasamy
    • Ziggy Jonsson
  • Founded 2015


  • Claim: <quote>The average fund manager can gain 0.40 to 0.70 percentage point of return by using more intelligent data when trading mortgages<snip/></quote>
  • <quote>Regulators could conceivably deem TheNumber a consumer credit bureau like TransUnion or Experian Plc.</quote>
  • Propensity Scoring… ,br/><quote>TheNumber tries to determine how much pride a homeowner probably has in his or her property, based on information it gleans from third parties, such as whether the resident tends to click on online ads from home improvement and gardening stores. It’s not a credit score, but<snip/></quote>
  • Mortgate (financialization & repackaging) Regulation
    Reg AB II, SEC
    <quote>ended up requiring less information from issuers than it had originally planned, to protect borrowers’ identities.</quote>
  • (no reference given) An RFC; “The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau”; 2017-02.
    solicitation: <quote>comments about the benefits, and risks, of using alternative data.</quote>


In order of appearance

  • John Ardy, chief executive officer Resitrader (a mortgage resale market)
  • Lee Tien, a senior staff attorney, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
  • Frank Pasquale, professor, Francis King Carey School of Law, University of Maryland.
  • Jeff Taft, partner, Mayer Brown (legal advice)
  • Michael Osnato, ex-”head” of “an enforcement unit”, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
  • Michele Raneri, (a) vice president of analytics and new business development, Experian
  • Paul Mangione, now-consultant, ex-staff, Apollo Residential Mortgage. Mangione
  • Brian Tortorella, staff, Smith Graham (mortgage trading, arbitrage).
  • Adam Murphy, founder, Empirasign Strategies LLC (mortgage trading & data)


In Bloomberg

What Happens When Biases Are Inadvertently Baked Into Algorithms | The Atlantic

When Discrimination Is Baked Into Algorithms; Lauren Kirchner; In The Atlantic; 2015-09-05.
Teaser: As more companies and services use data to target individuals, those analytics could inadvertently amplify bias.

tl;dr → maybe nothing, maybe legal action; lots of activists are looking into it.

Responsive To

The Tiger Mom Tax: Asians Are Nearly Twice as Likely to Get a Higher Price from Princeton Review; Julia Angwin, Surya Mattu, Jeff Larson; In ProPublica; 2015-09-01.
tl;dr → The Princeton Review charges Asians a higher prices for SAT tutoriing, frequently enough for the reporters to measure by the methodology.



for color, background & verisimilitude

  • Sorelle Friedler
    • postgrad, computer science, Haverford College
    • fellow, Data & Society,