By Hannah Fry, Los Angeles Times (TNS) Every day millions of people share more intimate information with their accessories than they do with their spouse. Wearable technology — smartwatches, smart rings, fitness trackers and the like — monitors body-centric data such as your heart rate, steps taken and calories burned, and may record where you go along the way. Like Santa Claus, it knows when you are sleeping (and how well), it knows when you’re awake, it knows when you’ve been idle or exercising, and it keeps track of all of it. People are also sharing sensitive health information on health and wellness apps , including online mental health and counseling programs. Some women use period tracker apps to map out their monthly cycle. These devices and services have excited consumers hoping for better insight into their health and lifestyle choices. But the lack of oversight into how body-centric data are used and shared with third parties has prompted concerns from privacy experts, who warn that the data could be sold or lost through data breaches, then used to raise insurance premiums, discriminate surreptitiously against applicants for jobs or housing, and even perform surveillance. The use of wearable technology and medical apps surged in the years following the COVID-19 pandemic, but research released by Mozilla on Wednesday indicates that current laws offer little protection for consumers who are often unaware just how much of their health data are being collected and shared by companies. “I’ve been studying the intersections of emerging technologies, data-driven technologies, AI and human rights and social justice for the past 15 years, and since the pandemic I’ve noticed the industry has become hyper-focused on our bodies,” said Mozilla Foundation technology fellow Júlia Keserű, who conducted the research. “That permeates into all kinds of areas of our lives and all kinds of domains within the tech industry.” The report “From Skin to Screen: Bodily Integrity in the Digital Age” recommends that existing data protection laws be clarified to encompass all forms of bodily data. It also calls for expanding national health privacy laws to cover health-related information collected from health apps and fitness trackers and making it easier for users to opt out of body-centric data collections. Researchers have been raising alarms about health data privacy for years. Data collected by companies are often sold to data brokers or groups that buy, sell and trade data from the internet to create detailed consumer profiles. Body-centric data can include information such as the fingerprints used to unlock phones, face scans from facial recognition technology, and data from fitness and fertility trackers, mental health apps and digital medical records. One of the key reasons health information has value to companies — even when the person’s name is not associated with it — is that advertisers can use the data to send targeted ads to groups of people based on certain details they share. The information contained in these consumer profiles is becoming so detailed, however, that when paired with other data sets that include location information, it could be possible to target specific individuals, Keserű said. Location data can “expose sophisticated insights about people’s health status, through their visits to places like hospitals or abortions clinics,” Mozilla’s report said, adding that “companies like Google have been reported to keep such data even after promising to delete it.” A 2023 report by Duke University revealed that data brokers were selling sensitive data on individuals’ mental health conditions on the open market. While many brokers deleted personal identifiers, some provided names and addresses of individuals seeking mental health assistance, according to the report. In two public surveys conducted as part of the research, Keserű said, participants were outraged and felt exploited in scenarios where their health data were sold for a profit without their knowledge. “We need a new approach to our digital interactions that recognizes the fundamental rights of individuals to safeguard their bodily data, an issue that speaks directly to human autonomy and dignity,” Keserű said. “As technology continues to advance, it is critical that our laws and practices evolve to meet the unique challenges of this era.” Consumers often take part in these technologies without fully understanding the implications. Last month, Elon Musk suggested on X that users submit X-rays, PET scans, MRIs and other medical images to Grok, the platform’s artificial intelligence chatbot, to seek diagnoses. The issue alarmed privacy experts, but many X users heeded Musk’s call and submitted health information to the chatbot. While X’s privacy policy says that the company will not sell user data to third parties, it does share some information with certain business partners. Gaps in existing laws have allowed the widespread sharing of biometric and other body-related data. Health information provided to hospitals, doctor’s offices and medical insurance companies is protected from disclosure under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act , known as HIPAA, which established federal standards protecting such information from release without the patient’s consent. But health data collected by many wearable devices and health and wellness apps don’t fall under HIPAA’s umbrella, said Suzanne Bernstein, counsel at Electronic Privacy Information Center. “In the U.S. because we don’t have a comprehensive federal privacy law ... it falls to the state level,” she said. But not every state has weighed in on the issue. Washington, Nevada and Connecticut all recently passed laws to provide safeguards for consumer health data. Washington, D.C., in July introduced legislation that aimed to require tech companies to adhere to strengthened privacy provisions regarding the collection, sharing, use or sale of consumer health data. In California, the California Privacy Rights Act regulates how businesses can use certain types of sensitive information, including biometric information, and requires them to offer consumers the ability to opt out of disclosure of sensitive personal information. “This information being sold or shared with data brokers and other entities hypercharge the online profiling that we’re so used to at this point, and the more sensitive the data, the more sophisticated the profiling can be,” Bernstein said. “A lot of the sharing or selling with third parties is outside the scope of what a consumer would reasonably expect.” Health information has become a prime target for hackers seeking to extort healthcare agencies and individuals after accessing sensitive patient data. Health-related cybersecurity breaches and ransom attacks increased more than 4,000% between 2009 and 2023, targeting the booming market of body-centric data, which is expected to exceed $500 billion by 2030, according to the report. “Nonconsensual data sharing is a big issue,” Keserű said. “Even if it’s biometric data or health data, a lot of the companies are just sharing that data without you knowing, and that is causing a lot of anxiety and questions.” ©2024 Los Angeles Times. Visit at latimes.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
Mumbai : The Samajwadi Party (SP) on Saturday, December 7, decided to quit the Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) over Shiv Sena (UBT) chief Uddhav Thackeray’s close aide hailing the demolition of the Babri Masjid and a related newspaper advertisement congratulated those behind the act. The Samajwadi Party has two MLAs in the 288-member Maharashtra assembly. “An advertisement was given by Shiv Sena (UBT) in a newspaper congratulating those who demolished Babri masjid. His (Uddhav Thackeray) aide has also posted on X hailing the demolition of the mosque,” Maharashtra SP unit chief Abu Azmi said. “We are quitting the MVA. I am speaking to (Samajwadi Party president) Akhilesh Yadav,” Azmi told PTI. The SP’s move comes in response to Sena (UBT) MLC Milind Narvekar’s post on Babri Masjid demolition. Narvekar has posted a photo of the demolition of the mosque accompanied by Shiv Sena founder Bal Thackeray’s quote “I am proud of those who did this”. pic.twitter.com/3nZYC4EK0e The Shiv Sena (UBT) secretary also posted images of Uddhav Thackeray, Aaditya Thackeray and himself in his message. “If anyone in the MVA speaks such language, what is the difference between the BJP and them? Why should we stay with them?” Azmi asked. He said the mosque was demolished and no one was punished for it, adding that people had forgotten about it but wounds are being reopened. “The Congress has to decide whether it can ally with someone who speaks like this,” he told reporters. Hitting back, Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Bhaskar Jadhav said his party’s stand on Babri Masjid remains the same since 1992. Has the Samajwadi Party realised the stand of Shiv Sena (UBT) after 31 years, he asked. Jadhav accused SP of leaning towards the ruling alliance. When asked about the SP’s decision to quit the MVA, senior Congress leader Nitin Raut said “Abu Azmi has made a statement (of quitting the MVA). We will discuss with the Samajwadi Party about its decision and understand what the problem is.” “It is unlikely to hurt the MVA directly because the SP has very limited presence in the state. The decision to walk out of the MVA is perhaps being taken keeping the civic body polls in mind and positioning the party accordingly,” political analyst Abhay Deshpande said. Meanwhile, Azmi also said there was no coordination with parties like Samajwadi Party during the Maharashtra assembly polls. The SP had contested eight seats and won two and had a friendly contest on six. The Samajwadi Party was part of the larger opposition of the MVA, which primarily comprises the Shiv Sena (UBT), Congress and Sharad Pawar-led NCP (SP). The Akhilesh Yadav-led party’s move also reflects the differences within the INDIA bloc at the national level, of which the MVA is part of. On Friday, West Bengal Chief Minister and TMC supremo Mamata Banerjee expressed dissatisfaction with the functioning of the Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance signalling her intent to take charge of the bloc if given the opportunity amid the drubbing received by the Congress in assembly polls in Haryana and Maharashtra.
HP gives lacklustre profit outlook on slow PC market recovery
California Vows To Step In If Trump Kills US EV Tax CreditWarriors could land Pelicans' former No. 1 pick plus Nets star in massive trade | Sporting News
SEC THIS WEEK
Flag football uses talent camps to uncover new starsBAKU: Negotiators raced against the clock at UN climate talks Thursday to broker a potential trillion-dollar deal to help poorer nations tackle global warming after rich and developing countries roundly rejected a draft proposal. The UN climate summit is supposed to conclude on Friday but is almost certain to run into overtime as nations from the United States to China panned a text released by the Azerbaijani hosts. The main priority at COP29 in Baku is agreeing a new target to replace the $100 billion a year that rich nations provide poorer ones to reduce emissions and adapt to disaster. Developing countries plus China, an influential negotiating bloc, are pushing for $1.3 trillion by 2030 and want at least $500 billion of that from developed nations. Major contributors like the European Union have baulked at such demands, and insist private sector money must be counted toward the goal. The latest draft recognised that developing countries need at least “USD [X] trillion” per year but omitted a concrete figure. “There is a critical piece of this puzzle missing: the overall number,” said Cedric Schuster, the Samoan chairman of the Alliance of Small Island States, a coalition of nations facing an existential threat from rising seas. “The time for political games is over.” Ali Mohamed, the chair of the African Group of Negotiators, another important bloc, said the “elephant in the room” was the missing figure. “This is the reason we are here,” said Mohamed, who is also Kenya’s climate envoy. Azerbaijan said it would release a shorter, revised draft later Thursday that would contain numbers. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, who flew back to Baku after attending COP29’s opening last week, said that negotiators had not yet shifted from initial positions and urged a “final push” for a deal.
By Hannah Fry, Los Angeles Times (TNS) Every day millions of people share more intimate information with their accessories than they do with their spouse. Wearable technology — smartwatches, smart rings, fitness trackers and the like — monitors body-centric data such as your heart rate, steps taken and calories burned, and may record where you go along the way. Like Santa Claus, it knows when you are sleeping (and how well), it knows when you’re awake, it knows when you’ve been idle or exercising, and it keeps track of all of it. People are also sharing sensitive health information on health and wellness apps , including online mental health and counseling programs. Some women use period tracker apps to map out their monthly cycle. These devices and services have excited consumers hoping for better insight into their health and lifestyle choices. But the lack of oversight into how body-centric data are used and shared with third parties has prompted concerns from privacy experts, who warn that the data could be sold or lost through data breaches, then used to raise insurance premiums, discriminate surreptitiously against applicants for jobs or housing, and even perform surveillance. The use of wearable technology and medical apps surged in the years following the COVID-19 pandemic, but research released by Mozilla on Wednesday indicates that current laws offer little protection for consumers who are often unaware just how much of their health data are being collected and shared by companies. “I’ve been studying the intersections of emerging technologies, data-driven technologies, AI and human rights and social justice for the past 15 years, and since the pandemic I’ve noticed the industry has become hyper-focused on our bodies,” said Mozilla Foundation technology fellow Júlia Keserű, who conducted the research. “That permeates into all kinds of areas of our lives and all kinds of domains within the tech industry.” The report “From Skin to Screen: Bodily Integrity in the Digital Age” recommends that existing data protection laws be clarified to encompass all forms of bodily data. It also calls for expanding national health privacy laws to cover health-related information collected from health apps and fitness trackers and making it easier for users to opt out of body-centric data collections. Researchers have been raising alarms about health data privacy for years. Data collected by companies are often sold to data brokers or groups that buy, sell and trade data from the internet to create detailed consumer profiles. Body-centric data can include information such as the fingerprints used to unlock phones, face scans from facial recognition technology, and data from fitness and fertility trackers, mental health apps and digital medical records. One of the key reasons health information has value to companies — even when the person’s name is not associated with it — is that advertisers can use the data to send targeted ads to groups of people based on certain details they share. The information contained in these consumer profiles is becoming so detailed, however, that when paired with other data sets that include location information, it could be possible to target specific individuals, Keserű said. Location data can “expose sophisticated insights about people’s health status, through their visits to places like hospitals or abortions clinics,” Mozilla’s report said, adding that “companies like Google have been reported to keep such data even after promising to delete it.” A 2023 report by Duke University revealed that data brokers were selling sensitive data on individuals’ mental health conditions on the open market. While many brokers deleted personal identifiers, some provided names and addresses of individuals seeking mental health assistance, according to the report. In two public surveys conducted as part of the research, Keserű said, participants were outraged and felt exploited in scenarios where their health data were sold for a profit without their knowledge. “We need a new approach to our digital interactions that recognizes the fundamental rights of individuals to safeguard their bodily data, an issue that speaks directly to human autonomy and dignity,” Keserű said. “As technology continues to advance, it is critical that our laws and practices evolve to meet the unique challenges of this era.” Consumers often take part in these technologies without fully understanding the implications. Last month, Elon Musk suggested on X that users submit X-rays, PET scans, MRIs and other medical images to Grok, the platform’s artificial intelligence chatbot, to seek diagnoses. The issue alarmed privacy experts, but many X users heeded Musk’s call and submitted health information to the chatbot. While X’s privacy policy says that the company will not sell user data to third parties, it does share some information with certain business partners. Gaps in existing laws have allowed the widespread sharing of biometric and other body-related data. Health information provided to hospitals, doctor’s offices and medical insurance companies is protected from disclosure under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act , known as HIPAA, which established federal standards protecting such information from release without the patient’s consent. But health data collected by many wearable devices and health and wellness apps don’t fall under HIPAA’s umbrella, said Suzanne Bernstein, counsel at Electronic Privacy Information Center. “In the U.S. because we don’t have a comprehensive federal privacy law ... it falls to the state level,” she said. But not every state has weighed in on the issue. Washington, Nevada and Connecticut all recently passed laws to provide safeguards for consumer health data. Washington, D.C., in July introduced legislation that aimed to require tech companies to adhere to strengthened privacy provisions regarding the collection, sharing, use or sale of consumer health data. In California, the California Privacy Rights Act regulates how businesses can use certain types of sensitive information, including biometric information, and requires them to offer consumers the ability to opt out of disclosure of sensitive personal information. “This information being sold or shared with data brokers and other entities hypercharge the online profiling that we’re so used to at this point, and the more sensitive the data, the more sophisticated the profiling can be,” Bernstein said. “A lot of the sharing or selling with third parties is outside the scope of what a consumer would reasonably expect.” Health information has become a prime target for hackers seeking to extort healthcare agencies and individuals after accessing sensitive patient data. Health-related cybersecurity breaches and ransom attacks increased more than 4,000% between 2009 and 2023, targeting the booming market of body-centric data, which is expected to exceed $500 billion by 2030, according to the report. “Nonconsensual data sharing is a big issue,” Keserű said. “Even if it’s biometric data or health data, a lot of the companies are just sharing that data without you knowing, and that is causing a lot of anxiety and questions.” ©2024 Los Angeles Times. Visit at latimes.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.On online baby message boards and other social media forums, pregnant women say they are being asked by their providers to pay out-of-pocket fees earlier than expected. Subscribe to continue reading this article. Already subscribed? To login in, click here.
Fall Protection Market to Expand by USD 5.05 Billion (2024-2028), Driven by Growth in Onsite Training, Market Evolution Powered by AI - Technavio
FRGT stock plunges to 52-week low, hits $1.35 amid market challenges
Why was Don Brown let go from his head coaching position at UMass Amherst? Is it really just all about wins? Personally, I think it is more about the program and the student athletes than a final score or a final season record of wins and losses. Don Brown is a class act. He always has been and always will be about his guys and building lasting relationships. When Coach Brown came in, half the players were on academic probation. Now no one is on probation. What took UMass Director of Athletics Ryan Bamford so long to get into a conference? Look at the schedule he worked out each year. Why is UMass playing a mini SEC schedule? Perhaps because it brought money into the program from the much bigger schools? It appears it may have been more important to put money first. Two years in a row UMass lost their starting quarterback to a season ending injury in an SEC game. Bamford said that because of Don’s renowned coaching reputation UMass is now in a conference positioned to accomplish their competitive goals. Bamford could not get the conference deal done before Coach Brown came on board. Now that Don has been an integral part in the success of UMass over the years, why not give him a chance to be successful in the new conference? Coach Don Brown deserves much better. Mark McGlone Plymouth, New Hampshire Cross|Word Flipart Typeshift SpellTower Really Bad Chess