...from:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/17/business/17record.html?th&emc=th
Warning on Storage of Health Records
By STEVE LOHR
Published: April 17, 2008
In an article in The New England Journal of Medicine, two leading
researchers warn that the entry of big companies like Microsoft
andGoogle into the field of personal health records could drastically
alter the practice of clinical research and raise new challenges to
the privacy of patient records.
The authors, Dr. Kenneth D. Mandl and Dr. Isaac S. Kohane, are
longtime proponents of the benefits of electronic patient records to
improve care and help individuals make smarter health decisions.
But their concern, stated in the article published Wednesday and in an
interview, is that the medical profession and policy makers have not
begun to grapple with the implications of companies like Microsoft and
Google becoming the hosts for vast stores of patient information.
The arrival of these new corporate entrants, the authors write,
promises to bring “a seismic change” in the control and stewardship of
patient information.
Today, most patient records remain within the health system — in
doctors’ offices,hospitals, clinics, health maintenance organizations
and pharmacy networks. Federal regulations govern how personal
information can be shared among health institutions and insurers, and
the rules restrict how such information can be mined for medical
research. One requirement is that researchers have no access to
individual patients’ identities.
Under the current system, individuals can request their own health
records, but it is often a cumbersome process because information is
scattered across several institutions.
As part of a push toward greater individual control of health
information, Microsoft and Google have recently begun offering Web-
based personal health records. The journal article’s authors describe
a new “personalized, health information economy” in which consumers
tell physicians, hospitals and other providers what information to
send into their personal records, stored by Microsoft or Google. It is
the individual who decides with whom to share that information and
under what terms.
But Microsoft and Google, the authors note, are not bound by the
privacy restrictions of the Health Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act, or Hipaa, the main law that regulates personal
data handling and patient privacy. Hipaa, enacted in 1996, did not
anticipate Web-based health records systems like the ones Microsoft
and Google now offer.
The authors say that consumer control of personal data under the new,
unregulated Web systems could open the door to all kinds of marketing
and false advertising from parties eager for valuable patient
information.
Despite their warnings, Dr. Mandl and Dr. Kohane are enthusiastic
about the potential benefits of Web-based personal health records,
including a patient population of better-informed, more personally
responsible health consumers.
“In very short order, a few large companies could hold larger patient
databases than any clinical research center anywhere,” Dr. Mandl said
in an interview.
But the authors see a need for safeguards, suggesting a mixture of
federal regulation — perhaps extending Hipaa to online patient record
hosts — contract relationships, certification standards and consumer
education programs.
“I’m a great believer in patient autonomy in general, but there is
going to have to be some measure of limited paternalism,” Dr. Kohane
said in an interview.
Peter Neupert, the vice president in charge of Microsoft’s health
group, said that he admired the authors and that they raised some
important issues. But he resisted the suggestion of extending Hipaa to
newcomers like Microsoft and Google.
“Philosophically and politically, I am skeptical of the concept of
paternalism,” Mr. Neupert said in an e-mail response to the article,
which he was sent, and to the authors’ comments. “It never turns out
to be ‘limited.’ ”
Designing a health records system that clearly informs consumers and
requires their consent for data use is the better approach, Mr.
Neupert said.
“We have to earn the consumer’s trust for our brand,” he said. “So I
can imagine a scenario where we have a third party verify that our
system works the way we assert it does,” much as an auditor reviews a
company’s financial reporting.
Dr. Mandl and Dr. Kohane are physicians and researchers at Children’s
Hospital Boston, the primary pediatric teaching hospital of the
Harvard Medical School.
What is it?
- long answer:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutralityhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9jHOn0EW8U
- short answer: In a "neutral" Internet the infrastructure owners do
not differentiate one packet of information from another either by
content, source, or destination. Neither is there a restriction on the
type of device that can be connected to the Internet. Without this
neutrality, infrastructure owners can give higher priority to certain
packets and charge differential fees for each packet depending upon
the contents, source, or destination of that packet. Differential fees
could also be applied to the type of computer you connect in a non-
neutral Internet.
A "non-neutral" infrastructure is what is now found in the cell phone
networks. The more you pay the more you are entitled to talk on them.
There are also additional fees for the type of information and how
much of it you send on the cell network: voice, SMS messaging, data,
etc are all charged differently. There are also different fees for day
and night cell service.
A "neutral" infrastructure is your traditional telephone service. You
pay one monthly fee (the same fee, pretty much, as everyone else) and
you can talk 24x7 without it costing you more. In addition, you can
connect your computer (over the older modems) and transfer data over
that phone line and that also costs nothing more for the use of the
telephone line.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Bell Canada seeking to create "non-neutral" Internet structure in
Canada:
...from:
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/story/4161642p-4748665c.html
Bell seeking to curb heavy bandwidth use
By: Sarah Schmidt
OTTAWA -- Bell Canada says it is downgrading the Internet services of
bandwidth hogs in the public interest, and is asking the Canadian
Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission to toss out a
landmark complaint by competitors alleging the telecom giant is
regulating the web in its own interests.
[...]
The practice, known as "traffic shaping" or "traffic throttling," is
part of a new billing system by telecom giants based on usage instead
of connection speed. In addition to penalizing heavy bandwidth users
with hefty charges and slower service at peak times, Bell is lifting a
cap on over-usage charges for all its Internet customers.
Last month, Bell informed smaller Internet service providers that it
was bringing traffic-shaping to the network space it sells to them,
effectively downgrading the services these smaller companies are able
to provide to their customers.
The association, which represents over 50 smaller companies, replied
with a complaint to the CRTC, saying Bell's use of "deep packet
inspection" technology to "choke" the traffic of its customers is
illegal and tantamount to anti-competitive behaviour.
Technology expert Jesse Hirsch says Bell's argument before the CRTC is
bewildering -- and bad news for consumers. He says Bell is
acknowledging it failed to anticipate the growth of the Internet, and
is now penalizing innovative users who are turning to the web to swap
TV shows and movies.
[...]
In its brief to the CRTC, Bell says the "balance of convenience"
supports its new traffic shaping.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
...from:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/04/16/EDM11064UL.DTL
Public must fight to maintain net neutrality
Lawrence Lessig - Stanford University, Ben Scott www.freepress.net
Thursday, April 17, 2008
The Internet is an engine of economic growth and innovation because of
a simple principle: net neutrality, which assures innovators that
their next great idea will be available to consumers, regardless of
what the network owners think about it.
No previous mass media technology has been so remarkably open.
Traditional media - newspapers, radio, TV - have gatekeepers standing
between consumers and producers, with the power to control content.
The Internet eliminates the gatekeeper.
Now, however, the Internet's unprecedented openness is in jeopardy.
Comcast, AT&T and Verizon have been lobbying to kill net neutrality.
They say they won't build an information superhighway if they can't
build it as a closed system. No other industrialized country has made
that devil's bargain, and neither should we. Without net neutrality,
online innovation is vulnerable to the whims of cable and phone
companies, which control 99 percent of the household market for high-
speed Internet access. And Silicon Valley venture capitalists are
unlikely to bet the farm on a whim.
Network owners say the threat of abuse is hypothetical. But actions
speak louder than words. Last fall, Comcast was caught secretly
blocking popular technologies that can bring HDTV to your laptop -
used by everyone from the Hollywood studios to NASA. It was no
coincidence: Comcast is targeting a growing competitor to its cable TV
service.
In response, the media reform group Free Press and a coalition of
public interest organizations and legal scholars filed a complaint
with the Federal Communications Commission calling for urgent action.
This is a bellwether case - a signal of whether we're headed toward an
open or a closed Internet.
After the FCC started an investigation, Comcast admitted to blocking,
but thumbed its noses at the government and the public - going so far
as to hire seat-fillers at an FCC hearing at Harvard University to
stifle the debate.
Public, government and media scrutiny ultimately forced Comcast to
stop blocking one of the file-sharing companies. But we can't expect
everyone to negotiate a side deal for permission to innovate. This
limits the online marketplace to ideas and commerce that don't pose a
threat to network owners - a chilling prospect.
This type of behavior shows why we can't trust the future of the
Internet to these companies. Just two years ago, telecom executives
went before Congress vowing never to interfere with the open Internet.
Their broken promises are exactly why we need net neutrality laws back
on the books. Fortunately, members of Congress from both parties have
introduced legislation that would do precisely that.
But net neutrality is just the first step. If this nation is to return
to the economic growth of the 1990s, it takes a renewed commitment to
Internet deployment and technology. The past eight years have seen
America fall behind other industrial nations - a deficit that we will
pay for in jobs, wealth and social opportunity.
Better policies in other countries have created a competitive high-
speed broadband market. But these policies require political
leadership - and public pressure to ensure that politicians aren't
distracted by the telecom industry's cash and clout.
Today, the FCC is holding a hearing at Stanford University - the
birthplace of our Internet economy - to give the public a chance to
weigh in on this debate. It's not often that federal regulators leave
the Beltway to ask people what they think. It's time to stand up and
make your voice heard.
The threat posed by would-be gatekeepers is real and getting worse.
The success of future innovation depends on an open Internet for
everyone.
Lawrence Lessig is a law professor at Stanford University and founder
of the Center for Internet and Society. Ben Scott is policy director
of Free Press, the national, nonpartisan media reform organization ( www.freepress.net
). The FCC hearing will be held at Stanford University's Dinkelspiel
Auditorium today from noon to 7 p.m.
...from:
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/story/4157473p-4745347c.html
Safe financial sites? Don't bank on it
Study finds banks misleading customers
Guarantees giving users a false sense of security
By: Sarah Schmidt
Updated: April 10 at 02:00 AM CDT
OTTAWA -- Canadian banks mislead their customers about the safety of
online banking in their marketing materials and give users a false
sense of security with a refund guarantee if hackers raid their
accounts, a leading software-security expert concludes in a new study.
Paul Van Oorschot, Canada Research Chair in Network and Software
Security at Carleton University, and PhD student Mohammad Mannan, a
specialist in Internet security, tested the standard banking claim of
a "100 per cent online security guarantee" against the fine print that
makes it conditional on fulfilling complicated security requirements.
The researchers opened up bank accounts at Canada's five major banks
and one online bank, and surveyed 123 technically advanced users,
mainly computer-science students, professors and security researchers.
Most in the survey are more security-aware than average customers, and
still failed to satisfy common security requirements. Expecting
average people to meet them is "extremely naive," they write.
"We conclude that most average users are ineligible for the 100 per
cent reimbursement guarantee banks assert, and doing online banking
with 'confidence' and 'peace of mind' is no more than a marketing
slogan which misleads users."
They found that despite strong recommendations about password
uniqueness, most banks allow weak passwords, such as "123456" and
"111111."
In one case, RBC listed "iwthyh," an acronym for the Beatles' song I
want to hold your hand, as an example of a "rock-solid" password, even
though it doesn't meet RBC's password length requirement of eight
characters.
The researchers also found weaknesses in banks' Secure Sockets Layer,
a protocol for transmitting private documents known as SSL
certificates. Software designed to infiltrate or damage a computer
system without the owner's knowledge, known as malware, can easily
access all user information, including on SSL-protected sites, the
study says.
The researchers also point out that malware can replace a bookmarked
login URL with a phishing site URL that masquerades as the bank. And
increasingly, phishing sites include SSL certificates to gain the
confidenc of users.
Meanwhile, most banks' customer agreements require users to install
and maintain up-to-date copies of anti-virus, firewall and anti-
spyware programs. The survey of 123 tech-savvy users found fewer than
half reported using anti-spyware on computers used for banking, and
more than a quarter do not use anti-virus software. Ten per cent do
not use any firewall.
Further, 65 per cent of users didn't read the banking agreements when
they signed on to online banking and 85 per cent couldn't name any
conditions for being eligible for the 100 per cent reimbursement in
the case of hacking.
"Banks advertise that users can start online banking 'in minutes.'
However, to comply with the security requirements and recommendations,
we expect most users would be delayed hours or days, if indeed
technically capable of doing so at all."
Maura Drew-Lytle, spokeswoman for Canadian Bankers Association, says
the expectations of banks are fair and are no more stringent than what
people should have on their home computers to do simple things like
sending e-mails.
It's also fair to expect customers to read agreements before they
agree to the terms, she added.
The study points out agreements can be changed at any times, and
customers will be notified by notice on the bank's website.
-- Canwest News Service
It seemed like such a novel approach to handling and distributing
media (music in this case) that I thought it might be of interest to
some of you on this list.
Wayne
...from:
- MacWorld magazine
- http://www.radioheadremix.com/information/
Remixing Radiohead
By Christopher Breen mailto:cbreen@macworld.com
Radiohead, in league with the iTunes Store, yesterday began offering
fans the opportunity to remix the band's single, "Nude" (nudeness not
required) and upload the results to the band's Web site, where the
public will vote on its favorite remixes. The remix information site
goes on to say that the band will listen to the best remixes. The
Terms page provides further niggling details, the gist of which is
that you're doing this for the fun of it and nothing more.
It works this way: You purchase up to five "stems" -- the bass, drum,
guitar, string fx, and voice parts of the single -- for $0.99 cents
each. These parts are in iTunes Plus format (unprotected AAC) so you
can import them directly into Apple's GarageBand or Logic as well as a
variety of other music editing applications. (Or you can convert them
to AIFF, WAV, or MP3 for editing in applications that don't support
AAC.) If you purchase all five stems you'll receive a link to a
GarageBand project file of the tune. The track is in 6/8 meter rather
than 4/4, and no tempo or key information is offered (if you count it
in 6 rather than 2 it runs at around 64 bpm).
Nine Inch Nails' Trent Reznor did something like this three years ago
when releasing a version of the song "The Hand That Feeds" in
GarageBand format. (No longer available.) It's now Radiohead's turn.
It's an interesting idea -- a nice way for bands to bring in some
extra cash and promote their work while providing fans the opportunity
to be part of the creative process. Given that GarageBand includes
very few 6/8 loops, I'm not sure that it's the best editing
environment for your remix unless you're willing to create your own
parts (a couple of remixes I've heard cheat this by doubling up 3/4
loops), but kudos to the band and Apple for providing parts -- OK,
stems -- that can be used in other editing applications.
Whether you're an old hand or just someone who would like to try his
or her hand at remixing, $4.95 is a small enough investment in
something that should be, at the very least, a fun way to spend a
couple of hours.
Get all the latest iTunes and iPod news at
http://www.macworld.com/weblogs/ipodblog.html?lsrc=mwipod.
...from:
http://www.macworld.com/article/132716/2008/03/0328bugsnfixes.html?lsrc=mww…
Bugs & Fixes: Two Word 2008 issues
by Ted LandauMar 28, 2008 6:51 am
If Word 2008 is bugging you with slow launch times or frequent
crashes, here are two fixes that can help.
Slow launch times for Word
Does Word 2008 take unusually long to launch? If so, here’s a fix that
reportedly speeds things up. Select Word -> Preferences and click on
the General pane. From here, deselect WYSIWYG Font And Style Menus and
Show Project Gallery At Startup. Quit the program.
Next time, it should launch faster. Apparently a font preview problem
is to blame and Microsoft is expected to fix it in an upcoming Office
update.
Word crashes
How about crashes—experiencing those in Word 2008? Tidbits reports
that you may still be able to use an old fix to solve this problem. If
a corrupt “Word Settings (10)” file, located in your user folder/
Library/Preferences folder is the culprit, the solution is to trash
the file. Word will create a new clean copy the next time you launch
the program.
This is a well-documented fix dating back at least as far as Word v. X
running under Mac OS X 10.2 (see this Microsoft support file for
details).
