CDT Tech Talks

It’s a modern day reality that large social media platforms deliver political information to many citizens, making these companies’ policies for removing and blocking speech critical to politics and culture. Emergencies such as the January 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol and the genocide of the Rohingya people in Myanmar can be traced in part to misinformation and hate speech shared online via large social media platforms. The problem of how social media companies should create policies to govern these spaces makes them uniquely quasi-governmental, a role, still developing today.

Recently, legislative bodies across the United States have exploded as lawmakers in over 10 states introduced several closely related bills to tackle AI- systems and their impacts on various facets of society. From hiring practices to education, insurance, housing, lending, government services, and even criminal sentencing, the scope of these bills is vast and far-reaching and will likely have a rippling effect across the country. Here to talk about these systems and the decisions they are responsible for making. Grace Gedye, Policy Analyst for Consumer Reports, and Matt Scherer, Senior Policy Counsel for CDT.

In recent years, differential privacy has emerged as a promising solution for enhancing privacy protections in data processing systems. However, beneath its seemingly robust framework lie certain assumptions that, if left unquestioned, could inadvertently undermine its efficacy in safeguarding individual privacy. Here to discuss their recent papers on differential privacy is Rachel Cummings, Associate Professor of Industrial Engineering and Operations Research at Columbia University and CDT Non-Resident Fellow and Daniel Susser, Associate Professor for the Department of Information Science at Cornell University and CDT Non-Resident Fellow.

On February 26, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments for Moody v. NetChoice and NetChoice v. Paxton, two pivotal cases that could alter the landscape of free expression on the internet. In this episode, we sat down with CDT’s Director of the Free Expression Project, Kate Ruane, and Vice President of the Center for Civil Rights and Technology, K.J. Bagchi to discuss the two cases that are challenging the constitutionality of the controversial Texas and Florida social media laws.

In today's episode, we’ll delve into the exciting realm of Artificial Intelligence, and its transformative impact on education. The recent strides in AI have reignited curiosity about its potential to enhance learning experiences. However, it's essential to recognize that AI encompasses a diverse array of methods, capabilities, and limitations. Join us as we navigate through the nuances often overlooked by researchers, education technology firms, and other developers in the AI landscape. Here to discuss what this means and share insights from his paper, “Unpacking the "Black Box" of AI in Education”, is Nabeel Gillani, CDT Non-Resident Fellow and Assistant Professor of Design and Data Analysis at Northeastern University.

Back in 2018, CDT’s own, Mallory Knodel, teamed up with Niels ten Oever from the critical infrastructure lab at the University of Amsterdam to present a draft document at the internet standards governing body called the Internet Engineering Task Force, or IETF. This draft outlined a proposal that urged the community to officially reject the use of discriminatory and exclusive language in Internet Drafts and RFCs. As we persistently uncover and confront systemic racial inequality across society, it becomes equally vital to guarantee that the fundamental design comprising one of our most critical and democratic technologies– the internet– is devoid of any historically racist or prejudiced terms.

CDT’s Tech Talk is a podcast where we dish on tech and Internet policy, while also explaining what these policies mean to our daily lives. You can find Tech Talk on Spotify, SoundCloud, iTunes, and Google Podcasts, as well as Stitcher and TuneIn. Recently, the US Privacy and Civil Liberties Board released a comprehensive report on Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, commonly called FISA 702. FISA 702 is a warrantless surveillance authority that was first established in 2008. It empowers the government to designate foreigners abroad as surveillance targets and to compel communication service providers in the US to turn over their communications without court approval. Unless renewed by Congress, FISA 702 is set to expire at the end of the year and is facing serious scrutiny from Democrats and Republicans alike. In this episode, Sharon Bradford Franklin, Chair of the US Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, will explain why CDT and other groups across the political spectrum have been calling for serious reforms to Section 702.

Note: This podcast episode was recorded BEFORE the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decisions on the crucial online free expression cases: Gonzalez v. Google and Twitter v. Taamneh. Nevertheless, we've chosen to release this episode NOW because the conversation contains important information about the potential risks to users’ free speech that is more relevant than ever. While the legal landscape may have shifted since this recording, the principles of protecting free expression and fostering an open and inclusive digital environment are not going away. In the Gonzalez and Taamneh opinions, the Supreme Court dodged any detailed consideration of Section 230 or the role of recommendation algorithms in enabling access to online speech, but we can expect that those topics will be back before the Court before long. So, let's dive into this discussion and keep advocating for the preservation of free speech in the online world. The Center for Democracy & Technology – along with six other technologists with expertise in online recommendation systems – filed an amicus brief in the case of Gonzalez v. Google. The brief urges the U.S. Supreme Court to hold that Section 230’s liability shield applies to claims against interactive computer service providers based on their recommendation of third-party content, because those claims treat providers as publishers. Here to talk a little bit about the amicus brief is Jonathan Stray, Senior Scientist at the Berkeley Center for Human-Compatible AI and Caitlin Vogus, (former) Deputy Director of CDT's Free Expression Project (currently Deputy Director of Advocacy at Freedom of the Press Foundation). More on our host, Jamal: bit.ly/cdtjamal More on Caitlin: cdt.org/staff/caitlin-vogus/ More on Jonathan: jonathanstray.com/me (CDT relies on the generosity of donors like you. If you enjoyed this episode of Tech Talk, you can support it and our work at CDT by going to cdt.org/techtalk. Thank you for putting democracy and individual rights at the center of the digital revolution.) Attribution: sounds used from Psykophobia, Taira Komori, BenKoning, Zabuhailo, bloomypetal, guitarguy1985, bmusic92, and offthesky of freesound.org.

July 26 marks the thirty-third anniversary of the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), perhaps the most important piece of legislation in the history of the disability rights movement. Since the passage of the ADA, disabled people have achieved significant advances in equality; but, the spread of technology brings new concerns and new questions to mind. In this episode, you’ll hear from Alexandra Givens, President and CEO of the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), and Ariana Aboulafia, Policy Counsel for Disability Rights in Technology at CDT, as they discuss the ADA, its legacy, and some of the most pressing issues in technology policy for disabled people. More on our host, Jamal: bit.ly/cdtjamal More on Alex: https://cdt.org/staff/alexandra-reeve-givens/ More on Ariana: https://cdt.org/staff/ariana-aboulafia/ (CDT relies on the generosity of donors like you. If you enjoyed this episode of Tech Talk, you can support it and our work at CDT by going to cdt.org/techtalk. Thank you for putting democracy and individual rights at the center of the digital revolution.) Attribution: sounds used from Psykophobia, Taira Komori, BenKoning, Zabuhailo, bloomypetal, guitarguy1985, bmusic92, and offthesky of freesound.org.

When the Supreme Court reversed Roe v. Wade, it enabled states to further restrict and criminalize abortion. Some states can now prosecute abortion providers, insurers, and, in some cases, even patients themselves. Some states also allow civil actions. Increasingly, law enforcement and civil litigants may turn to companies to gain access to data that could help prove that a person sought, received, aided, or provided an abortion. Many types of data can reveal sensitive information about a person’s health and healthcare choices. Search queries, browsing history, the contents of communications, and a person’s location data can all reveal such private information, despite not typically being thought of as sources of “medical” or health-related data. Because of this, companies inside and outside the healthcare sector must be responsible for carefully assessing and limiting the private information they collect, store, and share. Without thoughtful action, a company’s data practices may be complicit in sending their customers to prison or exposing them to civil litigation, for personal choices that are still legal in the majority of the United States. In the post-Dobbs era, companies must play an active role in protecting their customers' and users’ private information. Here to explain what companies can do to protect user data is Andy Crawford, Senior Counsel for CDT’s Privacy & Data project. More on our host, Jamal: bit.ly/cdtjamal More on Andy: https://cdt.org/staff/andy-crawford/ (CDT relies on the generosity of donors like you. If you enjoyed this episode of Tech Talk, you can support it and our work at CDT by going to cdt.org/techtalk. Thank you for putting democracy and individual rights at the center of the digital revolution.) Attribution: sounds used from Psykophobia, Taira Komori, BenKoning, Zabuhailo, bloomypetal, guitarguy1985, bmusic92, and offthesky of freesound.org.

June 24, will mark the one-year anniversary of the momentous decision by the Supreme Court to overturn Roe vs. Wade. Since then, a lot has happened - states are further restricting abortions, and many have made it plain they would prosecute providers, insurers, and even patients in some cases. Some states also allow private civil actions – which has, for example, allowed an ex-husband to sue his wife’s friends for allegedly helping her get abortion medication. Increasingly, law enforcement and civil litigants may turn to companies to access data that could help prove a person sought, received, aided, or provided an abortion. Some states, however, like Washington, California, and New York, have enacted shield laws that seek to prevent in-state companies from complying with out-of-state warrants in connection with abortion investigations. In this episode, you will hear from Alexandra Givens, President and CEO of the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), and Jake Laperruque, Deputy Director of CDT’s Security and Surveillance Project, as they dig into all the ways in which CDT has quickly sprung into action since the fall of Roe v. Wade. More on our host, Jamal: bit.ly/cdtjamal More on Alexandra: twitter.com/AlexReeveGivens More on Jake: twitter.com/JakeLaperruque (CDT relies on the generosity of donors like you. If you enjoyed this episode of Tech Talk, you can support it and our work at CDT by going to cdt.org/techtalk. Thank you for putting democracy and individual rights at the center of the digital revolution.) Attribution: sounds used from Psykophobia, Taira Komori, BenKoning, Zabuhailo, bloomypetal, guitarguy1985, bmusic92, and offthesky of freesound.org.

The overturning of Roe v. Wade is a watershed moment for the privacy of people seeking reproductive care. A person’s browser history, search history, location and private messages can be used by law enforcement or private citizens to pursue people who are suspected of having or aiding an abortion. When people’s most private digital information can be used against them, can tech companies change their practices to better protect their users’ privacy? As some states try to outlaw websites that tell people how to access abortion care, can advocates ensure that reliable health information remains online? In this episode, you will hear from Alexandra Givens, President and CEO of the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT); Cecile Richards, former President of Planned Parenthood; and Nabiha Syed, President of The Markup, as they discuss ways advocates are working to protect users’ privacy and access to information at this critical moment for reproductive rights. More details about this 2023 SXSW featured session: https://cdt.org/event/sxsw-featured-session-data-privacy-after-roe-v-wade/ More on our host, Jamal: bit.ly/cdtjamal More on Alexandra: https://twitter.com/AlexReeveGivens More on Cecile: https://twitter.com/CecileRichards More on Nabiha: https://twitter.com/nabihasyed (CDT relies on the generosity of donors like you. If you enjoyed this episode of Tech Talk, you can support it and our work at CDT by going to cdt.org/techtalk. Thank you for putting democracy and individual rights at the center of the digital revolution.) Attribution: sounds used from Psykophobia, Taira Komori, BenKoning, Zabuhailo, bloomypetal, guitarguy1985, bmusic92, and offthesky of freesound.org.