<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: data, interpretation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thepoliticsofsystems.net/2007/10/10/data-interpretation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thepoliticsofsystems.net/2007/10/10/data-interpretation/</link>
	<description>Thoughts on Power and Software</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2010 16:48:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ryan Shaw</title>
		<link>http://thepoliticsofsystems.net/2007/10/10/data-interpretation/comment-page-1/#comment-4</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan Shaw</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2007 16:26:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thepoliticsofsystems.net/2007/10/10/data-interpretation/#comment-4</guid>
		<description>I made this distinction in a &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.law.berkeley.edu/institutes/bclt/events/unblinking/unblinking/shaw.pdf&quot; title=&quot;Recognition Markets and Visual Privacy&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;paper on visual privacy&lt;/a&gt; I wrote last year, arguing that image recognition, not image capture, was what privacy advocates should be focusing on. I also pointed out that the algorithms to which recognition is delegated could themselves be designed to to delegate the work of analysis to human laborers, and in doing so achieve much better performance, but without really empowering the &quot;humans in the loop&quot; to make ethical judgments.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I made this distinction in a <a href="http://www.law.berkeley.edu/institutes/bclt/events/unblinking/unblinking/shaw.pdf" title="Recognition Markets and Visual Privacy" rel="nofollow">paper on visual privacy</a> I wrote last year, arguing that image recognition, not image capture, was what privacy advocates should be focusing on. I also pointed out that the algorithms to which recognition is delegated could themselves be designed to to delegate the work of analysis to human laborers, and in doing so achieve much better performance, but without really empowering the &#8220;humans in the loop&#8221; to make ethical judgments.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
