Acxiom®, the customer intelligence company, introduces Acxiom Health, the latest evolution in its data-driven healthcare and pharmaceutical marketing practice.

Acxiom Health outshines competitors in head-to-head tests | MarTech Cube

As the demand for home-based patient care surges, Axxess and WorldView are helping providers manage more patients with fewer resources. This integration complements the functionality given to home healthcare and hospice agencies and reduces administrative effort in order to provide timely patient care.

Axxess and WorldView Improve Home Care Management with New Integration

"Technology is a major driver of economic growth," says Corcoran, who was named as the new executive director for ChaTech earlier this year. "We keep the community informed about the evolving technology landscape while providing valuable growth opportunities for our members."

Austin Corcoran’s vision for Chattanooga: Technology-driven growth will provide the foundation for community advancement

iQor is a managed services provider of customer engagement and technology-enabled business process outsourcing (BPO) solutions comprised of 40,000 amazing employees spanning 10 countries. We are passionate about delivering an outstanding omnichannel ...

iQor Symphony [AI] Drives Excellence in Customer Service and Compliance

This is why many brands look for expert guidance in the form of external martech services partners ... a likely reflection of budget constraints driving attempts to embed technology without outside support. But what do the brands who best deliver on ...

How to deliver on what you promise

Acxiom®, the customer intelligence company, unveils its AI investment to help the world's leading brands implement Salesforce AI technologies. Acxiom's AI expertise can help brands deploy Salesforce Einstein and Data Cloud to boost the

Acxiom's Expertise Accelerates the Value of AI for Marketers

The IT services giant says GenAI will transform ... how last month’s Ryder Cup tested out technology to improve how fans digitally consume the event, and find out how Zurich Insurance has ...

Information technology (IT) in Italy

AxoSim has acquired the microBrain drug discovery technology platform from StemoniX, a subsidiary of Vyant Bio to develop drugs for neurological disorders. Apart from the drug discovery platform, the acquisition also included a research,

AxoSim acquires microBrain technology to build neurological drug pipeline

SANTA CLARA, CA / ACCESSWIRE / October 24, 2023 / BIOMEDevice Silicon Valley, the leading West Coast medtech exhibition for engineers and cutting-edge medical device companies, announces Axiom Space,

Axiom Space and Y-Combinator Female Powerhouse Speakers at BIOMEDevice Silicon Valley

The Company noted that over the previous 60 days, RAD’s software team successfully executed 120 refinements and/or additions to the software systems utilized by RAD’s clientele. These modifications, though varied in scale, contribute collectively to the improved functionality and user experience of all RAD devices.

AITX’s Subsidiary RAD Accelerates Software Updates as Device Deployments Rapidly Increase

Acxiom

acxiom

Interface and Data Biopolitics in the Age of Hyperconnectivity: Conclusions and References

Author:
(1) Salvatore Iaconesi, ISIA Design Florence and *Corresponding author (salvatore.iaconesi@artisopensource.net). Table of Links Abstract and 1. A Hymn 2. Asymmetry 3. Bubbles, Guinea Pigs 4. Interface and Data Biopolitics 5. Conclusions: Implications for Design and References Abstract This article describes their biopolitical implications for design from psychological, cultural, legal, functional and aesthetic/perceptive ways, in the framework of Hyperconnectivity: the condition according to which person-to-person, person-to-machine and machine-to-machine communication progressively shift to networked and digital means. A definition is given for the terms of "interface biopolitics" and "data biopolitics", as well as evidence supporting these definitions and a description of the technological, theoretical and practice-based innovations bringing them into meaningful existence. Interfaces, algorithms, artificial intelligences of various types, the tendency in quantified self and the concept of "information bubbles" will be examined in terms of interface and data biopolitics, from the point of view of design, and for their implications in terms of freedoms, transparency, justice and accessibility to human rights. A working hypothesis is described for technologically relevant design practices and education processes, in order to confront with these issues in critical, ethical and inclusive ways. Keywords: Hyperconnectivity, Algorithms, Biopolitics, Ethics, Data 1. A Hymn In her “Hymn of Acxiom” folk singer Vienna Teng (2013) starts off with lyrics “Somebody hears you, you know that…”, in what seems to be a church choir. After listening for a bit, the real topic the artist is discussing about becomes clear: Acxiom is not a benevolent divinity somewhere in the cosmosphere caringly waiting to hear the troubles of his beloved human beings, but, rather, a highpowered data broker which has been described as “the Private NSA” (Tom’s Guide, 2013), as the silent, largest consumer data processor in the world (Fortune Magazine, 2004) and as “Big Brother in Arkansas” (NY Times, 2012). The topic of the song is data-surveillance. The idea for the song came while the author was pursuing an MBA at the University of Michigan: a colleague working with Acxiom data was shocked about the amount of information the company had available about herself and her husband. An interesting thing about the song is that the creepy, Orwellian, lyrics also empathize with databases as well as excoriating them. This is, in fact, an interesting point of view. As, on the one hand, we – directly and indirectly – consent tour data to be collected through our behaviors and basically accepting our lifestyle, on the other hand we feel deeply uneasy about that and from its implications. As we benefit from enterprises being able to provide us with products and services which are “more relevant” for us (more on this later in the article), we are simultaneously wary of the fact that a single subject knows so much about us and uses it to “sell us” to the highest bidder, and what this possibility implies for our liberties, freedoms and rights. Even more, it is progressively harder, if not impossible, for us, to know and understand what parts of our online and offline environment are determined from these data collection processes, or about which subjects have this data about us available, or how they are using it and for what purposes (Lafrance, 2014). In fact, the entries we see when we browse search engines, social media websites, and other online services are completely determined by these processes: the operators of these services feed the data they acquired about us to their classification algorithms which, in return, use it to determine what we may be more and less interested about, or where their optimal business opportunities lay in relation to our profile. This is not only true for our online lives: the offline world is quickly catching up. Physical mailings; fidelity cards; algorithmic research and control applied to stores, services and spaces of the city; imaging through security cameras; object and facial recognition on devices and architectures; the Internet of Things (IoT) and its sensors, possibilities for user identification and biometrics. These all combine with a plethora of other options which are turning us into data subjects, which can be recognized and tracked on databases as in the physical world. This paper is available on arxiv under CC BY 4.0 DEED license. Author: (1) Salvatore Iaconesi, ISIA Design Florence and *Corresponding author (salvatore.iaconesi@artisopensource.net). Author: Author: (1) Salvatore Iaconesi, ISIA Design Florence and *Corresponding author (salvatore.iaconesi@artisopensource.net). Table of Links Abstract and 1. A Hymn Abstract and 1. A Hymn 2. Asymmetry 2. Asymmetry 3. Bubbles, Guinea Pigs 3. Bubbles, Guinea Pigs 4. Interface and Data Biopolitics 4. Interface and Data Biopolitics 5. Conclusions: Implications for Design and References 5. Conclusions: Implications for Design and References Abstract This article describes their biopolitical implications for design from psychological, cultural, legal, functional and aesthetic/perceptive ways, in the framework of Hyperconnectivity: the condition according to which person-to-person, person-to-machine and machine-to-machine communication progressively shift to networked and digital means. A definition is given for the terms of "interface biopolitics" and "data biopolitics", as well as evidence supporting these definitions and a description of the technological, theoretical and practice-based innovations bringing them into meaningful existence. Interfaces, algorithms, artificial intelligences of various types, the tendency in quantified self and the concept of "information bubbles" will be examined in terms of interface and data biopolitics, from the point of view of design, and for their implications in terms of freedoms, transparency, justice and accessibility to human rights. A working hypothesis is described for technologically relevant design practices and education processes, in order to confront with these issues in critical, ethical and inclusive ways. Keywords : Hyperconnectivity, Algorithms, Biopolitics, Ethics, Data Keywords 1. A Hymn In her “Hymn of Acxiom” folk singer Vienna Teng (2013) starts off with lyrics “Somebody hears you, you know that…”, in what seems to be a church choir. After listening for a bit, the real topic the artist is discussing about becomes clear: Acxiom is not a benevolent divinity somewhere in the cosmosphere caringly waiting to hear the troubles of his beloved human beings, but, rather, a highpowered data broker which has been described as “the Private NSA” (Tom’s Guide, 2013), as the silent, largest consumer data processor in the world (Fortune Magazine, 2004) and as “Big Brother in Arkansas” (NY Times, 2012). The topic of the song is data-surveillance. The idea for the song came while the author was pursuing an MBA at the University of Michigan: a colleague working with Acxiom data was shocked about the amount of information the company had available about herself and her husband. An interesting thing about the song is that the creepy, Orwellian, lyrics also empathize with databases as well as excoriating them. This is, in fact, an interesting point of view. As, on the one hand, we – directly and indirectly – consent tour data to be collected through our behaviors and basically accepting our lifestyle, on the other hand we feel deeply uneasy about that and from its implications. As we benefit from enterprises being able to provide us with products and services which are “more relevant” for us (more on this later in the article), we are simultaneously wary of the fact that a single subject knows so much about us and uses it to “sell us” to the highest bidder, and what this possibility implies for our liberties, freedoms and rights. Even more, it is progressively harder, if not impossible, for us, to know and understand what parts of our online and offline environment are determined from these data collection processes, or about which subjects have this data about us available, or how they are using it and for what purposes (Lafrance, 2014). In fact, the entries we see when we browse search engines, social media websites, and other online services are completely determined by these processes: the operators of these services feed the data they acquired about us to their classification algorithms which, in return, use it to determine what we may be more and less interested about, or where their optimal business opportunities lay in relation to our profile. This is not only true for our online lives: the offline world is quickly catching up. Physical mailings; fidelity cards; algorithmic research and control applied to stores, services and spaces of the city; imaging through security cameras; object and facial recognition on devices and architectures; the Internet of Things (IoT) and its sensors, possibilities for user identification and biometrics. These all combine with a plethora of other options which are turning us into data subjects, which can be recognized and tracked on databases as in the physical world. This paper is available on arxiv under CC BY 4.0 DEED license. This paper is available on arxiv under CC BY 4.0 DEED license. available on arxiv

Interface and Data Biopolitics in the Age of Hyperconnectivity: Abstract and A Hymn

Political Campaigns Use Your Phone’s Location to Target You: A Deep Dive

Image by: Sébastien Thibault Data brokers’ millions of dollars in lobbying spending in 2020 rivaled that of some Big Tech firms By Alfred Ng and Maddy Varner The data brokers who’ve made fortunes from collecting and sharing millions of people’s personal information tend to fly under the radar. Names like LiveRamp or RELX might not be familiar to most Americans, but they’re making themselves known on Capitol Hill. Collectively, data broker spending on lobbying in 2020 rivaled the spending of individual Big Tech firms like Facebook and Google. The Markup searched lobbying disclosures in the U.S. Senate’s database and the watchdog Center for Responsive Politics’ tool for the names of companies that registered as data brokers in or . Those states are the only two that require companies to annually disclose that they collect, sell, or share people’s personal information without having a direct relationship to them. Lobbying Disclosure Act OpenSecrets Vermont California All in all, we found 25 companies whose combined spending on federal lobbying totaled $29 million in 2020. Many of the top spenders were not pure data brokers but companies that nonetheless have massive data operations. Oracle, which has spent the past decade acquiring companies that collect data, spent the most by far, with disclosure documents showing $9,570,000 spent on federal lobbying. For comparison, of the Big Tech firms with heavy lobbying presences, Facebook spent $19,680,000, Amazon $18,725,000, and Google $8,850,000 in the same period, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy group, found that Big Tech spent . $108 million collectively on lobbying in 2020 Oracle has its own data collection arm but has also built its portfolio by buying up companies like , Compendium, and Crosswise. The companies, which were acquired in 2012, 2013, and 2016, respectively, take data from a variety of sources. DataRaker gets data from millions of smart meters and sensors for utilities companies, while Compendium delivers targeted ads. Crosswise allows Oracle to track people across devices, claiming to process data from billions of devices every month. DataRaker Oracle also acquired , in 2014, which connected offline purchases to online profiles. Additionally, Oracle combines datasets from more than 75 other data brokers, which it calls “the world’s largest collection of third-party data.” Datalogix Our report comes as the data broker industry is not only growing but also facing scrutiny for the first time. California recently passed a statewide privacy law that establishes an agency focused on regulating data privacy issues. Virginia and Maine have also passed regulations to protect people’s online information. California’s and Virginia’s privacy laws hit at the core of what data brokers do by requiring companies to delete data collected about people upon request and allowing people to prevent their personal information from being used for targeted advertising. Maine’s privacy law prevents internet service providers from sharing personal information with data brokers until people give “express, affirmative consent.” And the past year also saw concerns raised about how well these brokers protect their massive troves of data—Oracle, for instance, after security researchers found were left exposed on a server. suffered a data breach billions of records from its BlueKai data collection The Markup contacted all 25 companies for comment on their lobbying activities. Several companies, like Inmar Intelligence and LiveRamp denied being data brokers, though they had self-identified as such to California and/or Vermont regulators. “Inmar Intelligence does not generally consider itself a data broker though one of our entities, Inmar-OIQ, LLC, is registered as such in a couple of states,” Holly Pavlika, a corporate marketing senior vice president for Inmar Intelligence, said. The industry itself is hard to define—many companies, including tech giants, make money off of personal data, though the technical details of how they use that data vary. So The Markup relied on companies that self-reported to and as members of the industry. The list, 480 companies long, shows just how pervasive it has become for companies to traffic in personal information. Vermont California The list includes businesses that are primarily data brokers, like CoreLogic, which claims to have collected data on 99 percent of property and homeowners in the U.S. and spent $215,000 on lobbying in 2020; and Acxiom, which spent $360,000 on lobbying in 2020 for issues related to data security and privacy. Acxiom’s InfoBase boasts of datasets on more than 250 million people and collects information including location data, purchases, interests, life events, and behaviors, according to its marketing material. Our list also includes credit monitoring services like TransUnion, Equifax, and Experian, which each spent about $1.4 million lobbying in 2020 on issues related to credit score reform, like the of 2020, the Credit Access and Inclusion Act of 2019, and the of 2019. TransUnion also owns subsidiaries like Callcredit, Iovation, and Signal, which has been used for collecting and profiling users for gambling apps, . Protecting Your Credit Score Act Clarity in Credit Score Formation Act according to The New York Times Notably, our tally also does not include lobbying by trade associations that data brokers are a part of, such as the Interactive Advertising Bureau and the Digital Advertising Alliance. Of the data brokers who spent the most on lobbying, Oracle far outspent its peers Oracle, the biggest spender, used lobbyists to advocate on issues like annual defense and intelligence budgets and “competition and antitrust in the mobile telecommunications and digital advertising industries,” according to . public records The company didn’t respond to requests for comment. The second largest spender was Accenture—a technology and consulting company that boasts a marketing and analytics branch called . According to its , the company can combine datasets from sources including people’s purchase history and location to help its clients build customer profiles for advertising. Accenture Interactive marketing materials In 2020, the company spent $3,250,000 lobbying on issues like artificial intelligence, the , and COVID-19 contact tracing, according to public records. Digital Dollar When The Markup reached out to Accenture, the company pointed us to two statements CEO Julie Sweet made on data privacy legislation in 2018. The statements called for a federal privacy law that would preempt state laws. PricewaterhouseCoopers, a major accounting firm, spent $2,820,000 lobbying the federal government in 2020, third most among registered data brokers. The total amount 25 data brokers spent on federal lobbying in 2020. $29M PWC collects data from advertising networks and data analytics partners including personal information like names and addresses, which it uses to help clients personalize advertising campaigns, . according to the company’s privacy statement Spending went to monitoring privacy legislation and accounting and auditing issues. PWC didn’t respond to a request for comment. Other big spenders included Deloitte, which was awarded a $106 million contract to build a development environment for the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center this summer. The company spent $2,400,000 on federal lobbying in 2020, including on bills like the and the . Department of Defense Artificial Intelligence in Government Act Artificial Intelligence Initiative Act Deloitte is an auditing and advisory company but provides services like , which uses information including people’s hobbies, interests, and financial data to generate a health risk prediction score and help life insurance companies figure out how likely people are to buy their products. PredictRisk provided by data brokers And RELX, which spent $2,375,000 on federal lobbying in 2020, including on data privacy bills like the , the , and the ; and on bills related to data privacy and COVID-19, including the and the . Data Accountability and Trust Act Information Transparency & Personal Data Control Act Data Broker Accountability and Transparency Act Covid-19 Consumer Data Protection Act Exposure Notification Privacy Act RELX is a major data broker that owns companies like LexisNexis and ThreatMetrix, which has customers in law enforcement, insurance, and financial services. ThreatMetrix alone boasts tracking on 4.5 billion devices, from RELX in 2018. according to a statement Deloitte and RELX didn’t respond to a request for comment. In addition, many other data brokers spent lower amounts on lobbying efforts An Industry Increasingly Under Fire Some of the bills targeted by lobbyists would have regulated the data broker industry, though disclosures do not specify whether they lobbied for or against the bills. The Data Accountability and Trust Act looked to establish security standards and require postbreach audits for data brokers and also prohibit collecting information under false pretenses. The Information Transparency & Personal Data Control Act would have required data brokers to get consent to collect sensitive data and go through an annual privacy audit. The Data Broker Accountability and Transparency Act of 2020 wanted to mandate opt-outs from data brokers and for the FTC to create a national list of data brokers. While lobbying records don’t always list specific bills, filings show that RELX paid lobbyists to address all three bills. Deloitte records show that some of its lobbying efforts went toward addressing the Data Accountability and Trust Act. Both COVID-19 data privacy bills looked to provide stronger controls over data related to contact tracing. None of the bills named in this story passed Congress, except for the National Defense Authorization Act, which was enacted. Some of the companies that showed up in lobbying records faced other sorts of pressure during 2020. For instance, Apple and Google from their app stores last December following a series of reports from on how the location data broker was providing information to contractors who passed that information to the U.S. military. X-Mode spent $30,000 on lobbying in the last quarter of 2020, during the height of the public pressure. banned X-Mode’s trackers Motherboard Both and , another location data broker, which spent $160,000 on lobbying, are facing scrutiny from Congress over their location data sales. Sen. Ron Wyden, a Democrat from Oregon who signed on to , called the data broker industry “out of control,” in a statement to The Markup. X-Mode Venntel a letter calling for an investigation on Venntel “Americans are learning more every day about the secretive and shady data broker industry and they’re demanding new laws to protect our privacy,” Wyden said in the email to The Markup. “It’s no surprise data brokers are trying every avenue they can think of to ward off the common sense protections Americans desperately need.” -Sen. Ron Wyden X-Mode and Venntel didn’t respond to a request for comment. Some companies said they were lobbying to have a voice on legislation, including potential federal laws on privacy. “With increased momentum, attention and legislative activity in multiple states, we support a federal data privacy law that can rebalance the system and set standards that rebuild trust with the people providing the data—consumers,” Christine Travis, a senior communications director for LiveRamp, said in an email. “A federal approach to data privacy and security is better than a patchwork of state laws for all stakeholders.” When somebody shows up on the lobbying records, it just tells me they see a real threat to their business model. -Hayley Tsukayama, Electronic Frontier Foundation LiveRamp was the top lobbying spender among companies whose for advertising purposes. The company, which connects people’s activity across the web and from offline purchases for advertisers, spent $630,000 on lobbying in 2020 on issues such as the and Privacy Shield. primary focus is collecting data Augmenting Compatibility and Competition by Enabling Service Switching (ACCESS) Act Privacy Shield was a framework for transferring data between the European Union and the U.S. but was declared . invalid last July for failing to meet the EU’s privacy regulations Travis denied that LiveRamp is a data broker despite being listed on , insisting instead that the company is a “data connectivity platform.” California’s data broker registry Experts said scrutiny and oversight is fairly new to the data broker industry. “When somebody shows up on the lobbying records, or in meetings or in trade associations, it just tells me they’ve probably recently woken up to this issue and they see a real threat to their business model by privacy regulations,” Hayley Tsukayama, a legislative activist for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said. Others, however, said Congress is not doing nearly enough to regulate the unwieldy industry. “What is widely understood now in Congress and among independent agencies like the FTC are the ways in which large tech companies like Facebook and Google are extracting data from consumers and using that to monopolize markets like the advertising industry,” Jane Chung, a Big Tech accountability advocate at the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, said. “What a lot of people don’t understand is how data brokers fit into that ecosystem.” Originally published as " “ with the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) license The Little-Known Data Broker Industry Is Spending Big Bucks LobbyingCongress

Who are the Data Brokers Spending Big Bucks to Lobby Congress?

In May 2018, the most far-reaching legislation for the protection of personal data ever conceived took effect: The European Union's (GDPR). General Data Protection Regulation The law was created by the European Parliament and Council to unify privacy regulation within the European Union and provides individuals extensive control over their personal data. To accomplish this goal GDPR can impose severe penalties on violators. Companies not complying with the provisions of the law, face fines of up to 4% on worldwide turnover or EURO 20 million, whichever is higher. The following month Governor Brown signed , now known as the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, which grants Californians similar rights with respect to the collection of their personal information. Assembly Bill 375 A lot has been written about how GDPR might affect not only European businesses but also the operations of non-EU companies and international corporations. For the following analysis, we will assume that – outside of notable exceptions - the law will be enforced within and outside the EU and will govern how US-based companies treat personal data. Personal Data Personal data is generally understood as any information relating to an identifiable individual; an identifiable person is one who can be identified, directly or indirectly, by reference to an identification number (i.e. social security number) or one or more factors specific to a person’s physical, physiological, mental, economic, cultural or social information. Usage of personal data by third parties pretending to be the rightful data owner is considered “identity theft”. As such GDPR protects the individual’s identity. GDPR prohibits the transfer of data outside of the European Economic Area to a third-party country unless the recipient country provides an “adequate level of data protection” Though the United States has worked extensively with the European Commission on data security standards, it is currently not considered to be an Adequate Jurisdiction by the Commission. Fiat Identity Like fiat currencies, which enables governments to declare which money is legal tender, “fiat identities” are tied to government decrees pronouncing which documents it considers to be legitimate for the verification of a person’s identity. In the United States, the government began issuing Social Security Numbers in 1936. To-date nearly 454 million different numbers have been assigned, according to the . Social Security Administration While the original objective was to track U.S. workers’ earnings to determine their Social Security benefits, government agencies and companies soon found many new use cases for the number, gradually morphing it to a “profiling system”. When someone is asked for his/her "last four digits of your social" the answer is literally the government assigned serial number. One of the more enlightened identity solutions thus far has successfully been deployed by the tiny European nation of Estonia. E-identity cards have already been issued to 98% of the countries citizens. The card is a cryptographically-secured digital identity powered by a blockchain-like infrastructure on the back-end and enables Estonians to access public services, financial services, medical and emergency services as well as to pay taxes online, e-vote, provide digital signatures, and travel within the EU without a passport. Profiling "Product YOU" The Internet, and to a greater extend the emergence of the world wide web, have made personal data accessible to an ever-increasing number of data brokers, including those offering . social engineering as a service (SEaaS) Simultaneously, applications build on the web led to an explosion of the type of personal data that can be observed and recorded - i.e. click-throughs on web pages - which led to the creation of online identities (sometimes referred to as 'digital identities'). While most European nations have identified and battled the dangers of leaving online identity management to for-profit corporations for some years, it took a nationwide scandal - now simply referred to as - to wake up U.S. citizens to the fact that their identities had been turned into products which are sold to advertisers and bad actors alike. Cambridge Analytica More troublesome, shockingly data brokers do not limit themselves to rent personal data to advertisers but trade this information among each other. Companies such as (LiveRamp Holdings, Inc.) openly promote their prowess to sell personal data with statements such as Acxiom “ LiveRamp IdentityLink is an identity resolution service that ties data back to real people and makes it possible to on-board that data for people-based marketing initiatives across digital channels.” The primary (commercial) nature of Google, Facebook, LinkedIn and many of the most popular web and mobile applications is that of an advertising marketplace. The "free service" of these companies are paid for in cash at a rate of more than $10 million each hour by marketing companies and loss of privacy by the user. Blockchain to the Rescue? Blockchains combine a number of features that make it desirable for the protection of sensitive data: decentralization, encryption, transparency and access controls. Many – and sometimes all – of these features are missing from most systems currently controlling personal data. GDPR requires companies to secure personal data via multiple levels of protection to ensure that data is neither lost, destroyed, or disclosed to unauthorized individuals. This principle is shared with a characteristic of blockchain technology referred to as pseudonymization. Consequently, a growing number of blockchain projects are attempting to tackle the topic of personal data and identity management, including Civic, SelfKey, Evernym, uPort and Shocard. The importance of blockchain-powered identity solutions has also caught the attention of traditional technology companies such as IBM which advertises its commitment “to creating a secure, blockchain-enabled decentralized identity for everyone on the internet”. Most often these are focused on improving processes around legal and regulatory burdens involving financial institutions – such as ‘know your customer’ (KYC) laws – using government-issued credentials. applications Others subscribe to the idea that consumers might be interested in being their own data broker and thus profit from selling their personal information. As shown above, current government systems and the treatment of personal data as commodities by commercial entities are at the center of the current problems surrounding identity management. As Franklin Foer in his book “World without mind” explains, Facebook and other social media applications owe their astonishing growth rates to the fact that they removed friction from the process of personal data exchange and defaulting to ‘opt out’ paradigms which required users to act to protect their data, while often signaling greater utility by unrestricted sharing of information. In the light of GDPR, all future applications will have to adhere to privacy by design, requiring users to opt into the use of data while adding usage transparency and anonymization to their processes. Preliminary Conclusions There can be little doubt that blockchains can be part of the solution to the current crisis in identity management. However, outside of the decentralization of data handling, any approach that does not address problems created by legacy systems is not likely to find widespread adaptation. After all, there is little value in protecting a 'digital identity' (profile) which has already been copied by data brokers and unauthorized users. Scalability is also a challenge for those companies that seek to enable users to profit from selling their personal information as data sets with low volumes have little or no commercial value for data brokers. A truly innovative solution is more likely to emerge from those groups addressing the needs of the almost one billion people on the planet without government-issued IDs. As seen with the adaption of mobile phones and later smartphones, users in the developing nations might leapfrog solutions encumbered by legacy technology debt. Finally, just like email and voice required dedicated protocols to provide end-to-end control mechanism (SMTP; VoIP), identity will require its own protocol to be owner controlled at last. Further reading: Blockchain & Sentiment

Blockchaining the Internet of Identity 

A Marriage And A Funeral My friend Jane heard of mylife.com when her friend’s father died. They did a Google search of his name and in the results was mylife.com; his picture and a list of his prior home addresses. With one visit to the site, they had access to his date of birth, location of death, siblings, children, spouse, net worth, and finally, a big red reputation score, a 3.6 out of 5. Jane was creeped out. Her friend was offended. Really, a reputation score? Jane looked up herself. She looked up her parents. She scrolled through similar details pausing at ‘marital status: divorced’ listed under her father’s name. Her parents had been together since she was born and still lived in her childhood home. She wasn’t surprised that a shady site like mylife.com would have some errors. Then she showed her mom. And when Jane pointed out the divorce error, her mom hesitated then said they needed to talk. Jane’s parents were indeed divorced. They’d been since she was in middle school. They didn’t tell the family and continued to live together to avoid disruptions. But after waiting years, the timing never felt right to share the news. From mylife.com, Jane learned that her parents had been divorced for 5 years. Jane told me this story when I let her know about , the project I started to track down and stop sites collecting and selling personal information without consent. After years of working in political analytics, I saw how the sausage was made and wanted to restore the privacy we'd lost. She immediately understood why the project was important and why more people needed to find out what was going on with their personal information. Kanary The Data Tracking Ecosystem MyLife is a class of website called a The definition of a broker is, “a person who buys and sells goods or assets for others.” Real estate brokers sell real estate that’s not theirs. Stock brokers sell stock that’s not theirs. data broker. A data broker sells data that’s not theirs. In the data broker taxonomy, MyLife is in a subclass called . They don’t just sell information, they post it publicly. Anyone can look up someone by name, email, phone number, or address and purchase their full profile including reputation score. people search sites There are thousands of data brokers like mylife.com. Their only purpose is to compile social and behavioral data about as many people as possible. They’re creating hireability scores, reputation scores, social scores, and persuadability scores. They call these scores and tell brands that they’ll save a lot of money if they use them to target the right people with ads. “Find out who doesn’t like you, then don’t waste money sending advertisements to them,” they claim. For companies, it makes sense. Why would an engagement ring company send an ad to someone who isn’t interested in buying an engagement ring? data enhancements On an individual level, it feels pretty harmless. You might not care if an engagement ring company knows you’re not interested in buying an engagement ring. You might be grateful to not get ads about stuff you don’t want. But you care about who knows this information about you and . should how they know it How They Profit Off You If you had to make your best prediction about whether someone was going to get engaged in the next 6-12 months, what would you want to know? You might want to know how old they are, their gender, their sexual orientation, their relationship status, the length of their current relationship, how many relationships they’ve had in the past, if their parents or siblings are married, if they’ve ever been divorced, how much of The Bachelor they’ve watched... feeling invasive yet? to make the perfect prediction. They find out where you live, the marriage rate in your zip code, the marriage rate across your social network, if you’ve recently been laid off, your criminal record, your alcohol and drug consumption, how much money you make, how much debt you have, if you have children, if you still have accounts on dating apps, your political affiliation, your credit score, and maybe even your workout schedule. Data brokers keep digging Data brokers acquire this information through data partnerships, contracts, and website scraping. They pay state governments for voter records. They pay the DMV for your age and driving records. They purchase census data to understand marriage rates and income levels in your zip code. They find your family information through online phone books and ancestry lists. They pay court houses to pull marriage and divorce records. They pay streaming services to find out what shows you watch. In a couple lines of python, they scrape the relationship statuses of you and your friends from Facebook or Instagram. They purchase your stock buying history from Robinhood and your debt levels from the credit bureaus. They buy leaked databases of employment records or simply scrape your LinkedIn profile. They partner with mobile apps to scan your phone for active Tinder or Grindr or Feeld accounts. They partner with free VPNs to collect every website you visit. The most advanced brokers will mine photos of your face to determine your agreeability, likability, or attractiveness. With this raw information, why would they stop at engagement predictions? They can predict other valuable outcomes like who you’ll vote for, how you’ll respond to a payday loan offer, or what price you’ll be willing to pay for your next rideshare. All these predictions become profiles and scores sold to advertisers, employers, or random people looking you up on the internet. It’s been estimated data brokers made $200 billion in revenue last year. The Ones You Should Know About And How To Stop Them I started working on tracking down these sites and removing information from them about a year ago. Since starting I've built a small team and a software platform that tracks over 2,500 websites that share and sell personal information without consent. You manually go through and remove yourself from each one. But 2,500 sites x 5 minutes per site to find and remove your info = 208 hours. Doing this at least 2 times a year as data pops up and recirculates would take 408 hours or 51 eight-hour work days. This is why we’re automating the removal processes so all it takes to remove yourself is . could Keeping up is an inhumane task. one click But if this is your first introduction to who these companies are, what they know about you, and why this puts your privacy, security, and safety at risk, you might want to see it for yourself. I recommend starting with the following 8 sites that have fairly straight forward opt outs and track a lot of information about you. It takes about 30 minutes to submit the removal requests and opt outs across these sites, and 2-3 weeks to receive confirmation they’ve removed you from their systems. #1 Acxiom They boast having 11,000 attributes about over 2.5 billion people. This means you’re likely in their database and they’ve collected or predicted 11,000 things about you. They also make ~$900,000,000 each year selling personal information and predictions. Why: Go to , fill out the information you’d like to remove from their databases, enter an email you can use to confirm the request (ideally use an alias email, not your primary email), complete a captcha, submit the request, then click the confirmation link they send to your email, and complete another captcha. They claim they will not use any new information used to submit the opt out in their terms and conditions. How To Opt Out: https://isapps.acxiom.com/optout/optout.aspx #2 LexisNexis On their site they highlight offering scores that show the best way to collect debt from people. They also claim their socioeconomic health attributes help insurance companies forecast potential risks (aka high costs associated with certain patients). Why: Note: this one requires a California address* and proof of ID like drivers license # or SSN. Go to , fill out the form, (share your driver’s license, not SSN, if possible), select both the ‘do not sell’ and ‘delete my information’ options. Complete the captcha and submit the request. In about 2 weeks they will send a letter to the address you entered confirming they’ve removed you from their database. If they can’t confirm your identity from the info you submit, you won’t receive anything. How To Opt Out: https://consumer.risk.lexisnexis.com/request#california If you don’t have a California address, you can still bug them to remove your information by emailing a removal request to or calling them at 1-888-497-0011, but no guarantee they'll respond. consumer.documents@LexisNexis.com *This is why we need comprehensive Federal Data Privacy Regulation in the United States. #3 BeenVerified They aggregate information across social media sites and make it publicly searchable by name, address, phone number, and email. One of their testimonials is from someone who claims BeenVerified helped them snoop on their significant other to find out they were a liar. Great relationship goals. Why: Go to , fill out your name and state, click submit. Go through the results to find the records that look like you or family. Click one, fill out the captcha, submit a unique email or email alias, go to your email and click the confirmation link. They’ll require a unique email for each request you submit. They’ll email you again once the request has been received and once the information has been taken off their site. How To Opt Out: https://www.beenverified.com/app/optout/search #4 MyLife Their information is publicly searchable by name, email, phone number, or address. They sell premium subscriptions to access additional information like criminal records and reputation scores. for misleading practices and false claims. Why: They’ve been sued by the FTC Go to , search for your information. Click the results that match and you want removed. Email the links to your information to with a subject and message saying “delete my information and remove me from your site immediately”. They’ll respond within 2-3 weeks and confirm the removal. How To Opt Out: www.mylife.com privacy@mylife.com #5 Spokeo They’ve also been . They claim to have 6,000,000,000 consumer records publicly searchable so your information is likely on their site. They have the ‘Forbes’ logo listed but immediately have a disclaimer saying that Forbes hasn’t endorsed or sponsored them for anything. Why: sued by the FTC Go to , search for your information, copy each link to your results individually and paste them on this page . Add an alias email to the form, solve the captcha, and press submit. Go to your email and click the confirmation link they send you. They’ll email you in 2 weeks confirming the removal. How To Opt Out: www.spokeo.com https://www.spokeo.com/optout Note: They don’t remove address information, but they will remove your name from an address listing. #6 Radaris They are one of the source systems for many little data brokers and people search sites. Removing your information from Radaris is like pulling a weed out by the roots. Why: Go to , search for your information, copy each link to your results individually and paste them on this page ; make up a username, don’t use your real name. Add an alias email to the form, solve the captcha, and press submit. Go to your email and click the confirmation link they send you. They’ll email you in 2 weeks confirming the removal or telling you they can’t find your information. Another alternative is to email them directly at with the links and personal information you want removed. Again, use an alias where possible. How To Opt Out: https://radaris.com/ https://radaris.com/control/privacy removals@radaris.com #7 Intelius They are owned by a personal data broker monolith called People Connect. They’ve been recently hit with a class action lawsuit for charging people without letting them know. Unfortunately, People Connect is unresponsive to removal requests, so removing yourself from Intelius is the next best thing. (Feel free to try bugging privacy@peopleconnect.us, but it's unlikely they'll respond) Why: Go to , search your name and state. Enter an alias email. Review the results and click to remove a result that matches your information. Complete the captcha and click on the confirmation link they send to the email you first entered. You can submit multiple removal requests with multiple unique alias emails. They will send you an email once your information has been opted out successfully. How To Opt Out: https://www.intelius.com/opt-out/submit/ #8 ThatsThem They make hundreds of thousands of personal records searchable by name, email, phone number, residential address, vehicle id number, and ip address. They post this information for free and do not offer any paid subscriptions. In addition to contact information, they’ve created wealth, travel, tech, shopping, and green scores. Why: They offer an opt out form, but it’s easiest if you go to , search for your information, copy the links to the pages about you, and send an email to listing the page links you want removed. Once again, send the email from an alias if possible. How To Opt Out: https://thatsthem.com/people-search optout@thatsthem.com The Right To Be Forgotten Blocking these sites from selling and sharing your information and limiting the information you share to begin with can have both personal and societal impacts. On the personal level, it can reduce the amount of spam you get, your risk of harassment or stalking, the specificity of a targeted phishing attempt or hack. It can help you keep personal information private (even if it’s technically public), like marital status, sexual preference, religion, or divorce. It can also protect your family members from being targeted by someone using your information. On the larger scale, it can impact the progression and acceptance of surveillance across our society. We can accept the terms and conditions offered by governments and corporations in exchange for ultimate convenience. Or we can actively demand rights to be forgotten, rights to privacy, and rights to control our information. To learn more about Kanary and try it for free, check out our . website I’d love to hear from you if you have questions, suggestions, or feedback. Send me a note - rachel@thekanary.com.

You’ve Never Heard Of These Sites, But They Know A Lot About You

My Data! My Rules! How True is That?

We in an age of information that is as a result of the technological advancement experienced over the past few decades. Information is the main driving force of various economies around the world. are living Information has led to the creation of profitable platforms such as Facebook — who leverage the data that they amass to be able to attract advertisers. This wealth of data and the societal inferences around it has caused The Economist to very aptly summarize: ‘The world’s most valuable resource is no longer oil, but data.’ This is the new economy, and many tech companies are applying working practices from this approach. Earlier this year, Facebook came under much scrutiny due to the discovery that the company had intentionally let during the 2016 US elections. It also came under fire from Europe’s GDPR, which was going to fine them up to $1.6 billion for the data breach of more than 50 million accounts, where hackers were able to access the login account tokens of its users- resulting in a £500,000 fine for Facebook. Cambridge Analytica use personal data of over 80 million users The scandal led to the realization of what actually can happen to user data after collection. User data is valuable due to the influence and results achievable through the information provided. Various institutions are eagerly searching for the right source of user data, trying to obtain it ethically to avoid the problems that Facebook and Cambridge Analytica faced. Advertising undoubtedly requires the greatest need for user data due to the strict requirements of adverts to be relevant and have the maximum chance of eliciting positive reactions from targeted markets in accordance to the objective goals of the advertiser. Data is fueling the growth of various industries thus there is a need for data in its raw and refined form. Platforms such as Wibson, Datawallet, and Lumeos are working towards making it possible for users to profit from their data. However, has already taken a unique approach that sets them apart from the rest of the data and market research industry. Insights Network Blockchain technology has shown to provide great promise in being the chosen platform for future data exchange and sales. ✅Its structural architecture has proven to be a very encouraging foundation for projects presently and previously developed on it, so much so, Forbes have noticed platforms like Wibson which are making profits possible for their uses by incentivizing their data sales. Recent Qualtrics Acquisition by SAP and SurveyMonkey IPO Shows Massive Potential of Blockchain-Based Data Industry SAP’s recent takeover of Qualtrics, shows a strong market for the data industry- one which blockchain and Insights Network hope to exploit | Source SAP- the German-based European multinational software corporation that makes enterprise software to manage business operations and customer relations is among the latest companies to acquire a rapidly growing company in the survey and data industry. ✅ - an industry leader in user data- in a move worth $8 billion that will help expand SAP’s influence globally. This marks the second largest acquisition by a SaaS company only topped by Oracle’s purchase of NetSuite which was worth $ 9.3 billion in 2016. This acquisition is hot on the heels of an earlier successful IPO back in September for online survey provider , which is currently trading at a $1.75B market cap. What was more impressive is that SurveyMonkey shares jumped by 60% after its Wall Street IPO, thus exemplifying the markets powerful desire for survey and data companies. They recently purchased Qualtrics SurveyMonkey ✅These recent events reinforce the tremendous opportunities for establishing blockchain-based data startup — who recently launched a that connects consumers and businesses for mutualistic beneficial data exchange. Insight Network new data marketplace How instarwallet.com Works The new Instar Wallet is now available on and and allows consumers to earn cryptocurrency (INSTAR) for completing daily activities such as polls, surveys, and other data exchange. Businesses and individuals can create targeted polls and surveys using the Insights Requester Beta which works similar to Web Google Play Audience by SurveyMonkey. INSTAR’s new Web Wallet and mobile app is awaiting imminent release | Source Similarities To Survey and Data Industry Kingpins There are a few significant similarities between Insights Network and the more traditional survey and data industry kingpins Qualtrics and SurveyMonkey. ➡️ Polls & Surveys Qualtrics, SurveyMonkey, and Insight Networks are all marketplaces which exhibit a significant focus on polls and surveys. Businesses and individuals can create unique questionnaires within these platforms and publish them to their target market. These surveys can also be used to extrapolate a specific target market for actionable requests. ➡️ Dynamic Pricing All three platforms are made to serve individuals and corporates and offer flexible pricing. For Qualtrics, they provide dynamic pricing plans that allow their software to cater to a broader reach of its target market. Flexibility in pricing may have been a decisive factor that allowed for both Qualtrics and SurveyMonkey to grow over the years to its current standing. Insight Network also offers flexible pricing which allows custom survey creation for all budgets. ➡️ Engaged Users All of the platforms have a broad base of engaged users. SurveyMonkey alone has over registered users and over 20 active million users. Even more impressive is that SurveyMonkey’s on their answer approximately . 60 million 20 million number of questions on a daily basis and an average of 90 million surveys are created monthly on the platform Insights Network is showing great promise to achieve similar growth and maximization of users base by already establishing over 50 thousand users which have led to the creation of almost 3 million data points in the network. ➡️ Quantifiable Results All parties put the focus on making sense of the data and analytics and aim to achieve a universal agreed equilibrium for all stakeholders involved. Why Insights Network is Special Many companies are existing in the data collection industry such as Acxiom, who profit from brokering data to other big corporations. Most of this data is collected in ways that the owners may not approve and this is what Insight Networks wants to change. has the goal of creating a trustless and decentralized data exchange network that benefits the masses. The network uses a unique combination of Secure Multiparty Computation and the blockchain to enforce exchange of both payment and data between data requesters and data providers without any third-party involvement. This translates into a user-managed secure consumer database that is the first of its kind. Insights Network ✅Through blockchain technology, Insights Network will be able to safely and securely share data that has been submitted by the user willingly. It won’t be Insight Networks that will sell the data, but the actual users themselves who will be selling their data to interested parties. Insight Networks will only be a conduit for their meeting — this will create confidence in the purchasers of data as they are assured that they are obtaining data from the primary source — the most accurate place for authentic data. Significant Differences That Could Give Insights Network The Edge Although Insights Network has some notable similarities to both Qualtrics and SurveyMonkey, there are a few different technological advances that Insight Network utilizes that will provide them with a crucial competitive edge in the long run. Some of the most apparent benefits of the platform include: 1. Blockchain Based This is arguably the essential difference between the three companies. Insight Network uses blockchain technology to create a trustless decentralized data exchange network for the masses. Unlike Qualtrics and SurveyMonkey, where there is a centralized approach with a single point of entry, Insights Network results are verifiable on the INSTAR Blockchain. The data is fully encrypted, and the requester can open it with using a provided one-time pad. Requesters can extract the data themselves, and that original file will never be opened again. Insight Networks also features INSTAR wallet to help in the management of INSTAR Tokens and other cryptocurrencies. 2. Trusted Userbase All data is submitted by KYC Verified participants who have provided their data honestly. This ensures that the quality of data and the network improves over time. SurveyMonkey and Qualtrics, however, have continued to gather data from unverified users and proceeded to display the data as authentic to the broader public. 3. Consumer Benefits/Profits — Not The Data Broker SurveyMonkey makes a $0.50 donation for each survey taken and offers cheap chances at prizes. Insight Networks benefit their community members through various rewards for tasks completed. For example, they will reward its users through INSTAR token which can either be traded or used within the network. Users can pay for various services and even trade their tokens for other cryptocurrencies or fiat depending on the exchanges upon INSTAR is listed. The platform itself is incentivized such that users of Insight Networks get rewarded through the INSTAR token for the data they produce. Usually, Big Data companies and other corporations gain from the data that people create. The human population is the one that realizes losses from their data, but this can change through Insight Networks. Through the incentives provided, users of this network will have a chance of profiting from the data they produce. 4. Privacy and Security Blockchain platform allows for a trustless set-up. The data is fully encrypted. The requestor can extract this data using a provided one-time pad that ensures the privacy of the results and thus the original file cannot be opened again. Instant Data Sharing vs. Compromised Data Sharing (full decentralization by the end of Q1 2019) 5. Costs Insights Network is considerably cheaper. A comparable survey targeting users in the Philippines cost $4.59+ per person while on Insights Network could go live for as little as $0.03-$0.05. 6. Fueling Data-Based Profits for Network Users Insight Networks has a great project at hand. It can house data requesters and data providers in its platform. It also has polls and surveys that can be created by various institutions to try and get more information from users within the network. Rewarding users for submitting data to companies bridge the gap that exists between businesses and their consumers. This has been the source of criticism lately where businesses use underhand ways to obtain user data which often ends up backfiring on them. With a setup such as Insight Networks, enterprises can receive factual data in either raw or refined form depending on their requests. ✅Data is usually stored locally by the data requestor. The data providers also choose to have their data stored in encrypted databases to ensure that their sensitive information is not obtained. Insight Networks only acts as a conduit through which data requestors and providers transact and has no control or visibility into the users’ data. ✅Data is only obtained through targeting users in surveys after data requests have been made. Records are kept regarding all the targeted requests such that anyone in the world can access the user data as long as they have made requests. Smart contracts will enable the users and requestors carry out their transactions through the reception of INSTAR tokens by the users from the requestors. The user will receive an export of any information in case the requestor decides to close their data request. Evolution is normal and is considered a necessity for the improvements of societal norms. The next stage in the surveys and data industry evolution will be the adoption of Insights Network | Source Differences/Areas For Future Improvement The Insight Networks is an exciting project with exciting opportunities. However, like many new vibrant projects (as well as old); there will part of the project which can be improved upon for future instances. These include: ➡️ Lack of Partners Qualtrics has amassed over 9,000 partners during its lifetime. This is undoubtedly a tremendous number. While the Insight Network is very far away from that number, it’s unique and convenient features will provide an excellent platform for many partners around the world to collaborate with the company. ➡️ Marketing It is worth noting that there has not been much talk outside the Insight Networks community. Most of the discussion on the future of the network is on its blog posts and community pages. For Insight Networks to grow to a level similar to Qualtrics or even surpass its value, it has to have a social presence that engages beyond its community to allow it to expand globally and truly let the wider public know of its existence and benefits they provide, ➡️ Competition Competition from other established centralized systems may hinder Insight Network’s growth, in the short term at least. Blockchain has not yet penetrated to levels the market may want; hence it may take some time before Insight Network’s potential is realized. This could instill a little bit of doubt to investors from supporting this project initially as they seek more traditional products in centralized platforms. ➡️ Global Presence For investors to pour money into a project, it has to have a robust growth plan or an already established presence either locally or globally. Qualtrics is a global brand that provides services for global companies hence its high valuation. It has dealt with companies like Disney, Marriott, Nike, and IBM. These brands alone are an indicator of how influential and global Qualtrics is. Insight Networks will also be following the same path. The significant aspect of blockchain technology is that it cannot be restricted to one place. As long as one has access to the internet, Insight Networks can be accessed therefore making Insight Networks virtually a global company. Even its whitepaper is written in multiple languages to show its presence on the world market. The success of Insight Networks will also depend on how many markets it can penetrate, and its global presence will give it that advantage. ➡️ Bridging The Gap Both these companies are bridging the gap that exists between business and their consumers. Insight targets to bridge this gap by providing a way through which both parties can mutually benefit from each other. Qualtrics bridges the gap by offering a host of products that are suitable to all levels of businesses and consumers. It has tailor-made approaches for each category thus enterprises can come even closer with their target audiences. They also do this through their various community programs which have helped increase the public’s awareness of these platforms. Insight Networks has even gone a step further by having bounty programs to attract even more people to help build its community and portfolio. Bright Future Ahead: Updated Q4 Roadmap with Completed Milestones has adequately been mulled over. The team is planning to integrate: The Insight Network’s gameplan for Q4 Distribution channels through promoting free account creations and from this transfer of tokens can begin Technology through the launch of INSTAR wallet 1.0 which will serve as a digital hub to track tokens earnings, the launch of requestor dashboards for polls and surveys by data requestors, INSTAR blockchain explorer. Adoption by releasing a new website, bounty programs, referral programs, a 2019 roadmap, an Insights research and learning lab. INSTAR’s updated roadmap shows multiple significant events in the near future | Source Conclusion These are some of the milestones is aiming to achieve. They are both within the same industry just under different platforms. It is likely that the same factors that made Qualtrics successful will be the same factors that make Insight Networks successful. Insight Networks At the same time, users get to enjoy a piece of the value of their data in this digital age where data reigns supreme. Rewarding through INSTAR will allow Insight Networks users to benefit even much more depending on the amount of INSTAR in the market at the time of trading. Some of the challenges they face can easily be solved by creating more awareness about the project. Insight Networks has the potential to become even more significant than Qualtrics. ✅Data is incredibly important for businesses because it helps them to expose variability and optimize their operations for the highest quality results. By examining large amounts of data, it is possible to uncover hidden patterns and correlations. These patterns can create competitive advantages, and result in business benefits like more effective marketing and increased revenue. However, with the Insight Network’s blockchain based platform, there will no need at all to compromise user security and trust that so very often arrives almost concurrently when collecting data. If data is as essential as fuel, then the Insight Network could very well prove to be among the defining projects of a generation 🤘. For further information on the Insights Network, please use the following links: | | | | Website Twitter Telegram Medium Reddit #InsightsNetwork #INSTAR #Qualtrics #Surveys #Data #Q42018 Disclaimer: Please only take this information as my OWN opinion and should not be regarded as financial advice in any situation. Please remember to DYOR before making any decisions. Hi, my name’s Sal. ♂️ If you found this article useful and would like to view my other work please be sure to clap and follow me on medium and LinkedIn! 😎

Qualtrics $8 Billion Takeover Promises Great Opportunities For Insights Network’s Recently…

ICO seems a fast and easy way to get fundraising for your project, without passing any additional legal procedures. However, most of ICO founders have misconceptions about the legal side of the process, which may often lead them to civil or sometimes even criminal charges. To avoid this, you should always bear in mind that WORDS ARE IMPORTANT! Tezos, Titanum, Centra, Arise Bank, Munchee, PlexCoin… all of these ICOs had quite a similar roadmap to the one above. They failed mainly because of misleading marketing messages communicated to investors through white papers, social networks, emails, ICO websites etc. To avoid any problems with current laws and regulations you should double check each aspect of your marketing strategy and ensure that they are compliant in each country where the ICO is being offered. A particular attention should be paid at: 1. Define your Token type There are two main types of tokens: and tokens. ICOs that issue security tokens need to pass registration in most countries. However, this is commonly avoided because the procedure is costly and time consuming. As an alternative the ICO can specify that a utility token is offered and commence the ICO launch. utility security Utility token is the one you can use to get a product or a service. The most important is that a utility token should have functionality at the time of ICO. Any token which doesn’t have a functionality is sold as an investment contract_._ Hence, it is not sufficient to state in the white paper that you’re offering a utility token, unless your token complies with the above definition. However utility tokens are not just limited to the definition therefore, one should also ensure that they are advertising it as a utility. Remember Munchee token, who raised USD 15m during their ICO? Their utility token was built to enable users access some services in their app. The app was available at the time of ICO and the users would be able to start using a MUN token within some time. However, SEC has stated that MUN was an unregistered security because it was advertised as an investment. Here is the quote from their filing: Munchee made public statements or endorsed other people’s public statements that touted the opportunity to profit. For example, on or about October 25, 2017, Munchee created a public posting on Facebook, linked to a third-party YouTube video, and wrote ‘199% GAINS on MUN token at ICO price! Sign up for PRE-SALE NOW!’ So if you have a utility based token, you should make sure you’re not using an investment based language in your marketing communications, i.e you’re not promising returns from: appreciation in the value of tokens distribution of profits to investors (don’t promise to pay rewards, revenue share or dividends) 2. Don’t deceive investors Once you have made sure that your token is compliant, you should ensure you’re honest with your audience. By all means avoid lying about your team, partners, testimonials, trademarks etc. Even exaggeration may lead into problems with the law. Let’s look at Titanium, which raised USD 21m during their ICO. They were providing false information about their business relationships and were accused of investment fraud by the SEC: On TBIS’s website as of January 29, 2018, TBIS similarly made false statements about its relationships with numerous specific blue-chip companies. TBIS identified by name and corporate logo nearly thirty well-known companies as clients of EHI — additionally including Verizon, McDonald’s, Cisco, Pfizer, SAP, HP, Acxiom — and included a hyperlink to EHI’s website for its client list and testimonials. https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2018/comp-pr2018-94.pdf Moreover, Titanium also claimed that 8 of their products are trademarked, even though the ICO hasn’t registered a single one. Also their testimonials have appeared to be false. Even though it is easier to paint a pretty picture to attract investors, a legitimate ICO should not exaggerate and should not, under any circumstances, lie to investors about any single aspect of their activity and partnerships. 3. Be careful when using celebrities for promotion Having a celebrity to advertise your project is always nice, because it builds awareness and brings higher credibility to your project in addition to attracting new users. But ICOs should do this promotion carefully. In most jurisdictions it is illegal to use celebrities to promote securities. Sometimes this kind of advertising involves disclosing information about the nature and amount of compensation paid. So if you want a celebrity to promote your ICO, make sure your token is a security. not Celebrity endorsement may also be one of the reasons why ICO can be claimed a scam. One of the brightest examples ICO Centrum, which raised USD 32m. Before the initiation of the ICO round the team was paying to celebrities to make posts on social media about their project. However, they never disclosed information about paying them. Here’s the extract from the filing: Defendants also paid celebrities to promote Centra’s ICO on social media, which they did at various times over September and October 2017… for example, one celebrity Centra promotor tweeted: ‘Centra’s (CTR) ICO starts in a few hours. Get yours before they sell out, I got mine,’ which Centra re-tweeted on its official Twitter handle. These celebrity posts — which generated significant interest in the ICO — did not disclose that Centra paid the celebrities significant compensation in exchange for their promotion of the offering. https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2018/comp-pr2018-70.pdf As it can be seen, it is really important to choose the right words when promoting your ICO. Moreover, correct messages should not come only from the official project communication, but also from the team on their personal accounts as well as any third parties involved into the project. Apart from that, this type of communication should be preserved when participating in offline events, talking to the community, speaking at conferences and meetups and also when giving interviews. If you’re planning to launch an ICO you should consult with an advisor and a lawyer who would be able to help you any mitigate possible risks. If you have any questions, or if you want to connect, add me on , or email me . I love networking and meeting new people. LinkedIn t@bitmedia.io Disclaimer This document does not constitute legal or investment advice nor should be taken as such. You should not rely on it and if seeking to do an ICO or any other related activity you should seek separate professional counsel. It is for informational purposes only.

3 Things To Check to ensure that your ICO marketing strategy is compliant with current laws &…

Long before Facebook, your personal information was bought and sold, just less effectively “Two CCTV cameras on a gray wall” by on Scott Webb Unsplash What did you think was happening? Here is the truth about our personal data, it’s everywhere, and we have no one to blame but ourselves. Data collection and data sharing have long been apart of our lives. We agreed to Facebook’s terms of service; we joined the loyalty programs, we spent our days posting and sharing our likes and dislikes online. We gave up freedom long ago, and we did so willingly. Loyalty programs were the first big step. Points for things? The occasional discount? We signed up in droves. We also ignored the small type saying that the information, the data, they collect from our usage of said card doesn’t belong to us. Who amongst us doesn’t have a credit card? Hard to get by without one these days. Visa, MasterCard, and American Express all collect and sell your demographic and purchase data. We love our social platforms and mobile apps. Every web service you use that is free has and exists to . Twitter, , Instagram, Reddit and every inch of are advertising businesses wrapped in platform services. made you the product give your data to other companies Facebook Google Even when you’re protective of your privacy, minimizing your exposure on social media, or using alternatives to Google, you still live in a world of constant data collection. Ever hear of Acxiom, Datalogix, eBureau, CoreLogic, PeekYou, or Rapleaf. They’re all data brokers, and I guarantee they know almost as much, if not more about you than Google or Facebook. Data brokers collect information about your subscriptions from magazine publishers and newspapers; they know whether you prefer dogs or cats by skimming purchase history from pet supply chains. From public records, they can tell what kind of car you drive or if you’ve declared bankruptcy. Funny, just as I was searching for information, I found this exact headline: https://qz.com/213900/the-nine-companies-that-know-more-about-you-than-google-or-facebook/ If you want to freak out over data collection and it’s usage against us, search the name Palantir and read what comes up about Predictive policing and their other government initiatives. What Facebook is guilty of, and this hasn’t been allowed since 2015, is of building a better mousetrap when it comes to data accessibility. They made it easy, too easy to get access to massive data sets and Cambridge Analytica took advantage. Cambridge Analytica used Facebook. They exploited the system. While Facebook has a lot of work to do when it comes to transparency, protecting users and having a soul, they are not responsible for what happened next. Cambridge Analytica took what everyone else is doing to sell us more crap, then…well…they sold us more crap. They used the power of data and machine learning to craft and optimize messaging ( targeted but at scale ) to sway the opinions of poor, uneducated white men ( others too, but this was the prime demographic they had the most effect on ). Only a mouth breather would see the ads Cambridge Analytica were propagating, then look at a future with Donald Trump and think, yep that’s the way to go. It’s going to come out that all the major, digital media platforms were used to spread Cambridge Analytica’s messaging, so will we be dragging them in front of congress as well? Of course we shouldn’t and i’m not sure we should do much about any of this, from a government or regulatory perspective. Cambridge Analytica should be punished for stealing user data: they’re guilty of that. But we can’t punish them for using machine learning to test the efficiency of messaging simply because their end result was Donald Trump? We also can’t put the pyschographic profiling genie back in the bottle either, Cambridge Analytica aren’t the first group to use this kind of targeting, and they most definitely won’t be the last. Would we blame Nike for using these same tactics to sell us shoes? Because they are. As I’ve been reading up on this “scandal”, there seem to be two schools of thought; either we are easily manipulated and are fucked, or we actually aren’t that malleable ( especially when it comes to our political leanings ) and this is overblown. Quite frankly I don’t know which of those ideas I believe more. What I do know is that we’re in an age of broad reach, more effective messaging and political polarization. None of which is going away, nor is easily solved for. What I do know is that rhetoric and pitchforks don’t help us. So how about less knee jerk and more deep thought? In the short term, what we do need is more transparency and to better educate ourselves as to what we’re seeing and where it comes from. For consumers: Understand that what you see online, from anyone other than your immediate friends and family, is trying to sell you something. There is nothing wrong with that if you understand the transactional nature of the relationship and proceed accordingly. You wouldn’t listen to some random stranger on the street telling you to do almost anything, so why would you do it online? Do the research, track down sources, get a bunch of opinions and then most important of all…think for yourself and make decisions that are best for you, your family and your needs. For Facebook ( and all digital platforms ): Be up front. Tell us what you are doing. Tell us in big, bright, accessible language. Protect your users first. Your business models are predicated on being able to help sell us stuff, that’s fine, but put in the work to verify that both you and your “trusted” partners aren’t taking advantage of people. Here’s a hint, if companies think they can get away with something, they’ll probably try it, so be diligent. Commerce is one thing, but democracy is something altogether more important. If that means far stricter regulations on spending for political groups or political messaging, then so be it. These groups are crafty, so when they are caught trying to circumvent the system, make the punishment harsh.

Stories, News & Mentions about ACXIOM

Acxiom’s Stories on HackerNoon

Acxiom's News & Mentions