About Guest Author

This is our user name for posting guest input on the site. Check the actual posting to see the real author.

Who’s Monitoring the Baby Monitors?

Guest Blog entry by Cassie Phillips

With the recent, record-breaking distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks carried out with hijacked internet-of-things (IoT) devices, the woeful state of IoT security and privacy finally is achieving some public recognition. Just recently, distinguished security experts testified to US House of Representatives subcommittees on the dangers of connected devices, and the rationale for government regulation to address the security risks.Baby Monitor

But regulation is at best a long way off, if coming at all. It is vital that owners of these devices understand that although they may see no direct consequences of hijacked IoT devices being drafted into zombie attack networks, there are many other security and privacy issues inherent in these devices. Simply put, when we introduce connected devices into our homes and lives, we are risking our privacy and safety. Just one of the horrific risks can be seen in the use of baby monitors, nanny cams, security cameras and similar devices.

There has been a sharp increase in incidents of hijacked baby monitors. Some of these hacked devices were abused to prank families by playing strange music. But too many have been used to spy on sleeping children—so much so that websites dedicated to streaming hijacked nanny cam views have sprung up, clearly serving the frightening hunger of some deeply disturbed predators. And in one particularly twisted case, a toddler kept telling his parents that he was frightened of the bad man in his baby monitor. To their horror, his parents discovered that it was no childish nightmare; a man was tormenting their son night after night after night through the baby monitor.

These cases demonstrate that the risks are not simply cases of anonymous breaches of privacy. The safety of children and families can be entirely violated. It is certain that eventually a predator will see enough through the eyes of a baby monitor to identify, target and hunt a child in the real world, with tragic consequences. And what is perhaps more tragic, is that only then will lawmakers wise up to the risks and demand action. And only then will the manufacturers of these products promise to fix the problems (though certainly not without defending that because everyone else made insecure products, they’re in line with industry standards and not really to blame).

In short, though we may demand action from lawmakers or responsibility from manufacturers, at this point only parents reasonably can take any actions at all to protect their families. The knee-jerk solution may be to throw all of these devices out, but that would entirely ignore the benefits of these products and the ways in which they can still save lives. The best solutions today are for parents to take charge of the situation themselves. They can do this by purchasing more reputable products, changing their default passwords and using network security tools. Secure Thoughts (where Cassie is a writer) has evaluated VPN technology that can be used to minimize this abuse in the home. Parents should also remain informed and vigilant.

With the rapid development of the IoT, we’re likely to encounter new risks on a regular basis. And until there is a global (or at least national) policy regarding the security specifications of these devices, we are going to have to secure them ourselves.

About the author: Cassie Phillips is a technology blogger at Secure Thoughts who’s passionate about security. She’s very concerned about the effect the rapidly-expanding IoT will have on our privacy and safety.

 

 

Privacy and Security

Guest Post from: Marvi Islam

Let me start it with privacy and link it to security. Well, all of us know about the privacy settings on Facebook and we like them so much as we can hide from our family members, the things we do and the people we’re with. But wait, what about security? How is privacy linked to security?

Let’s leave the digital platform and move our focus towards our daily lives. We need security in our banks, schools, public places and even in our homes and parks. But have you ever wondered what price we pay for this non-existent blanket of security? Privacy.  Let me reiterate –  security at the price of privacy. Those cute little things we see on the ceilings of our school corridors; we call them “CCTV” –  they are installed for our security. But security from? No one bothers to ask. Maybe they (the authorities) want to tape everything in case something bad happens so that they can go through the tapes and catch perps red-handed. But they are taping every single thing and we don’t take this as them breaching our privacy?

A number of times these tapes have been misused causing niggling unpleasantries and yet it’s ok. There’s a famous proverb in Hindi that translates to this,“You have to sacrifice one thing to get another”. Here we sacrifice our privacy to get security. With self-driving cars grabbing all the attention, there goes more data to stay connected and apparently, “secure”.

Similarly, some companies check what their employees are up to and what they are doing on their computers while they are at work. This, from the company’s perspective is to avoid plausible breach of sensitive data but is such constant monitoring even ethical? So, does it really have to be a tradeoff? Security for privacy and vice versa?

Marvi Islam is from Islamabad, Pakistan and studies at Capital University of Science and Technology, Islamabad. https://www.facebook.com/marvi.islam

What does it mean to be human?

Guest Blog from: John Benedict

“… I’d like to share a revelation that I’ve had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species, and I realized that you’re not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment; but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply, and multiply until every natural resource is consumed and the only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, cancer on this planet, you are a plague, and we…are the cure…”

Let’s hope it doesn’t come to that.

Eighteen years have passed since the birth of a blind child and his graduation from high school. Eighteen years ago, there were no iPods, USSR was a superpower, Japan looked to the United States for economic leadership and support, smoking was permitted on airplanes, there were no companies which researched on biotechnology and only a handful of mobility and medical specialists taught in the nation’s public schools.

In eighteen more years, today’s blind infants will graduate from a strikingly different world. What we teach these kids today will determine how well they survive in their future. We have to make educated guesses about that future (and keep guessing) to prepare them for success.

When a much earlier world changed from a hunting-and-gathering culture to an agricultural age, human relationships were redefined and concepts about space and time changed. The speed of life accelerated. Leadership shifted; old power structures were replaced by the newly empowered. Old definitions and institutions collapsed and new ones took their place.

The hunting-to-survive stage lasted for a million years, the agricultural age – another six thousand years and the Industrial age lasted three hundred years. Some futurists defined an information age and then declared it dead after forty years.The concept of a “job” was also invented by the Industrial age. It pulled the children off the farms to the cities where they had to adjust to new spatial and temporal rules. A job required an employee to be at a certain place for a set amount of time, to do repetitive tasks – to “work” at producing things that were not immediately relevant to the individual’s life. In exchange for the loss of an agricultural lifestyle, employers gave steady wages (not affected by the weather or natural rhythms).

The industrial age saw the creation of vacations, health insurance, and sick days; all resulting from the invention of the job (a new way to work). This change was traumatic for a farm-based  agricultural culture, and many resisted. Human beings no longer were “ruled” by their natural rhythms or by the seasons. Respect for the wisdom of the elders of the society declined as their power was bypassed; they no longer controlled the source of wealth, and their knowledge was irrelevant to the new age.

The rules are ever changing in this age of communication. The life cycle of a business is only seven years now. The cycle in technology is down to six months, and in the software business, if a company is to survive, it must bring new products to market within two or three months. There is hardly time to plan; certainly the present is of little help.

The amount of information in the world is doubling every eight years. One-half of everything a college student learned in his or her freshman year is obsolete by the time they graduate. The amount of knowledge we are asking a typical high school senior to learn is more information than their grandparents absorbed in a lifetime. Our decision load is growing. We are running too fast, making too many decisions too quickly about things we know too little about. How can all these grand ideas about individual web pages, global consciousness, and the coming of massively capable workstations ever be implemented when we hardly have time to eat? This is the major social question facing the beneficiaries of the communications age.

The question remains – with advancements in technology, do we have too little time for what is important and much more for what might not? Are we missing out on morals and courtesies and relying too much on an online presence? We may be called social beings, but are we stepping away from human interaction? The answers to all these are terrifying to even think about! It’s time that we reclaim what we lost.

I finish this essay as I started – with a quote from The Matrix Revolutions.

“…Illusions, Mr. Anderson. Vagaries of perception. Temporary constructs of a feeble human intellect trying desperately to justify an existence that is without meaning or purpose. And all of them as artificial as the Matrix itself, although… only a human mind could invent something as insipid as love…”

The machines may be right but our entire purpose is built on something as insipid as love.

John Benedict is from Hyderabad, India and works with Amazon, India.

Multitasking vs Focus

Guest Blog from: Chris Fallon

“What do you want to watch on T.V.?”
“I don’t know.  Just put on whatever.”
You fire up the television.  The latest episode of said show begins.  No sooner than the theme music starts your phone comes out.  For the next half hour you sit there looking at your phone checking back in with the program on t.v. every once-in-a-while.  

Sound familiar?

We have become masters of multitasking.  Or, at least, we crave the constant distraction of multitasking.

The ability to juggle tasks is often esteemed in our society.  “Sara is a good multitasker, she can deal with a lot on her plate.”  It seems like an ideal trait for an employee: The ability to effortlessly move from task to task.  Technology is seemingly training us for this ability as it demands and divides our attention.

The problem is that multitasking generally produces worse results for a given task.  Psychology Today has a study summary that looks at how multitasking decreases efficiency.  Additionally there exist studies showing that technology based mutlitasking can harm memory retention and possibly even change brain structure. According to one study out of Wilfrid Laurier University: “[T]hose who preferred to task-switch had more distracting technologies available and were more likely to be off-task than others. Also, those who accessed Facebook had lower GPAs than those who avoided it.”  

I’ve long held a theory that true masters of any field are single-minded. Famed psychologist Martin Seligman calls it being in a state of “flow” which he describes as: “Being one with the music, time stopping, and the loss of self-consciousness during an absorbing activity”  Time and time again I see this state of flow mentioned, if not by name, by the best-of-the-best in their field.

Concentrate; put all your eggs in one basket, and watch that basket...”
Andrew Carnegie

I never could have done what I have done without the habits of punctuality, order, and diligence, without the determination to concentrate myself on one subject at a time…
Charles Dickens

My ability to concentrate and work toward that goal has been my greatest asset.
Jack Nicklaus

Singleness of purpose is one of the chief essentials for success in life, no matter what may be one’s aim.
John D. Rockefeller

That doesn’t sound much like our iPad to iPhone to T.V. back to iPad daily routine does it?

I am of the opinion that the less we crave distraction, the less we mindlessly vacillate between our tech devices, the less we spread ourselves thin, the better.  Concentrate on one task at a time and see if you don’t reap the rewards.

Are you happier or more productive now with the multitasking that technology encourages, or do you prefer a single task focus?

Chris Fallon lives in Raleigh North Carolina and is the marketing director for axcontrol.com

Health App Standards Needed

Guest Blog from: John Torous MD, Harvard

Last year, the British National Health Service (NHS) thought it was showing the world how healthcare systems can best utilize smartphone apps – but instead provided a catastrophic example of a failure to consider the social implications of technology. The demise of the NHS ‘App Library’ now serves as a warning of the perils of neglecting the technical aspects of mobile healthcare solutions – and serves as a call for the greater involvement of IEEE members at the this evolving intersection of healthcare and technology.

The NHS App Library offered a tool where patients could look online to find safe, secure, and effective smartphone apps to assist with their medical conditions. From major depressive disorder to diabetes, app developers submitted apps that were screened, reviewed, and evaluated by the NHS before being either approved or rejected for inclusion in the App Library. Millions of patients came to trust the App Library as a source for high quality and secure apps. Until one day in October 2015 the App Library was gone. Researchers had uncovered serious privacy and security vulnerabilities, with these approved apps actually leaving patient data unprotected and exposed. Further data highlighting that many approved apps also lacked any clinical evidence added to the damage. Overnight the NHS quietly removed the website (http://www.nhs.uk/pages/healthappslibrary.aspx) although the national press caught on and there was a public outcry.

As an IEEE member and a MD, I see both the potential and peril of mobile technologies like apps for healthcare. Mobile technologies like smartphone apps offer the promise of connecting millions of patients to immediate care, revolutionizing how we collect real time symptom data, and in many cases offering on the go and live health monitoring and support. But mobile technologies also offer serious security vulnerabilities, leaving sensitive patient medical information potentially in the public sphere. And without standards to guide development, the world of medical apps has become a chaotic and treacherous space. Simply go to Apple or Android app stores and type in ‘depression’ and observe what that search returns. A sea of snake oils, apps that have no security or data standards as well as no clinical evidence are being marketed directly to those who are ill.

The situation is especially concerning for mental illnesses. Many mental illnesses may be thought of in part as behavioral disorders and mobile technologies like smartphones have the potential to objectively record these behavioral symptoms. Smartphones also have to potential to offer real time interventions via various forms of e-therapy. Thus mobile technology holds the potential to transform how we diagnose, monitor, and even treat mental illnesses. But mental health data is also some of the most sensitive healthcare data that can quickly ruin lives if improperly disclosed or released. And the clinical evidence for the efficacy of smartphone apps for mental illness is still nascent. Yet this has not held back a sea of commercial apps that are today directly available for download and directly marketed to those whose illness may at times impair clear thinking and optimal decision making.

If there is one area where the societal and social implications of technology are actively in motion and needing guidance, mobile technology for mental healthcare is it. There is an immediate need for education and standards regarding consumer facing mobile collection, transmission, and storage of healthcare data. There is also a broader need for tools to standardize healthcare apps so that data is more unified and there is greater interoperability. Apple and Android each have their own healthcare app / device standards via Apple’s ReseachKit and Android’s Research Stalk – but there is a need for more fundamental standards. For mobile mental health to reach its promised potential of transforming healthcare, it first needs an internal transformation. A transformation led in part by the IEEE Society on Social Implications of Technology, global mental health campaigns (changedirections.org), forward thinking engineers, dedicated clinicians, and of course diverse patients.

If you are interested in tracking standards and developments in this area, please join the LinkedIn Mobile Mental Health App Standards group at: http://is.gd/MHealthAppGroup


 

John Torous MD is an IEEE member and currently a clinical fellow in psychiatry at Harvard Medical School. He has a BS in electrical engineering and computer sciences from UC Berkeley and medical degree from UC San Diego. He serves as editor-in-chief for the leading academic journal on technology and mental health, JMIR Mental Health (http://mental.jmir.org/), currently leads the American Psychiatric Association’s task force on the evaluation of commercial smartphone apps, co-chairs the Massachusetts Psychiatric Society’s Health Information Technology Committee.

Romanian Pre-U Students Address Social Concerns

A guest blog post on behalf of the SSIT Romanian Chapter Chair, Prof. Mihai Micea, provided by As.univ.dr.ing. Alin-Adrian Anton, Secretary of the Romanian IEEE Chapter of the Society on the Social Implications of Technology

On June 2 2015 a SSIT meeting took place in Timisoara, Romania,
where several ITC projects have been presented by children from K-12.
The presenting children have been selected as the winners of the
competition organized by Coolest Projects Timisoara  – in preparation of
their final presentation which took place on June 13 in Dublin, Ireland 

The best presentations also received the “Runners Up” mention at Heros 2015, Dublin.

  • “Krieg in der Natur” is a strategy game developed in Scratch where you can raise armies, made by junior Dragos Ciocloda under the supervision of Vlad Isac.
  • “Interjobs” is a web platform aiming to connect the freelancers, students, talented kids in IT and the IT companies, developed by juniors Alexandru Pop, Samfirescu Stefan, Licaret Raul, Trif Iulian and Theodor Stoica, mentored by Alex Iatan.
  • Other presentations include websites, games, an interactive assistant and playful robots.

CoderDojo https://coderdojo.com/ is a free programming and IT training club which organizes lectures with support from StartupHub. Many of our students participate as mentors during the lectures, with 100 – 150 children
attending on a weekly basis.

The Romanian SSIT Chapter Commission for the assessment of the projects has been formed by local SSIT members as well as by guests from the local private ITC sector:

Horatiu Moldovan (president Lasting System)
Horia Damian (Director research SphinxIT)
Diana Andone (Director eLearning Center, Politehnica University of Timisoara)
Oana Boncalo (lecturer, Polytechncic University of Timisoara)
Cosmin Cernazanu (lecturer, Polytechnic University of Timisoara)
Ciprian Chirila (lecturer, Polytechnic University of Timisoara))

The Commission has made recommendations to the participants with regard to the improvement of the impact of their presentations and regarding the commercial assessment of ideas presented.

The event was organized with the help of StartupHub Timisoara  and CoderDojo Timisoara

The event has been covered in the online media, with presentations
available from:

http://twitter.com/diando70/status/605750733414264832
http://twitter.com/diando70/status/605747301236240384
http://twitter.com/diando70/status/605744886105665536
http://twitter.com/diando70/status/605742889184960512
http://twitter.com/diando70/status/605739260919091200
http://twitter.com/diando70/status/605737614642192384
http://twitter.com/diando70/status/605735116074283009
http://twitter.com/diando70/status/605732888609497088
http://twitter.com/diando70/status/605730518760628224

As.univ.dr.ing. Alin-Adrian Anton
Secretary of the Romanian IEEE Chapter of the Society on the Social Implications of Technology
“Politehnica” University of Timisoara
Department of Computer and Software Engineering
2nd Vasile Parvan Ave., 300223 Timisoara, Timis, Romania

Information and media authentication for a dependable web

Guest author: Prof. Alessandro Piva (Bio Below)

The wide diffusion of the web and its accessibility through mobile devices has radically changed the way we communicate and the way we collect information about the world we live in. The social impact of such changes is enormous and includes all aspects of our lives, including the shape of social relationships and the process whereby we form our opinions and how we share them with the rest of the world. At the same time, web surfers and citizens are no more passive recipients of services and information. On the contrary, the Internet is more and more populated with contents directly generated by the users, who routinely share information with each other according to a typical peer-to-peer communication paradigm.

The above changes offer a unique opportunity for a radical improvement of the level of democracy of our society, since, at least in principle, every citizen has the ability to produce globally-accessible, first-hand information about any fact or event and to contribute with his/her ideas to general discussions while backing them up with evidence and proofs retrieved from the Internet.

The lack of a centralized control contributes to increase the democratic nature of the Internet, however, at the same time it makes the Internet a very fragile ecosystem, that can be easily spoiled. The ease with which false information can be diffused on the web, and the possibility of manipulating digital contents through easy-to-use and widely diffused content processing tools, casts increasing doubt on the validity of the information gathered “on-line” as an accurate and trustworthy representation of reality.

The need to restore and maintain trust in the web as one of our primary sources of information is evident.

Within the IEEE Signal Processing Society, the Information Forensics and Security (IFS) Technical Committee is involved in the signal processing aspects of this issue, with a particular attention to multimedia data (see the IEEE Signal Processing Magazine special issue on Digital Forensics, Vol 26, Issue 2, March 2009). It is a fact that multimedia data play a very special role in the communication of facts, ideas and opinions: images, videos and sounds are often the preferred means to get access to information, because of their immediacy and supposed objectivity. Even today, it is still common for people to trust what they see, rather than what they read. Multimedia Forensics (MF) deals with the recovery of information that can be directly used to measure the trustworthiness of digital multimedia content. The IFS Technical Committee organized the First Image Forensics Challenge, that took place in 2013, to provide the research community an open data set and protocol to evaluate the latest image forensic techniques.

However, MF tools alone are not the solution to the authentication issue: several key actions must be undertaken involving technological, legal and societal aspects.

What are your opinions about this topic?

Are we irremediably condemned to base our opinions, beliefs and social activity on information whose reliability cannot be determined?

Do you think that the involvement of a critical mass of researchers with different background – technological, legal and social  – could find a solution?

Are you interested in working on this topic?

===================

Author: Prof. Alessandro Piva

IEEE Signal Processing Society Delegate on the SSIT Board of Governors

Associate Professor @ Department of Information Engineering – University of Florence (Italy)

Alessandro Piva is Associate Professor at the Department of Information Engineering of the University of Florence. He is also head of FORLAB – Forensic Science Laboratory – of the University of Florence. His research interests lie in the areas of Information Forensics and Security, and of Image and Video Processing. In the above research topics he has been co-author of more than 40 papers published in international journals and 100 papers published in international conference proceedings. He is IEEE Senior Member, and he is IEEE Information Forensics and Security Technical Committee Associate Member; he has served on many conference PCs, and as associate editor of the IEEE Trans. on Multimedia, IEEE Trans. on Information Forensics and Security, and of the IEEE Trans. on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology. Other professional details appear at: http://lesc.det.unifi.it/en/node/177

Who’s flying this drone?

Looking out for humankind as intelligent technologies take charge

Guest Blog post by Jeanne Dietsch, Founder, Sapiens Plurum.

Until recently, I was an unmitigated technophile. Back in 1980, just after the first Apple PC was introduced, I tried to write a thesis on “The Future of the Computer as a Mass Medium.” My Master’s committee unanimously declared that such a thing would never occur. Two tech start-ups later, I was jeered onstage by London telecom executives because I predicted that Internet commerce would grow by 1000% over the next 5 years. And indeed I was wrong… on the low side.

More and more futurists now find themselves on the conservative side of reality. Consider these startling examples of actuality exceeding expectation: 1) Researchers stunned their compatriots by “solving” Texas Hold’em Poker, including probabilistic reasoning and bluffing strategies. Software cued with nothing but the rules of the game and monetary loss aversion became unbeatable by playing more hands of poker during two years than all humankind throughout the history of the game. Michael Bowling and colleagues now expect to optimize any constrained process with a clear outcome in the same massively parallel manner. 2) Researchers at the University of Washington can now play videogames telepathically. Using off-the-shelf tech, a videogame viewer controls a viewless player’s hand just by thinking about it. And Washington insiders hint US DoD has been performing similar studies for some time. 3) Nanobots will actually be tested this year to find and destroy cancerous cells and repair damaged ones. Projections that such minute machines would collaborate to keep us alive “forever” previously lay in the distant mists.

Since I sold our intelligent robotics start-up in 2010, I have been studying the accelerating evolution of technology. The tectonic tremors building up alarm not only me, but physicist Stephen Hawking, inventor Elon Musk, MIT professor Max Tegmark and thousands of others who signed Max’s open letter Research Priorities for Robust and Beneficial Artificial Intelligence. And it is not just AI, but its combination with other radical advances that portends vast, almost unimaginable change… and benefits. The question, as always, is: benefits for whom? Who’s driving this drone and where is it headed?

We know that military, political and economic gain will set its course unless someone creates a vision with loftier goals. Our challenge, then, is how to intervene to keep humankind, and human kindness, in the pilot’s seat, and piloting software. This is the reason I started Sapiens Plurum (the wisdom of many). Sapiens Plurum advocates for the interests of humankind in a world of increasingly powerful technology. The strategy behind Sapiens Plurum and Sapiens Plurum News assumes that any top-down policy consensus will be too little, too late, and largely unenforceable. By instead working to educate the general public, in particular, the young, we hope to create a demand-side force that will create bottom-up norms for humane and human-enhancing technologies. Hence, our priorities are to:

  1. Help people understand the potential impact of rising technologies on their lives
  2. Encourage people to choose technologies that put them in control to improve our lives
  3. Advocate for technologies that benefit humankind rather than exploit them

Can you help us by disseminating awareness at your organization or joining ours? We are seeking volunteer regional leaders and board members at SapiensPlurum.org.

About the Author: Jeanne Dietsch was founder and CEO of MobileRobots Inc. She served on the IEEE Industrial Activities Board of RAS 2007-2011 and wrote a column for IEEE Robotics & Automation magazine 2009-2012. She is a Harvard graduate in sci-tech policy, a group-thinking facilitator and founder of Sapiens Plurum, an advocacy organization looking out for the interests of humankind.

Smart Government: ICT Enabled Social Engagement in Public Organizations

An SSIT Guest Blog provided by: Carlos E. Jiménez; Open & Smart Gov Specialist, IEEE SSIT Sr. Member; Barcelona, Spain.

In a broad sense, we usually use e-Government concept as the ICT adoption by public organizations as helpful tool in order to improve the way they achieve their goals. Key elements in these organizations are elements like efficiency, effectiveness, transparency and citizen-centric oriented.

However, it is important to say that in a more specific sense, there are important differences when we talk about its degrees and elements within this field. Then, we could talk on 4 distinct concepts: e-Administration, e-Government (in a more specific sense), Open Government and Smart Government. These stages are incremental where ICT transform the public organizations at the same time as they produce better services to citizens.

In the table, we can see that e-Administration started with the ICT adoption addressed to automatize workflows in public organizations (1st stage, -Bureaucratic organization) and, later, the e-Government stage (2nd stage, -Professional organization) includes interaction between citizens through the use of electronic tools, as well as bi-directional flows of information allowing citizens to use e-services. Next, technologies contribute and facilitate the move to a 3rd stage (Relational organization) where -Open Government- is achieved, allowing a high degree of the governance paradigm and not only through the use of e-services. In this stage there is a participation of the society in decisions and processes that before, were mainly done exclusively by the organization. A 4th stage and type of public organization (Intelligent organization) after the Relational one, would be based in the optimized IT adoption degree, and how it can transform the public organization as well as society.

Organization  Modernization Level ICT Role
1. Bureaucratic Begin Automatized Workflows  (e-Administration)
Benefit: increased internal efficency
2. Professional Middle Citizenship Interaction (e-Government).
Benefit: efficient public services (filing forms…)
3. Relational Advanced Citizenship participating in governance (Open Government).Benefit: Paradigm of governance
4. Intelligent Optimal:
Adopted completely Interoperability principle and Open Innovation as tool
Interconnected Ecosystem (Smart Government)Benefits: real time, data driven – integration of information, Public-Private-People Partnership…

This 4th “refined” public organization level, would be achieved as a result of ICT as tool that is being used in perfect harmony with: a) Open Government b) the Social & Open Innovation in public organizations and c) a maximized Interoperability Principle [this concept is expanded in a special issue of IEEE Computer Magazine, Oct 2014]. The concept of Smart Government, then, will have all these factors, and the social implications of technology are being key here.

Indeed, we have to understand that territories and cities only will be smarter if and only if are more social, through thinking in the best options for their citizens, specially, avoiding negative impacts of technology. To get a sense for how this looks in practice see, in the case of Barcelona, https://smartcitizen.me/.

What areas of government in your territory are starting to move towards the “Smart Government” level?