Also on today’s menu:
SB 255 Offers Protections For Adults’ Info
Bringing Humans Back Into Test-Scoring
Both children and adults share a lot of personal information on social media and other online platforms, leading to concerns about how it might be used. Congress passed the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) in 1998 to address some of the those concerns, and the Federal Trade Commission is updating the rules around that law. New Hampshire Attorney-General John Formella is part of a bipartisan coalition of 43 state attorneys-general urging the FTC to strengthen the rules that technology companies must follow.
“The internet poses serious dangers to the privacy and safety of children, and those dangers have only grown as people continue to live more and more of their lives online,” Formella said. “COPPA is an important bulwark against those dangers, and the FTC should update its rules to reflect the ways that the online experience has changed and to protect against the predatory ways that technology companies can profit from children online.”
The rules governing online privacy protections for children up to age 13 have not been updated in more than a decade, while the digital world has evolved rapidly, with companies using children’s data for targeted advertising and content that is algorithm-driven. The attorneys-general are urging the FTC to expand the definition of “personal information” to include biometric identifiers such as fingerprints, retina and iris patterns, a DNA sequence, and data derived from voice data, gait data, and facial data, as well as avatars generated from a child’s image and likeness. “Those changes are needed because of the increasing prevalence of wearable devices like smartwatches and fitness trackers, as well as virtual reality headsets and environments,” Formella said.
The attorneys-general letter to the FCC suggests updating the definition of government-issued identifiers such as Social Security numbers to include “passport and passport card numbers, Alien Registration numbers and other identifiers from USCIS, Birth Certificate numbers, any unique identifiers used to access public benefits, State ID card numbers, and student ID numbers. These numbers are highly sensitive [and] have a high risk if exploited…”
They note that the current definition of “personal information” includes “information concerning the child or the parents of that child that the operator collects online from the child and combines with an identifier” and they suggest adding “or which may otherwise be linked or reasonably linkable to personal information of the child.”
Currently, COPPA allows the collection of “persistent identifiers” for contextual advertising purposes without parental consent, as long as they do not also collect other personal information. The letter recommends providing a specific definition for “contextual advertising” that limits an advertiser’s ability to collect personal identifiable information through artificial intelligence for targeted advertising and prohibits the collection of browser histories, IP addresses, and locations data, which allow companies to reach children without parental consent.
The FCC is proposing a rule governing the use of school-authorized educational services that require parental consent. “What types of services should be covered under a ‘school-authorized education purpose’?” they ask. “For example, should this include services used to conduct activities not directly related to teaching, such as services used to ensure the safety of students or schools?”
Discussion: The latter point is one that Newfound Area citizens have been raising, concerned about student data that is shared with outside entities not bound by the confidentiality rules that are observed within the school district. Interim Superintendent Steve Nilhas says that the only information shared outside the district is aggregated data from the voluntary youth risk survey that does not identify any student. Only students who wish the fill out the paper survey do so, and they remain anonymous and are not required to answer all of the questions, some of which are intrusive. Results of the paper surveys are tabulated and it is only those numbers that are shared outside the district. The attorneys-general are right to be concerned about the COPPA rules, however, because those who want to get around the law will always search for loopholes. One of those identified in the AGs’ letter is the definition of online activity. “As an example,” they write, “consider emerging technologies beyond traditional websites and online services, such as virtual reality experiences, augmented reality applications, or other innovative platforms that may not neatly fit into the current understanding of a website or online service. Defining ‘activity’ with such specificity could potentially limit the scope and applicability of the Rule in the future. We recommend maintaining flexibility by not narrowing the definition further. By leaving the term ‘activity’ open-ended, the Rule can adapt to new and evolving technologies on a case-by-case basis. This approach allows for a more dynamic and responsive regulatory framework, ensuring that the Rule remains effective in addressing emerging challenges without the need for frequent updates.”
SB 255 Offers Protections For Adults’ Info
It is not only children who are at risk from marketing companies and hackers, but, as we previously reported, Senate Bill 255, which takes effect in January 2025, allows New Hampshire residents to control — to the extent possible — the storage of their data by companies and businesses, and gives them tools to remove or amend that data.
Under the law, businesses must respond to a consumer’s request — or a request from their designated agent — within 45 days, but they can extend that deadline by another 45 days if “reasonably necessary” and they can decline to take action if they provide justification for not complying with the request. Consumers may appeal such a decision.
Even without direct consumer involvement, businesses are required to limit their data collection to what is “adequate, relevant, and reasonably necessary”, and must inform the customer before obtaining the data. They cannot obtain “unnecessary” data without the customer’s consent, including any “sensitive data” such as the customer’s race or ethnicity, religious beliefs, mental or physical health, sex life, sexual orientation, citizenship status, physical geolocation data, and genetic and biometric data.
Discussion: Because the law does not take effect until next year, expect to see a lot of effort at collecting that information now. Beware of apps that collect such information behind the scenes, and avoid the temptation to take part in those “tell us how you met a friend” or “identify which states you have visited” quizzes, aimed at gathering clues about you and your friends’ interests. It will be interesting to see how this will apply to American automakers’ current practice of harvesting of thousands of “data points” that have no relationship with driving through the vehicle’s computer software. Such data harvesting has proven to be very lucrative for the car companies, while drivers and passengers have remained in the dark about how much personal information they are giving up while in their vehicles.
Bringing Humans Back Into Test-Scoring
NHPR reports that, “[F]or the first time in at least five years, New Hampshire elementary and middle school students who take the state’s writing tests will have their essays scored by humans, rather than computers.” It is not because of concerns about the quality of the artificial intelligence used, as one would expect, but because Cambium, the company that administers the statewide assessment, has not trained its software to handle the new writing prompts that the Department of Education has developed in consultation with New Hampshire teachers.
Automated scoring is a hybrid approach to grading students’ essays in which computers handle most of the scoring. Between 15 and 20 percent of the tests are routed to humans, usually due to unusual responses. That hybrid approach is now commonly used for standardized tests nationwide because it is considered to be cheaper and faster, and as accurate as relying entirely on human scorers.
To be distributed by March 15 this year, the assessments prompt each student to write on a randomly selected topic, intended to focus on testing different kinds of writing, such as a narrative piece instead of a persuasive one. The state encourages schools to require students to complete the essays in a single sitting, although it is not mandatory that they do so.
Discussion: I have found that artificial intelligence is very good at generating press releases that generally follow a prescribed formula, and the essays that students have been taught to write for standardized tests also are formulaic. John Warner of The Biblioracle Recommends has written extensively over the years about the “five-paragraph” essay and how wrong that approach is: “What teachers and schools ask students to do is not great, but that asking is bound up with the systems in which it happens, where teachers have too many students, or where grades or the score on an AP test are more important than actually learning stuff,” he writes. In discussing how artificial intelligence such as ChatGPT works, he notes, “The algorithm does not ‘know’ anything. All it can do is assemble patterns according to other patterns it has seen when prompted by a request.” It seems that, because the new writing prompts require a little more “thinking” about the writing, it is requiring some thinking on the part of human graders.
Café Chatter
On ‘The End Of The World’: “Concerns about the end of the world led to the popular phrase, ‘Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.’” Actually, Tom, that is not true. That phrase comes directly from the Bible (the KJV version to be exact). It had nothing to do with concerns about the end of the world. It was a response to those who denied the truth of the resurrection of the body. 1 Corinthians 15:32b. Essentially what he was saying was that, if there is no resurrection from the dead, why was he risking his life laboring for the Gospel? It would all be in vain, and he might as well give it all up and just enjoy this life to the fullest while it lasts.
— Ted Porter