Tech Talk: Talking Tech with Mallory Knodel and Niels ten Oever On Inclusive Language in Internet Standards
Graphic for CDT’s podcast, entitled “CDT’s Tech Talks.” Hosted by Jamal Magby, and available on iTunes, Google Play, Soundcloud, Spotify, Stitcher, and TuneIn. Dark grey text and app logos, as well as light blue text, on a white background.
CDT’s Tech Talk is a podcast where we dish on tech and Internet policy, while also explaining what these policies mean to our daily lives. You can find Tech Talk on Spotify, SoundCloud, iTunes, and Google Podcasts, as well as Stitcher and TuneIn.
Back in 2018, CDT’s own, Mallory Knodel, teamed up with CDT Non-Resident FellowNiels ten Oever from the critical infrastructure lab at the University of Amsterdam to present a draft document at the internet standards governing body called the Internet Engineering Task Force, or IETF. This draft outlined a proposal that urged the community to officially reject the use of discriminatory and exclusive language in Internet Drafts and RFCs. As we persistently uncover and confront systemic racial inequality across society, it becomes equally vital to guarantee that the fundamental design comprising one of our most critical and democratic technologies – the internet – is devoid of any historically racist or prejudiced terms.
(CDT relies on the generosity of donors like you. If you enjoyed this episode of Tech Talk, you can support it and our work at CDT by going to cdt.org/techtalk. Thank you for putting democracy and individual rights at the center of the digital revolution.)
British Public Oppose Secret Surveillance Powers and Want Strong Protections for Encrypted Communications
CDT released nationally representative polling data revealing that a the British public are broadly concerned about the security, privacy, and free speech consequences of allowing law enforcement to access encrypted communications.
Changing Course to Get It Right: The Advisory Committee Reviews Its AI Evidence Rule
CDT is keeping a close eye on Proposed Federal Rule of Evidence 707, which would govern when AI-generated information can be admitted as evidence in federal court — and many state courts where the federal rules are routinely adopted — without a human expert to explain it.
