• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Intel Drafts Model Legislation to Spur Data Privacy Discussion

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
37,642 (8.52/day)
Location
Hyderabad, India
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
Motherboard MSI B450 Gaming Pro Carbon AC
Cooling AMD Wraith Prism
Memory 2x 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4-3000
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT
Storage Western Digital Black NVMe 512GB
Display(s) Samsung U28D590 28-inch 4K UHD
Case Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound Blaster Recon3D PCIe
Power Supply Antec EarthWatts Pro Gold 750W
Mouse Razer Abyssus
Keyboard Microsoft Sidewinder X4
Software Windows 10 Pro
Intel Corporation released model legislation designed to inform policymakers and spur discussion on personal data privacy. Prompted by the rapid rise of new technologies like artificial intelligence (AI), Intel's model bill is open for review and comment from privacy experts and the public on an interactive website. The bill's language and comments received should provide useful insight for those interested in meaningful data privacy legislation.

"The collection of personal information is a growing concern. The US needs a privacy law that both protects consumer privacy and creates a framework in which important new industries can prosper. Our model bill is designed to spur discussion that helps inspire meaningful privacy legislation," said David Hoffman, Intel associate general counsel and global privacy officer.

Data are the lifeblood for many critical new industries, including precision medicine, automated driving, workplace safety, smart cities and others. But the growing amount of personal data collected, sometimes without consumers' awareness, raises serious privacy concerns.

People need assurances that information that is shared - both knowingly and unknowingly - will be used in beneficial, responsible ways, and that they will be appropriately protected. The U.S. needs a comprehensive federal law to create the framework in which companies can demonstrate responsible behavior.

Intel's model data privacy bill aims to bring together policymakers and others in a transparent and open process that helps drive the development of actual data privacy legislation. Intel has launched a website where interested parties can review and comment on the model bill. Company leaders believe input will help to promote the development of constructive data privacy legislation in Congress.

Privacy is an important and ongoing issue in our data-centric world. In a white paper published last month, Intel's Global Privacy team laid out six policy principles for safety and privacy in the age of AI, one of the technical domains that has significant privacy implications. These principles summarized here were among the factors that influenced Intel's draft legislation:
  • New legislative and regulatory initiatives should be comprehensive, technology neutral and support the free flow of data.
  • Organizations should embrace risk-based accountability approaches, putting in place technical or organizational measures to minimize privacy risks in AI.
  • Automated decision-making should be fostered while augmenting it with safeguards to protect individuals.
  • Governments should promote access to data, supporting the creation of reliable datasets available to all, fostering incentives for data sharing, and promoting cultural diversity in data sets.
  • Funding research in security is essential to protect privacy.
  • It takes data to protect data: Algorithms can help detect unintended discrimination and bias, identity theft and cyber threats.
Let your voice be heard. Weigh in on Intel's draft privacy legislation.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site
 
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
7,469 (3.21/day)
The wording of this bill is flawed. I like the EU's way of doing things which gives individuals near complete control over whether or not data is collected and stored, and if allowed by an individual, control of how and when it's used. We need that level of strict control over our personal data here in North America.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 26, 2018
Messages
23 (0.06/day)
Processor i7-3770@4.1
Motherboard Intel D77GA-70K
Cooling Enermax ETS-T40
Memory Kingston KVR-1600
Video Card(s) XFX RX580 GTS Black OC+
Storage Intel 330 + Intel 530
Display(s) Dell D2719HGF
Case Antec 300
Power Supply XFX Pro 550
Mouse Logitech G402
Keyboard Logitech G510
Why should we care what Intel thinks about this?
I want legislation by people that actually care about personal privacy.
Should read "Lawyers that work for Intel Draft Legislation to protect corporations from lawsuits".
Looks like a bunch of stuff to protect corporations from states and individuals when they loose all your info.

"Limitation - In promulgating rules under this Act, the Commission shall not require the deployment or use of any specific products or technologies, including any specific computer software or hardware."
Can't actually require any level of security.

"Safe Harbor - A covered entity shall not be subject to the civil penalties described in Sections 6(b)(3) or 6(b)(5)(A)"
Can't touch this! As long as a corporate officer certifies in writing to the Federal Trade Commission that we "conducted a thorough review" and it "does not reveal any material non-compliance".

"Civil Actions - In any case in which the attorney general of a State...has reason to believe that a covered entity has violated provisions of this Act, the State may bring a civil to impose a civil penalty in an amount that is not greater than $16,500 per individual"
Can't be punished much.

"Authority To Grant Exclusions - The regulations prescribed under this paragraph may include such additional exclusions from this Act as the Commission considers consistent with the purposes of this Act."
Open ended.
 
Joined
Aug 20, 2007
Messages
11,884 (2.66/day)
System Name Pioneer
Processor Intel i9 9900k
Motherboard ASRock Z390 Taichi
Cooling Noctua NH-D15 + A whole lotta Sunon and Corsair Maglev blower fans...
Memory G.SKILL TridentZ Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4-3200 @ 13-13-13-33-2T
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1080 FTW2
Storage Seagate Enterprise Capacity 3.5" HDD 2TB 7200 RPM (w/128MBs of Cache)
Display(s) LG 32GK850G-B 1440p 32" AMVA Panel G-Sync 144hz Display
Case Thermaltake Core X31
Audio Device(s) Onboard TOSLINK to Schiit Modi MB to Schiit Asgard 2 Amp to AKG K7XX Ruby Red Massdrop Headphones
Power Supply EVGA SuperNova T2 850W 80Plus Titanium
Mouse ROCCAT Kone EMP
Keyboard WASD CODE 104-Key w/ Cherry MX Green Keyswitches, Doubleshot Vortex PBT White Transluscent Keycaps
Software Windows 10 x64 Enterprise... yes, it's legit.
Why should we care what Intel thinks about this?
I want legislation by people that actually care about personal privacy.
Should read "Lawyers that work for Intel Draft Legislation to protect corporations from lawsuits".
Looks like a bunch of stuff to protect corporations from states and individuals when they loose all your info.

"Limitation - In promulgating rules under this Act, the Commission shall not require the deployment or use of any specific products or technologies, including any specific computer software or hardware."
Can't actually require any level of security.

"Safe Harbor - A covered entity shall not be subject to the civil penalties described in Sections 6(b)(3) or 6(b)(5)(A)"
Can't touch this! As long as a corporate officer certifies in writing to the Federal Trade Commission that we "conducted a thorough review" and it "does not reveal any material non-compliance".

"Civil Actions - In any case in which the attorney general of a State...has reason to believe that a covered entity has violated provisions of this Act, the State may bring a civil to impose a civil penalty in an amount that is not greater than $16,500 per individual"
Can't be punished much.

"Authority To Grant Exclusions - The regulations prescribed under this paragraph may include such additional exclusions from this Act as the Commission considers consistent with the purposes of this Act."
Open ended.
I'm with you. The idea IN CONCEPT is good. The motive of the instigator? Questionable.
 
Joined
Jan 15, 2015
Messages
332 (0.19/day)
Why should we care what Intel thinks about this?
It's called PR.

Corporations are designed to enrich the rich. Confusing people with deceptive emotional appeals (marketing) makes that happen.

PR continues for the same reason spam e-mail does. Enough people are duped to make it profitable.
 
Top