Automating the Forced Removal of Children in Poverty

Quote 1

Where the line is drawn between the routine conditions of poverty and child neglect is particularly vexing. Many struggles common among poor families are officially defined as child maltreatment, including not having enough food, having inadequate or unsafe housing, lacking medical care, or leaving a child alone while you work. Unhoused families face particularly difficult challenges holding on to their children, as the very condition of being homeless is judged neglectful.

Quote 2:

The AFST sees the use of public services as a risk to children. A quarter of the predictive variables in the AFST are direct measures of poverty: they track use of means-tested programs such as TANF, Supplemental Security Income, SNAP, and county medical assistance. Another quarter measure interaction with juvenile probation and CYF itself, systems that are disproportionately focused on poor and working-class communities, especially communities of color. The juvenile justice system struggles with many of the same racial and class inequities as the adult criminal justice system. A family’s interaction with CYF is highly dependent on social class: professional middle-class families have more privacy, interact with fewer mandated reporters, and enjoy more cultural approval of their parenting than poor or working-class families.

Quote 3:

We might call this poverty profiling. Like racial profiling, poverty profiling targets individuals for extra scrutiny based not on their behavior but rather on a personal characteristic: living in poverty. Because the model confuses parenting while poor with poor parenting, the AFST views parents who reach out to public programs as risks to their children.

Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor by Virginia Eubanks

First They Came for the Poor

…one day in early 2000, I sat talking to a young mother on welfare about her experiences with technology. When our conversation turned to EBT cards, Dorothy Allen said, “They’re great. Except [Social Services] uses them as a tracking device.” I must have looked shocked, because she explained that her caseworker routinely looked at her purchase records. Poor women are the test subjects for surveillance technology, Dorothy told me. Then she added, “You should pay attention to what happens to us. You’re next.”

Dorothy’s insight was prescient. The kind of invasive electronic scrutiny she described has become commonplace across the class spectrum today.

Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor by Virginia Eubanks

Technology Is Not Politically Neutral

The proposed laws were impossible to obey, patently unconstitutional, and unenforceable, but that’s not the point. This is performative politics. The legislation was not intended to work; it was intended to heap stigma on social programs and reinforce the cultural narrative that those who access public assistance are criminal, lazy, spendthrift addicts…Technologies of poverty management are not neutral. They are shaped by our nation’s fear of economic insecurity and hatred of the poor; they in turn shape the politics and experience of poverty.

Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor by Virginia Eubanks

A Feedback Loop of Injustice

Marginalized groups face higher levels of data collection when they access public benefits, walk through highly policed neighborhoods, enter the health-care system, or cross national borders. That data acts to reinforce their marginality when it is used to target them for suspicion and extra scrutiny. Those groups seen as undeserving are singled out for punitive public policy and more intense surveillance, and the cycle begins again. It is a kind of collective red-flagging, a feedback loop of injustice.

Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor by Virginia Eubanks

Insider Threat Program – Basic Structure

Quote

Governance of an Insider Threat Program

A mature governance structure is essential to effectively develop, deploy, and manage an insider threat program. The CERT Insider Threat Center recommends that the organization implement a governance structure that enables the insider threat program to

  •  Maintain an updated knowledge base related to insider threats including staying current with the latest research and capturing lessons learned.
  • · Provide support to the insider threat program stakeholders to ensure the groups are meeting their objectives, providing the appropriate inputs to the insider threat program manager and appropriately communicating results and decisions to other insider threat program stakeholders.
  • · Monitor governance practices to ensure that governing bodies are meeting insider threat program needs, to make recommendations for improvement, and to refine the measures as needed.
  • · Capture and communicate insider threat program success stories to internal and external stakeholders to increase program support.
  • · Execute a comprehensive program-risk-management approach and required procedures for insider threat program stakeholders.
  • · Perform processes including budgetary review, the development of future technical requirements, continuous operation procedures, and risk management.
  • · When applicable, facilitate both formal and informal Continuous Diagnostic Monitoring (CDM) governance training for the CDM program staff, departments and/or agencies (D/As), partners, and stakeholders.
  • · Maintain and execute the program schedule for updating charter guidance, procedures, and policies based on ongoing lessons learned (both internally and externally), best practices, and stakeholder input.

Common Sense Guide to Mitigating Insider Threats, Fifth Edition, The CERT Insider Threat Center, Software Engineering Institute at Carnegie Mellon University ( http://www.sei.cmu.edu), December 2016
TECHNICAL NOTE: CMU/SEI-2015-TR-010

Important Change

Quote

Amazon.com

The important changes begin with you and then spread outward to others.

Team Geek: A Software Developer’s Guide to Working Well with Others by Brian W. Fitzpatrick and Ben Collins-Sussman

True Friends Constructively Criticize

Quote

Amazon.com

If you can find friends or colleagues who will constructively criticize your work when you ask them, hang on to these people because they’re worth their weight in unobtainium.

Team Geek: A Software Developer’s Guide to Working Well with Others by Brian W. Fitzpatrick and Ben Collins-Sussman

Building Team Culture

Quote

Amazon.com

A “strong culture” is one that is open to change that improves it, yet is resistant to radical change that harms it.

The interesting thing about team culture is that, if you build a strongly defined one, it will become self-selecting.

Just as important as your team’s decision-making process is the manner in which team members treat one another, because this is more self-selecting than anything else.

Team Geek: A Software Developer’s Guide to Working Well with Others by Brian W. Fitzpatrick and Ben Collins-Sussman

Sustainability and IT

Quote

Amazon.com

“Sustainability is a stakeholder need and business requirements. But more than anything, it is a human responsibility. IT plays an important role. ”

“IT can be a solution or part of the problem, depending on how it is governed and managed.”

“For business to be sustainable, it has to consider sustainability as a strategic priority…COBIT 5 assists enterprises in achieving this goal.”

The Time for Sustainable Business Is Now: Leveraging COBIT 5 in Sustainable Businesses, ISACA Journal, Volume 3, 2015, by Graciela Braga

Source of Conflict

Quote

Amazon.com

Almost every social conflict can ultimately be traced back to a lack of humility, respect, or trust.

Note that “being humble” is not the same as saying one should be an utter doormat: there’s nothing wrong with self-confidence.

Team Geek: A Software Developer’s Guide to Working Well with Others by Brian W. Fitzpatrick and Ben Collins-Sussman