Questões de Concurso Sobre sinônimos | synonyms em inglês

(Source:http://www.revasolutions.com/internet-of-things-newchallenges-and-practices-for-information-governance/. Retrieved on January 26th, 2018) 

Governance Challenges for the Internet of Things

Virgilio A.F. Almeida -Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil

Danilo Doneda - Rio de Janeiro State University

Marília Monteiro - Public Law Institute of Brasília

Published by the IEEE Computer Society

© 2015 

The future will be rich with sensors capable of collecting vast amounts of information. The Internet will be almost fused with the physical world as the Internet of Things (IoT) becomes a reality. Although it’s just beginning, experts estimate that by the end of 2015 there will be around 25 billion “things” connected to the global Internet. By 2025, the estimated number of connected devices should reach 100 billion. These estimates include smartphones, vehicles, appliances, and industrial equipment. Privacy, security, and safety fears grow as the IoT creates conditions for increasing surveillance by governments and corporations. So the question is: Will the IoT be good for the many, or the mighty few? 

While technological aspects of the IoT have been extensively published in the technical literature, few studies have addressed the IoT’s social and political impacts. Two studies have shed light on challenges for the future with the IoT. In 2013, the European Commission (EC) published a study focusing on relevant aspects for possible IoT governance regimes. The EC report identified many challenges for IoT governance — namely privacy, security, ethics, and competition. In 2015, the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) published the FTC Staff Report The Internet of Things: Privacy and Security in a Connected World. Although the report emphasizes the various benefits that the IoT will bring to consumers and citizens, it acknowledges that there are many risks associated with deploying IoT-based applications, especially in the realm of privacy and security. 

[…] 

The nature of privacy and security problems frequently associated with the IoT indicates that further research, analysis, and discussion are needed to identify possible solutions. First, the introduction of security and privacy elements in the very design of sensors, implementing Privacy by Design, must be taken into account for outcomes such as the homologation process of sensors by competent authorities. Even if the privacy governance of IoT can oversee the control centers for collected data, we must develop concrete means to set limits on the amount or nature of the personal data collected. 

Other critical issues regard notification and consent. If, from one side, it’s true that several sensors are already collecting as much personal data as possible, something must be done to increase citizens’ awareness of these data collection processes. Citizens must have means to take measures to protect their rights whenever necessary. If future scenarios indicate the inadequacy of a mere notice-and-consent approach, alternatives must be presented so that the individual’s autonomy isn’t eroded. 

As with other technologies that aim to change human life, the IoT must be in all respects designed with people as its central focus. Privacy and ethics aren’t natural aspects to be considered in technology’s agenda. However, these features are essential to build the necessary trust in an IoT ecosystem, making it compatible with human rights and ensuring that it’s drafted at the measure, and not at the expense, of people. 

(Source: https://cyber.harvard.edu/~valmeida/pdf/IoT-governance.pdf Retrieved on January 23rd, 2018)  

TEXT I

In Europe, Weber still rules

Statecrafting

Jul 13, 2016

Steven Van de Walle

True, many tools and management practices associated with the NPM such as staff performance talks or management by objectives have become very common. Across all countries, the almost 7000 top civil servants we surveyed list achieving results and ensuring an efficient use of resources among the most important roles they have. They are also in agreement that, compared to five years ago, the public sector has made major progress in terms of efficiency and service quality — two main objectives of the NPM.

There are ‘NPM champions’ — countries that have gone further than others in reforming the Weberian state. Think the UK or the Netherlands, where public employment is increasingly normalised, and delivery contracted out. But even there, the structures of traditional public administration remain firmly in place.

Some elements of the NPM are still mainly absent from current management practice in European countries. Internal steering by contract is not very common, and performance related pay is very rare despite the popularity in reform talk. The weak presence of flexible employment also shows that the Weberian model still dominates. Despite attempts to normalize public employment in some countries, civil servants still enjoy a unique statute. We also observed this during the fiscal crisis, where outright firing permanent civil servants or cutting salaries has been relatively rare.

For civil servants, referring issues upwards in the hierarchy is still the dominant response in situations when responsibilities or interests conflict with that of other organisations. European top civil servants consider the impartial implementation of laws and rules as one of their dominant roles, and largely prefer state provision of services over market provision, with the exception of the British, Danish, and Dutch.

There are clear country differences, with management ‘champions’ such as the UK, Estonia, Norway and the Netherlands, and more legalistic and traditional public administrations such as in Austria, France, Germany, Hungary and Spain. The adoption of newer reform ideas suggest that the Weberian state may now be in decline. Yet some of the other findings of the survey, reported above, show that Weberianism’s main ideas are still deeply embedded in European countries.

(Source: https://statecrafting.net/in-europe-weber-still-rulesa851866dbf02. Retrieved on January 21st, 2018)

Cow Threat

Cows are walking machines. They transform materials (grass, hay, water, and feed) into finished products (milk, beef, leather, and so on).

As any factory, cows produce waste. Solid waste is eliminated through the rear end of these ‘complex machines’, and it is used as fertilizer.

The fermentation process in their four stomachs produces gas. These walking machines have two chimneys: one in the front end, and other in the rear end. Gaseous emissions through the front end chimney are called burps. Cows burp a lot. Every minute and half these burps release methane gas. Methane is dangerous to the planet because it contributes to the greenhouse effect.

The world population is growing very fast. That means there are more people eating beef. Consequently, there is more cattle – more walking machines – producing more methane gas.

This is the problem, but very few people want to change their eating habits. What about you?