Privacy ⯀  

An integral part of modern medicinal practice requires secure upkeep of patient information. And since the legislation of Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) was put into effect in the U.S. over two decades ago, the development of protective data technology has been made top priority in clinics and hospitals all over the nation.

Penalties for violating this act can range between $100 and $50,000, per patient record. As such, if proper care isn’t taken, it's very possible that physicians and other healthcare professionals could be slammed with the maximum $1,500,000 penalty.

The last decades have also seen a sharp increase in electronic data transmission, which means a greater chance for sensitive information to fall into the wrong hands. Given the ethical objections as well as the legal penalties of patient data leaks, it's extremely important for you as a medical practitioner to ensure that this does not occur. With just a few simple precautions, you can prevent these security breaches and keep your patients’ information safe from internet criminals.

Encrypted Text Messaging and Devices

Data encryption is an extremely effective means of keeping digital files secure, since it involves jumbling patient information into meaningless hunks of characters, which can only be deciphered by recipients who are granted authorization. Several programs exist for healthcare professionals to install on their personal and work-provided smartphones, ensuring that only senders and recipients have access to confidential patient data. Best of all, encryption programs are often free and easy to use.

Related articles

• How to Become a Leader in the Future of Health Care IT 
• How Smart Tech Is Improving Homecare for Seniors 
• Six Ideas that Will Revolutionize Health in the Future 

Secure Wireless Networks

Secure wireless networks are simply internet connections with end-to-end encryption, and they only differ from public WiFi networks in that they have limited user authorization. They’re able to keep out any potential security threats because they require secure login information that only doctors, nurses, and administrators have access to.

File-Sharing Platforms

Cloud storage platforms are one form of file-sharing that’s earned an unnecessarily bad rep. Dropbox, for example, is available for free or at low-cost, guaranteed to encrypt your data and keep it safe. These cloud-based file-sharing platforms often feature two-factor authentication as well, meaning that a phone call, text message, or email is sent to approved users' personal accounts as an additional layer of security. These measures have greatly improved cloud services over the last few years, and the technology only continues to improve.

Cloud Faxing

Traditional faxing is viewed as outdated in many industries, since it requires two pieces of equipment whose sole function is to transmit documents connected with landline phone connections. However, many clinics and hospitals still make use of fax machines for sharing patient data, potentially putting these individuals at risk. However, there are now cloud faxing services, which involves transmitting documents by scanning them with webcams or smartphones and sending them through programs designed specifically for this purpose. And of course, these programs are encrypted on both ends, meaning prying eyes are unable to view their contents.

Tamper-Resistant Prescriptions

While it is possible for criminals to modify or forge traditional paper prescriptions, tamper-resistant prescription pads and printer paper have made it an extremely difficult crime to commit. Doctors are required to hand-write prescriptions in ink. Whether they're handwritten or printed, criminals that attempt to erase the writing cause ink on the prescription paper to rub off, indicating that it was tampered with. This is one of the many defense mechanisms that make tamper-resistant prescription paper so effective in stopping fraud in its tracks.

By  Heather Lomax	Embed
Author Bio - Heather Lomax is a contributing writer and media relations specialist for Blaze Systems. She writes articles for a variety of medtech blogs, discussing solutions for optimizing healthcare data protection and clinical technology.

Automotive  

Connected cars are stunning in their technological developments. Their ease and convenience, however, could have big implications for our privacy.

Automotive technology is advancing so quickly that you are likely to lose count of auto innovations that have been introduced within a particular time. For instance, even before the concept of self-driving cars gets cold, connected vehicle (V2V) communication is here and already capturing the attention of the newsrooms. It is no doubt that technology is making cars smarter each day.
When vehicles are connected, they can communicate with each other on the road. This kind of communication will see vehicles relay information to each other concerning their exact locations in order to avoid collisions and potential road hazards. According to NHTSA, connected vehicles are estimated to prevent nearly 81% of car accidents every year.

Connected car technology will also be fundamental in the development of autonomous vehicles. Once self-driving cars start communicating to each other about their position on the road, sharing their speed information, and communicating their next intentions to each other, automakers will have significantly deterred collisions that often emerge as a result of human error. You will probably bid farewell to those defensive driving courses offered at Florida traffic school.

Related articles

• Hyundai to Collaborate with Cisco Systems on Connected-Car Technologies 
• Robotic Controlled Traffic Intersections On The Horizon 
• Wireless Charging for Electric Vehicles to Become a Reality in the Near Future 

It’s amazing to imagine the way city streets and highways could be easier when these automotive innovations are blended and comprehensively implemented.

Connected vehicle communication technology means a lot to our privacy and the general safety. As more vehicles are getting connected to the internet, we are more exposed to hackers and criminals tracking us as we move through various locations. Once many cars are connected, a substantial amount of information will be flowing through them. Among this information will be real-time locations, and even financial details and other personal information.

If hackers see value in hacking a laptop, you can only imagine the value they see in hacking your cab. For instance, someone could potentially keep track of your connected car’s movement to know where you are in a particular time, and thus he would know when would be a good time to break into your home or office and steal valuables.

It’s important to note that people once rubbished the idea of remotely taking control of critical car functions, an idea that is becoming possible with every autonomous car that is being manufactured. Wirelessly connecting cars and making wireless updates to them sounds like a great idea. However, it may also expose people traveling in the connected vehicles to potential attacks. Hackers might take advantage of this technology to hack into your car’s systems and take over its control. Hackers could then commit serious crimes while in control of your vehicle.

Moreover, smart devices like connected cameras, sensors, and voice-controls may be used by manufacturers to frequently monitor customer conversations and movements without their knowledge or consent. Hackers and other criminals can also take advantage of how computers talk to each other to regularly eavesdrop and monitor you wherever you are when you converse with family and friends.

What concerns most people is that a lot of information about your entire driving history is being gathered. And according to reports, auto manufacturers are using third parties in handling this crucial data. As such, you can’t tell who will have access to your personal driving information and how it is used. This significantly jeopardizes your privacy and your overall safety. As such, it is crucial that automotive industries make their practices crystal clear to consumers. In fact, they should come up with consume r rights in order to deter sensitive data gathering from the onset of such technologies.

Car-to-car communication will no doubt revolutionize the entire road transport system. However, there are significant issues to be sought out first. For instance, there are no intrusion detection systems yet to alert consumers of a potential attack on their car systems. Also, the auto industry has to address the pertinent questions about the privacy of its consumers.

By  Jamison Hutton	Embed
Jamison Hutton is a car enthusiast and small business consultant. He's a freelance journalist and loves writing about people's small business dreams. He lives in Houston, Texas with his wife and son.

 Technophobia  

With her TEDx Albany talk entitled "Wearable Technology like Google GLASS: Advancement? Dehumanization?", Michele Dutcher examines the varied reactions to this technology ranging from  fear to cult-like blind acceptance.

Michele Dutcher specializes in interactive technology/marketing and communications, with years of experience in web usability, information architecture, design/development, content management and marketing communications. She is  is a Google GLASS Explorer - one of 8,000 in the United States.

In her TEDx Albany talk entitled "Wearable Technology like Google GLASS: Advancement? Dehumanization?", Dutcher discusses the varied reactions to this technology ranging from Orwellian fear to Matrix-esque blind acceptance.

Related articles Sergey Brin talks about Google Glass at TED2013  Resistance Is Futile According to Cecilia Abadie  New Infographic Explains Google Glass

Once technology rolls over you, if you are not part of the steamroller, you're part of the road.
-Stewart Brand

Dutcher is the Interactive Marketing and Communications Manager at Excelsior College.  She also suffers from cholesteatoma, an expanding growth of keratinizing cells in the middle ear.  This condition produces hearing loss, so Dutcher already has a hearing aid that is physically screwed into her skull.  "I'm all jacked-up and bionic already, so wearing Glass is not going to be the leap for me as it might be for one of you," she tells her audience.

Dutcher examines the psychology behind peoples' reactions to technology (historically and presently) and aims to initiate a culture-wide discussion on being human and technologically-advanced.

She asks: Does advancing surgical capabilities with GLASS mean conceding to a Dalek-like existence? Will advancing GPS features translate to relinquishing all privacy to the NSA? How is it that in our culture GLASS is simultaneously feared for becoming the gateway to a future of GLASS-wearing human simulators while held to a higher beta stage standard for capabilities? What is the current public comfort level with wearable technology and how does that compare to the onset of past inventions - cell phone/telephone, computer, automobile, air travel?

With years of experience in web usability, information architecture, design/development, content management and marketing communications, she is aslo passionate about technology usability and human rights. She manages communications in the higher education field and is currently writing a science fiction collection of stories.



SOURCE  TEDx Talks

By 33rd Square

Subscribe to 33rd Square

 Augmented Reality  

Google Glass enthusiast Cecilia Abadie recently became possibly the first person to get a traffic ticket for driving while wearing the device.  She suggests augmented reality technology will lead to more transparency in our lives, and that this is a good thing.

R ecently Cecilia Abadie made history as the first person to receive a ticket for driving while wearing Google Glass.

On her G+ page, Abadie asked her fellow Explorers whether or not they had ever experienced something similar: "Is #GoogleGlass illegal while driving or is this cop wrong??? Any legal advice is appreciated!! This happened in California. Do you know any other #GlassExplorers that got a similar ticket anywhere in the U.S.?"
Abadie is one of the early users of Glass, the augmented reality computer systems from Google.

Related articles Google Once Again Shows That It Is Serious About Making The Singularity A Reality  Sergey Brin talks about Google Glass at TED2013  The Dorky Future: Where Does Google Glass Fit In?

Abadie, based on the TED Talk above, is clearly enthusiastic about Google Glass.

Facing some quite scathing comments on the video above, Abadie responded:

"My point overall is that the reality is that we are losing our privacy and moving towards transparency, that's just the observation of a current process that seems to be irreversible, so I just bring the subject to the table to think about it collectively and point out there are some good things about transparency when you do it right, as a society, government, organizations as well as personally."

What do you think, will augmented reality devices like Glass lead to more transparency, or just more distracted driving traffic tickets?



SOURCE  TEDx Talks

By 33rd Square

Subscribe to 33rd Square

 Forensic Science  

Since 2000 the number of Biobanks worldwide has increased by one third.  With DNA evidence increasingly being used in criminal cases, Elizebeth Coakley raises questions about biobanks' access and use of private genetic data.

While forensic science, at least by name, has been around for a long period of time, it has only recently become reliant on DNA evidence. Previously, evidence presented by people identifying as forensic scientists had been acquired through a number of means—testimony by dentists, footprint experts, mental health professionals.

In an episode of Frontline called “The Real CSI”, which first aired in April of 2012, the documentary crew reveals lapses in real science in forensic science, resulting in the false imprisonment of a shocking number of individuals.

The episode is startling in its discussion of the overly-simplistic process of obtaining a document certifying one as a forensic science expert—it is perhaps because of this coming under fire for faulty means of conviction and misrepresentation of degrees that forensic science has seen a shift to irrefutable DNA evidence.

Related articles Researchers Perform DNA Computation in Living Human Cell  Science of the Singularity - Can Technology Surpass Scientists?  Brain Epigenome Found To Change Dramatically From Infancy to Adolescence

Such is the accuracy of DNA evidence that positive identification, arrests, and prosecution double in the presence of such evidence. Such is the accuracy of DNA evidence that all 50 states have at least one criminal conviction which demands the use of DNA evidence. And with new technology comes new problems—in 2011, the National Institute of Justice revealed that backlogged samples were as high as 100,000. The increase in genetic testing had led to a test bank so overburdened that it was slow and prone to errors.

The solution, in part, was an increase in the number and size of biobanks handling genetic testing storage. Facilities such as this assist in the storage of human tissue, serum, plasma, urine, and blood, and require extreme consideration of temperature. Though such banks have been around for at least 50 years, the industry has seen tremendous growth—1/3 of existing banks have been built since 2000.

With the invention and inclusion of facilities that manage sample storage by way of machine, it is no wonder that forensic science is making a name for itself as a reputable one, positively contributing to the capture and persecution of many criminals. But it is sparking debate too—are medical biobanks used for forensic purposes subject to the same privacy considerations as those focused on disease and population?

The answer seems to be a resounding no. While it may seem unfair to disregard the rights of donors for forensic use, the basic right to privacy is sometimes secondary to another—in this case, violent criminal investigation and conviction. And, though access to DNA databases held in biobanks has the potential to encourage reluctance of individuals to contribute DNA or perhaps perpetuates the idea that donors are simply being used to solve crimes—it works.

By Elizebeth Coakley

Subscribe to 33rd Square

Author Bio - Elizebeth Coakley is a freelance writer with a background in life science research. When she's not trying to explain cytometers, you can find her binge-watching The Walking Dead.