#and its cause of HIPA | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

pplofchicago · 4 years

Photo

slightly nsfw image below

This will mostly be a recap of tonights events so if you’re up to date - go ahead and skip it!

Things popped off in either the worst or best way...its hard to tell.

Things started when Lexi posted this photo

with the caption “Make America Great Again”

selena: ew and now you're on some trump shit? gross

lexi: daddy said he's really a good guy, th4e fake news media is just out to get him, like its out to get our family

It didn’t take long before Patrick posted this

with the caption: i planned to caption this no regrets but turns out i have ONE regret never get married, kids.

selena followed suit and posted this:

with the caption “make america slutty again”.

Its a little unclear about what happened but

Patrick tweeted out in two separate tweets: funny how you're talking shit on main but in my DM's asking for favors lmao

maybe get some plastic surgery on the inside too

Clearly some things happened in between these posts, but nobody knows entirely what...unless you wanna send us screenshots? ;) We’ve gotta shoot our shot, okay?

But a little while after Selena posted: heres your daily reminder that lexi halbert pretended to be pregnant to keep a man around and hes still in my bed! <3

Now THAT hit us out of water because we never heard anything about Lexi getting pregnant - let alone faking anything and its certainly unnerving how we don’t know exactly who the dad would have been (?).

But Lexi took to twitter to say:

LEXI: I'M SICK OF PEOPLE SPREADING FAKE NEWS ABOUT ME AND MY FAMILY

LEXI: number one: it wasn't fake. it was true. number two: i didn't want any of them. they're both too old and ugly for me.

Selena replied saying “prove it” and Lexi responds with

LEXI: i'd offer to give you my medical records but ... HIPA

SELENA: you're allowed to share your medical records. doctors arent without YOUR permission. try again.

LEXI: i don't know medical law, hello i'm nineteen and not very smart

SELENA: i can tell. thats why you can think you can get away with trying to trap dudes into feeling bad. i know that you lied, sugar mama. and everyone else does, too.

LEXI: actually, i didn't lie. i never lie about anything in my life. so try again.

SELENA: except you did or you'd have some proof, sugar mama. and yetttt all we hear are excuses cause you weren't pregnant. thats a vile thing to do to someone.

Selena tweeted i love my best friend but he picks out the worst sugar mamas.

We will go ahead and update THIS post if anything else needs to be added and we’ll tell you guys on twitter, but this is what happened.

It seems like the Lexi, Selena and Patrick drama is never ending and we have one more post coming.

#lexi halbert #selena right #patrick hall

0 notes

pauldeckerus · 6 years

Text

The Problem Isn’t the Photo Contest, It’s Us

Eye-rolls, shrugs, and barbs greeted the $120,000 Grand Prize winner of Dubai’s HIPA Photography Prize. Malaysian photographer Edwin Ong’s photo of a partially blind Vietnamese woman carrying her baby was derided for representing yet another “poverty porn” contest winner before it was suggested that the image was staged by photographer Ab Rashid.

Ong defended his claim that the image was not staged to the Malaysian daily The Star, saying, “In this trip to Vietnam, we (the photographers) went to the rice field and there was a mother (who had her children with her) that passed by. We never told her to stand up or sit down.”

The circumstances that led to the photo are largely irrelevant. HIPA has no restriction in their contest rules that would prohibit staging, nor does the contest adhere to any photojournalistic ethics despite a jury selection throughout the years that has a bias towards photojournalists.

Photo by Edwin Ong Wee Kee

Yet we feel duped, and not necessarily because the image may or may not have been directed. We feel duped because Ong took the image with a gaggle of other photographers of a young, impoverished mother in a way that feels creepily reminiscent of a mid-20th-century all-male camera club hiring a female model.

We feel outraged because “poverty porn” is a reliable trope for winning photo contests – even one with the theme of “Hope” where no hope is to be found. A glimpse at the previous winners of HIPA certainly supports this claim despite having a rotating jury of some of the world’s best photographers who are supplementing their meager photo-related income with judging.

Photo by Mohamed Alragheb.

Photo by Arash Yaghmaeian, the 2016-2017 HIPA Grand Prize winner.

We feel disgusted because the subject is a brown woman. Never mind that Ong is brown because brown and black people are fully capable of committing the sin of exploiting their own just like white people.

We feel repugnance at a contest culture that often rewards unethical behavior, and allows contest organizers to build their business on the scam of contest entry fees. Never mind that this particular contest offers a total prize package of $450,000. The $150,000 Grand Prize is too big for this photo, for this photographer. He ought to share it.

But it’s hypocritical to impugn contest culture while simultaneously consuming most of our photography diet through a game-ified app on a 4-inch screen that algorithmically encourages and rewards “likes.” We’re sometimes more concerned with vertically scrolling as fast as possible to catch up with our feed than actually view photography.

We are competitive creatures living in a world where contest promoters and apps prey upon our vanity and search for validation. The same people who decry contests use platforms like Twitter and Facebook to build their own followings while chasing retweets and likes of their own.

Contests are problematic. The celebration of suffering is amoral. Large monetary prizes cause some people to act unethically. But contest popularity is merely a symptom of the Information Age optimized for the id. Of course, we should strive as a community for ethical standards, but it’s inaccurate to lay blame solely on Ong for taking and submitting the picture when the entire ecosystem is suspect.

Hopefully some of the online discussion in the wake of the contest will cause photographers, juries and contest organizers to reconsider “poverty porn” in contest culture. And perhaps HIPA can consider some ethical guidelines for future incarnations. And if nothing else, maybe the increased awareness of the world’s richest photo contest will attract a whole new wave of photographers doing important, long-term work thereby rendering discussion of poverty tourism moot.

About the author: Allen Murabayashi is the Chairman and co-founder of PhotoShelter, which regularly publishes resources for photographers. The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. Allen is a graduate of Yale University, and flosses daily. This article was also published here.

from Photography News https://petapixel.com/2019/03/22/the-problem-isnt-the-photo-contest-its-us/

0 notes

sailorrrvenus · 6 years

Text

The Problem Isn’t the Photo Contest, It’s Us

Photo by Edwin Ong Wee Kee

Photo by Mohamed Alragheb.

Photo by Arash Yaghmaeian, the 2016-2017 HIPA Grand Prize winner.

source https://petapixel.com/2019/03/22/the-problem-isnt-the-photo-contest-its-us/

0 notes

thetechnologyguy-blog1 · 6 years

Text

HIPAA breaches penalties up to 4.3 million

The MD Anderson Cancer Center has been cited for keeping their devices unencrypted.

The lack of device encryption will cost a Texas-based cancer treatment center 4.3 million dollars by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

In a statement released on Monday, the HHS Civil Rights Office said it received a summary judgment of a HHS administrative law judge who ruled that the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center violated the information security and safety standards established in the HIPAA. The International Institute of Cyber Security reports that the HIPAA establishes the obligation of hospital organizations to keep private the patient’s information.

The judge approved the penalty, imposing a fee of 4.3 million following its investigations into three infractions involving unencrypted devices.

In a statement provided to Information Security Media Group, the MD Anderson Cancer Center says they plan to appeal the ruling.

“We are disappointed by the judge’s decision, and we are concerned that the evidence and key arguments have not been considered. MD Anderson is planning to appeal the decision, which will result in a full review of all arguments and evidence. Regardless of the decision, we hope that this process will provide transparency, responsibility and consistency to the process of compliance with the Civil Rights Office.

A rare ruling

This ruling is just the second summary judgment in the history of the HIPA enforcement agency. The economic penalty is the fourth largest amount that has been imposed for the Office of Civil Rights by an administrative authority, highlights the OCR.

Breach Investigations

The Civil Rights Office says it investigated MD Anderson after three separate data-violation reports in 2012 and 2013. One involved the theft of a non-encrypted laptop from the residence of an MD Anderson employee; the others involved the loss of unencrypted USB devices containing non-encrypted electronic health information of more than 33.500 people, data exposed to experts in information security training and information protection.

“The investigation found that MD Anderson had established encryption policies since 2006, and that MD Anderson’s own risk analyses had found that lack of device-level encryption posed a high risk for the receipt of information”, says the Civil Rights Office in a statement.

“Despite encryption policies and the findings of security failures, MD Anderson did not begin to adopt a solution in information security training to implement encryption up to 2011, and even then, did not encrypt its inventory of electronic devices”, adds the Statement.

“The Office of Civil Rights is serious about protecting the privacy of health information and will pursue litigation, if necessary, to make entities responsible for HIPAA-compliant failures”, says Office Director Roger Severino.

The MD Anderson Center argued that penalties are an inappropriate measure, further stating that “substantial measures are being taken to ensure the patient’s private information. In the three cases involving the loss or theft of the devices reviewed by the administrative authority, no evidence was found that the information was seen by third parties or any harm was caused to the patients”.

A lesson for all

What other businesses and organizations might learn about information security training from the MD Anderson Center case?

According to specialists in computer security information, this is another example of how to take an antagonistic approach to a Civil Rights Office compliance review is a losing bet. The MD Anderson Center had different opportunities to collaborate with the regulatory officers voluntarily to establish security and information protection protocols; instead, they chose to spend money on expensive lawyers to defend themselves against the consequences of these flaws.

#information security

0 notes

computersystemsdesign · 7 years

Text

The State of Data Security and Privacy – Things Are Getting Worse

The concern for individual privacy has been growing since the 19th century when the mass dissemination of newspapers and photography became commonplace. The concerns we had then -- the right to be left alone and the right to keep private what we choose to keep private -- are now echoed in conversations carried on today about data security and privacy carried on today.

The contemporary conversation about privacy has centered on, and ironically also has been promulgated by, the technology that’s become part of our daily life. Computer technology in particular, including the internet, mobile devices, and the development of machine learning, has enriched our lives in many ways. However, the advances of these and other technologies have grown partly due to the collection of enormous amounts of personal information. Today we must ask if the benefits, both individual and societal, are worth the loss of some semblance of individual privacy on a large scale.

Keep in mind that privacy is not the same as secrecy. When we use the bathroom, everyone knows what we're doing, so there's no secret. However, our use of the bathroom is still very much a private matter. On the other hand, credit card information, for most people, is considered a secret. Though some of the data that's commonly collected today might not necessarily be secret, we still must grapple with issues of privacy, or, in other words, we must grapple with the right to share or keep hidden information about ourselves.

An exhaustive look at the rights of the individual with regard to privacy would take volumes to analyze it's cultural, legal, and deeply philosophical foundation, but today we find ourselves doing just that. Our favorite technology services collect a tremendous amount of information about us with what we hope are well-intentioned motives. Sometimes this is done unwittingly, such as when browsing our history, or when our IP address is recorded. Sometimes these services invite us to share information, such as when we are asked to complete an online profile for a social media website.

Seeking to provide better products and services to customers is a worthy endeavor for a company, but concerns arise when a company doesn't secure our personal information, which puts our cherished privacy at risk. In terms of government entities and nation-states, the issue becomes more complex. The balance between privacy and security, between the rights of the individual and the safety of a society, has been the cause of great strife and even war.

Today's technology exacerbates this concern and fuels the fire of debate. We're typically very willing to share personal information with social media websites and in the case of retail institutions, such as e-commerce websites and online banks, secret information. Though this is data we choose to give, we do so with an element of trust that these institutions will handle our information in such a way as to sufficiently ensure its safety and our privacy.

Therein lies the problem. It's not that we're unwilling to share information, necessarily. The problem is with the security of that information.

In recent years, we’ve seen financial institutions, retail giants, hospitals, e-commerce companies, and the like all fall prey to cyber attacks that put our private and sometimes secret information at risk of compromise.

Netflix knows our credit card information.

Facebook knows our birthday, religion, sexual preference, and what we look like.

Google knows the content of our email.

Many mobile app makers know our exact geographic location.

Mortgage lenders know our military history and our disability status.

Our nations know our voting history and political affiliation.

We almost need to share this information to function in today's society. Sure, we could drop off the grid, but except for that sort of dramatic lifestyle change, we've come to rely on email, e-commerce, electronic medical records, online banking, government collection of data, and even social media.

Today, organizations, including our own employers, store information of all types, including our personal information, in distributed databases sometimes over the world. This brings in another layer of complexity. With globally distributed information, we must deal with competing cultures, values, and laws that govern the information stored within and traversing national borders.

The security of our information, and therefore the control of our privacy, is now almost completely out of our hands, and it's getting worse.

Those of us working in technology might respond by investing in secure, encrypted email services, utilizing password best practices, and choosing to avoid websites that require significant personal information. But even we, as technology professionals, use online banking, hand over tremendous private and secret information to our employers, and live in nations in which our governments collect, store, and analyze personal data on a consistent basis.

The larger society seems to behave similarly. There may be a moment of hesitation when entering our social security number in an online application; nevertheless, we enter and submit it. Private and public institutions have reacted to this by developing both policy and technological solutions to mitigate the risk associated with putting our personal information out there. Major components of HIPAA seek to protect individuals' medical information. PCI-DSS was created to protect individuals' credit card information in an effort to reduce credit card fraud. Many websites are moving away from unencrypted HTTP to encrypted HTTPS.

So it seems the climate of data security doesn't seem to be centered much on limiting the collection of information. The benefit we gain from data collection and analysis precludes our willingness to stop sharing our personal and secret information. Instead, attention is given to securing information and developing cultural best practices to protect ourselves from malicious people and insecure technology. The reaction, by and large, hasn't been to share less, but to better protect what we share.

In mid-2017, we see reports of cyber attacks and data breeches almost daily. These are the high-profile attacks that make the headlines, so imagine how much malicious activity is actually going on. It's clear that the current state of data security and therefore our privacy is in a state of peril. Cyber attacks and their subsequent breeches are so commonplace that they've become part of our popular culture.

That aspect of data security is getting worse exponentially, and since we're mostly unwilling or unable to stop sharing personal information, we must ensure that our technology and cultural practices also develop exponentially to mitigate that risk.

The post The State of Data Security and Privacy – Things Are Getting Worse appeared first on Computer Systems Design.

from Computer Systems Design http://ift.tt/2tRE8LM

0 notes