through all that. but i would ask you to do is to provide written answers and explanations and examples where others have been reporting this and accurately. >> i would be happy to talk to the caucus and do anything you would like. what we have been doing in this area since the single biggest frustration i've had in the job is a perception that somehow there is religious persecution inside the united states air force. it isn't true. we have incidences like everybody. we investigate every one of them and we've asked every chaplain in the air force. they said no. i'm telling you there is a perception that we are in the middle of. >> again, i'm running out of time here. i've spoken with your chaplain, and i think that he has some of the same concerns and i would invite you to talk with him. are you familiar -- >> i will bring him to sit with

you. >> are you familiar with the danger of the publication? >> many items have been listed at their. the secretary and i have talked about the staff sergeant and apparently the air force position has changed with him as well. so again other problems are getting worse, not better. >> the time has expired. there are four minutes left, 324 people haven't voted yet. i think we have time and then there were two votes by the time we get there for this vote we should be getting better to the next vote and you can hurry back and i think we can get everybody that returns very quickly. we have the opportunity to ask that question. >> it's unfortunate so many of the members are late and i wish

they were here to hear some of my questions and your responses. madame secretary and general welsh and after being offered to allow to select some folks to the appointments to the academy i believe as i'm sure tha i ensu do that the air force academy has our very best and brightest of our nation, and it encompasses some of the folks encompass the very broad religious diversity of our great nation; wouldn't you agree with me on that? thank you. also having served for more than a few years in the military, the air force academy for the students is a very, very confined and close environment. isn't it also true? you know, during --

>> to give a verbal response because it won't reflect in the record. >> the air force academy as you indicated is very constrained and close environment for the cadets, is it not? >> yes inot? >> yes it is. >> in my previous career before i decided to come to congress, i had the honor of commanding 13,000 soldiers and airmen and of that number, i had 35 chaplains in my command so 50 folks who provided for the spiritual needs of the 13,000 soldiers and airmen. it appears to me that among the religious freedom guaranteed by the constitution is not only the freedom to practice religion but

the freedom not to practice if one so chooses. and also it's one of our freedoms not to be proselytized by one of another faith if one has a different faith or no faith at all. would you agree is that your understanding of the constitution also? stomach the way that i would explain this is that you have every right to your beliefs and practice your faith freely. if someone asks you about your faith can't tell you everything about it. if they don't ask don't assume that they want to or need to know. >> i would like to see this particular issue laid to rest so we can deal with more important issues in terms of strategies and tactics. the commission on the structure of the air force has talked about a concept called continuous service. and someone that served on the air force reserve and army

national guard i'm interested in continuing the service. in that concept they have a flexibility to be reactive and reserve components which board enable efficient utilization of the integrated force. i know some of those are contained in the wall but others are more regulatory -- >> at the hearing wraps u up we take you live to the white house for the briefing with jay carney. thank you for being here for the daily briefing. i have a couple guests with me, the ambassador of human rights and the national security adviser for the indications. they are here to give you a preview of the president's upcoming four-inc for an -- forp

and then ambassador rice will provide a dramatic overview and then we will take some questions on the areas in the allotted period of time i will stick around for questions. >> thanks. i will start with the president's schedule. there may be additional meetings and we will keep you updated over the course of the trip. he will leave here sunday night and arrive on monday morning. then the president will go to the museum in amsterdam where he will meet with the cremaster of netherland and they will then have their bilateral meeting. following that, the president will go to the site at the hague

and have a bilateral meeting with china to initiate a meeting and this will be the first meeting since the g. 20 in september. the president of course was able to a great uni income meet with mrs. obama today and we were pleased they were able to meet and continue their consultations at the hague. then he will go into the summit sessions. there will be a plenary session on the base policy discussion in the afternoon. the president will attend a g7 meeting at the prime ministers residence in the hague. this meeting has been added onto the schedule as part of our continued response the situation in ukraine and the president will consult with the leaders of the g7 about how to support the ukrainian government and of course the meeting itself is part of our isolation of russia for its actions in ukraine. following that g7 meeting the

president will have a chance to see th the the king of the neths and attend a working dinner. then on tuesday the 25th, throughout the course of the day the president will participate in the summit entries again anticipate him having the opportunity to have some meetings on the margins of the summit with additional leaders. we will keep you updated on those interactions. at the conclusion of the summit, president obama will have a joint conference with president of the netherlands. then following that press conference, he will have additional meetings. he will have a bilateral meeting with mohammed of the national nl arab emirates, one of our key relationshiprelationships in thd opportunity to discuss our commitment to the gulcommitmenty and to support the opposition in syria and to update our nuclear negotiations in iran. following that meeting, we will have a very important trend lateral meeting with president park of the republic of korea

and japan. this is an important message to show the united states along with their were two important allies of northeast asia to signal our commitment to the security of northeast asia and our belief in the united states and allies stand together we are much stronger in the region and in the world. then the president will leave and travel to brussels and to spend the night in brussels. wednesday, march 26, the president will begin by going to flanders field, of course one of the most important battlefields of world war i. this of course is the centennial anniversary of world war i. a very critical i'll stun an historeye of stunninghistory ofd states and the world. at flanders field, the president will meet with both the king philippe and the prime minister as well. so they will have a private meeting which will be a moment for the people of belgium and the people of the united states

and europe as well. following that, the president will attend the u.s. eu summit where he will meet with the presidents. here of course we have a broad agenda with the eu and i'm sure the situation will be front and center as well as the discussions on the transatlantic investment partnership and the negotiations into a broader range of issues that we have with the eu. following the summit, he will have a joint press conference with the leaders. after the eu meeting, the president will meet with the secretary general of nato, and of course this is our single most important joint security alliance, and frankly it is as important as ever given the situation in europe and in ukraine. some of the secretary-general will be able to discuss not just the situation in ukraine are the steps that we are seeking to

reinforce the security of our allies in eastern europe as you've seen recently with vice president joe biden's trip and additional deployment to the baltic states and poland as well. so, these will be in the discussions on the collective defense and the preparations for the summit. following the meeting with the secretary-generalsecretary genet will give a speech at brussels. this will be the signal speech of the trip. the president will have a chance to discuss his vision of transatlantic relations of european security. obviously the situation of ukraine would factor heavily into the presentation. it only reinforces the need for the united states to remain committed to the transatlantic alliance and the security of europe, the integration and to the value is that the united states and europe stand for together. including both individual liberties but also the rights of the sovereign nations that make their own decisions and to have their sovereignty in the

territory respected. following that speech, the president will depart where he will spend the night on thursday march 27. the president will begin with an audience of pope francis. he has long looked forward to meeting the pop the pope and hes admired the leadership as provided in his first year as pope has commitments to address issues like him, he quality and his leadership of the church more broadly. so, it will be an important time for the president to have personal interactions and to hear about the ambitious agenda that he has launched in his first year. following that audience with pope francis, the president will meet with the secretary of state to discuss what the vatican is doing on a range of issues around the world as well. after the visit to the vatican, he will then have a meeting and lunch with the president napolitano of italy who has been a good friend and partner of president obama for several years now.

then he will have his first bilateral meeting with italy. he had a good series of discussions on the phone and he will have an opportunity to address the prime minister and the situation of course in ukraine. but also broad cooperation between the united states and italy. following that press conference, the president will have the opportunity to tour the coliseum and one of the iconic sights in the world. he is very much looking forward to that opportunity. then on friday we go to saudi arabia to re- rihad. again an important virginity to invest in one of the most important relationships in the middle east, certainly in the gulf region to address into the very broad agenda to our ongoing in support for the gulf security and again from our support for this year he in a position where we have been very coworker needed with the saudi's and the middle east peace negotiations as well as both the nuclear negotiations with iran and also

joint concern for destabilizing actions in iran taken across the region. and the president will spend the night in saudi arabia in friday he will be returning back to the united states on saturday. and with that i will turn it over. >> good afternoon, everyone. over the course of this trip, the president will be mobilizing the international community and some of our most important partners in the world at a time when we are dealing with a number of important challenges. if there is a common theme to this trip is the fundamental strength and importance of our alliances and partnerships. the strategic importance of the effort really can't be understated from europe to asia to the middle east, our ability to lead a strong coalitions is a sensual to making progress. and europe as you heard him say, he will meet with our most important institutional partners in the world. the g-7, the european union and

nato. we will also have an important bilateral engagement with the leaders of the netherlands, italy and belgium, all traditionally striving allies. these meetings take place against the backdrop of fresh's intervention in ukraine. what will be clear for the entire world to see is that russia is increasingly isolated in the united aids is leading the international community in supporting the government of ukraine and the people of ukraine and the imposing costs on russia. at the same time we are also building our strategic cooperation in europe by moving forward with the vital engine for growth and job creation in this side of the atlantic. in the selected security and by advancing the efforts to the nuclear materials around the globe through the president's signature initiative of the

nuclear security summit in its third iteration. meanwhile, we continue to focus on our rebalancing to asia. after the period of tension we will bring together two of the closest ally is the republic of korea and japan in a trilateral meeting that will send a powerful message about america's commitment to the security of northeast asia. in addition to the president will meet with the president of china and that will advance efforts to try to cooperate where we can with china on a range of issues from climate change to denuclearize in the korean peninsula. finally we will be reinforcing our most important relationships in the middle east. as you heard him say on the margins of the nuclear security summit, the president will have the opportunity again to spend time with the crowned prince of the emirates and then travel to rihad with king abdullah of saudi arabia, which we have very much been looking forward to.

these meetings come at the time that we are engaged in the nuclear negotiations with iran where we are working to try to bring fruition to the middle east peace negotiations. and we are engaged in collective efforts with many of our partners in the region as well as in europe to strengthen the serious opposition. by investing in the deepening the core partnerships, the united states would be in a stronger position to make progress on these important projects that are central to the president's second term agenda. the common thread is that we are investing in our traditional alliances and building strong and flexible coalitions in each of these regions which will serve in many ways has forced multipliers. the united states cannot and should not bear all the burdens of addressing global challenges alone, and we don't because with this core group of alliances and partnerships from europe to asia to the middle east, i am

confident we have the wherewithal to manage this complex mix of international issues including challenges like ukraine, iran, north korea and syria while continuing to make progress on the key elements of the agenda, things like the trade agreement we are working on, the asia rebalancing come in working to resolve the issue by the nuclear issue through peaceful means. with that i'm happy to take a few questions. >> start with josh. >> thinks. is it your goal to get the europeans to agree on the sanctions that they say it's going to oppose or are you anticipating tough rhetoric from the europeans unwillingness to embrace the kind of things against the sectors of the russian economy that could affect them, and also will you be laying out the lines what's that russia would have to take

to trigger those kind of sanctions? >> we have been in close and constant communication and consultation with our g-7 partners. talking to the counterparts almost every day. the president has been on the phone over the last several weeks and communication has been robust. the coordination is almost very much in training and you saw that yesterday when the european council on the same day that we made our announcement of additional sanctions yesterday came out with a strong decision of its own "it not only additional support for ukraine but additional designations of individuals for the asset freezes and visa bans as well as a small statements to impose broad economic sanctions in the event the situation escalates. that's very much matches the theory behind the executive order that the president signed yesterday escaped us and gives us the ability as it is needed to target particular sectors to

be designated within the russian economy showed above circumstances necessitate. so we are already closely toward the needed with our european partners. obviously the meeting would be an opportunity to deepen and continued coordination even as we have the chance to talk about how we step out of our collective support for the people and the government of ukraine and consider the optimum disposition of the mechanism going forward in light of recent developments. >> it says the white house canceled a meeting between the leaders in saudi arabia because of some of the persian gulf leaders. >> that isn't accurate. there was never a meeting scheduled. it was something that we contemplated some weeks back in the primary consultations but then of course the situation

between and among the members have grown more complex a fleet and wyoming we maintain relationships with each of the countries, we didn't think that's the point was optimal for the collective meeting. >> is this crisis prompting a fundamental reassessment of the relation? >> yes. [laughter] >> the fact of the matter is in the years since the ending of the cold war, the united states and europe and the international community has proceeded along the path where we have made it clear that our interest was more fully in integrating russia politically and economically into europe and into the fabric

of the international system into the global economy. but that was predicated on an expectation that russia would play by the rules of the road. the economic and security rules of the road into the international law and the norms and principles that govern the international action that we have seen in ukraine is obviously a very agree just the parts are from that and it is causing the countries and people of europe and the international community and of course the united states but to reassess what does this mean and what are the implications. use all the example of that or the demonstration in the un security council last weekend where russia was allowed. even without china and insisting that its actions in ukraine had any international legitimacy. the rest of the world said they reject and would never accept the annexation.

this was an act that was in violation of the law with sovereignty and territorial integrity of ukraine and it would have consequences and it already has. >> russia is a country that is supposed to be a participant in the security summit. do you have an idea who's going to be representing them in their? i know there's a speculation the secretary could be that counterparts while is there anything you want to use at the summit to service and a message? >> nuclear security is an area of the united states has and continues to have an interest in cooperating with russia and other countries where the security of nuclear materials remains of concern. so the nuclear security summit is an opportunity for i think it's about 53 countries to come together to advance a very important agenda that has been a

pillar of this administration's national security policy to make it harder and harder for those who may wish to use the materials to get their hands on them and there has been a series of steps starting in 2010 which have led to very serious improvements in the security materials around the world. we have every interest continuing to cooperate even where we have differences with them on other issues on the issue of nuclear security. ibibb of the foreign minister wo is representing russia, and i think that was their plan -- the united states is sending -- stomach that is their choice to make that it's been their choice for quite some while. >> [inaudible] >> i don't think there was ever an expectation that president putin or medvedev --

>> [inaudible] >> we have not seen evidence of the contrary. >> since the war being direct what do you think that vladimir putin is up to this morning? he said overnight that they should hold off on countermeasures in response to the sanctions. do you think that he is trying to rewrite the end of the cold war or through confrontation of update his status? >> i'm noi am not going to get o speculating about president putin's motives. we have expressed our opposition to his invasion and annexation of crimea and the steps he's taken with regard to ukraine. the situation can and should be de- escalated and resolved through dialogue and diplomacy and we still believe it can be. if that choice is what the

russian federation makes and we will continue even as we impose costs and they can increase as the situation escalates to continue to work to support any credible efforts to resolve the situation diplomatically. >> does he deliver a message to the leadership? >> he has been. >> the secretary has had two important calls in the last couple of days one where he encouraged them to continue to show restraint. how are they being pushed and responding giving putin an excuse to take more territory and second, the secretary had a phone call with the defense minister to talk about the 20,000 russian troops on the border. and it was explained that there was a military training exercise going on. do you belief that they are just doing an exercise, how do you believe them when they suggested they had no intention to take

crimea? >> i think we are characterizing what the secretary's counterpart said to him yesterday. i won't describe the value to it. i will say what the secretary has been doing staying in close consultation with his ukrainian counterpart is very similar to what the secretary has been doing with the prime minister and foreign minister of ukraine and it's part of our ongoing effort to show support and partnership to the people in the government of ukraine where that support takes to diplomatic support. of course much increased economic support, and that is the reason for our efforts to work with congress and urge them to act quickly to implement through legislation and the billion dollar loan guarantee and the reform that is critical to the ability to support ukraine and this dialogue

remains ongoing with russian counterparts which we think is still important to maintain. >> the secretary said it encourages at some point or are you concerned about the crimeans will want to push back into this will give him an excuse to do more? >> this is a worrying situation that we have been very much admire and have the posture that the ukrainian people in government have taken. they've exercised enormous restring in the face of obvious provocation. and they have made it clear that their interest in the unified democratic future that is it's been in existence at peace with both russia and with western europe and the united states and the president said yesterday we don't see those as anyway intentioned. ukraine has a history that ought to be simultaneously working constructively with russia with the remainder of the world.

>> the reports today that more russian troops substantially more than the 20,000 member that was discussed have gathered many on the ukrainian border. have they taken note of this? >> we have indeed been taking note of the developments along the border including the russian border. and indeed, i think that was part of the substance of the secretary's telephone conversation with his russian counterpart. >> does it signal that things are getting worse? >> it's not clear what that signals. the russians have stated that they are intending to let terry exercises. given their past practice and the gap between what they've said and what they've done we are watching with skepticism. >> [inaudible] they want to de- escalate the

situation but from the last couple of days at least how far is the white house willing to go beyond sanctions when it comes to russia? >> i'm not sure what you're implying that the united states has been leading the international community to the point where we are now which is russia finds itself highly isolated from the norms and expectations. i mentioned what occurred in the security council which is emblematic of that. we have europe, the united states and many others coming together to impose economic costs on russia and indicate that the costs will escalate as the situation escalates. we are supporting ukraine in an affirmative way to get on its economic peak and to be able to conduct the upcoming elections.

.. out of this point. our interest is not making the escalation -- situation escalate and evolve into hot conflict or our interest is in diplomatic resolution, de-escalation, and, obviously, economic support for ukraine. and to the extent that it continues to be necessary, for the costs imposed on russia for its action.

>> you have a timeline to add to those economic sanctions? >> we will keep you guessing. >> thank you for doing this briefing today. can you point as to the impact that you've seen of the sanctions so far? and with the next step be sanctions directly on the russian government? what to the present me that would have a global impact? >> well, first of all you can see that these measures have had at least an initial impact when you look at the markets, when you look at the current see, when you look at the ratings by the major rating agencies which have downgraded russia from stable to negative just in the last 24 hours. these steps are consequential. the executive order that the president signed yesterday is a tool that allows even broader

action, should that be determined to be necessary, including the opportunity for the secretary of treasury and consultation with the secretary of state to impose sanctions in various sectors, key sectors of the russian economy. we have not taken that decision. as the president said yesterday that is not our preference, but if the situation escalates that remains a tool at our disposal. >> would you say that the primary aim is to persuasion -- [inaudible] and do you think it is achievable considering he's been very critical of the present? and often, don't expect any change? >> i think the meeting that president obama looks for to having with the king of saudi arabia will cover a broad range of issues. in the first instance are very important bilateral relationship and the strength of our

cooperation and security, economic issues, counterterrorism, regional issues as well. this partnership is long-standing. it's very important to both of our countries and this will be an opportunity to affirm that and to find opportunities to strengthen and deepen it. on the regional agenda, of course syria will be a topic of conversation you're so well iran and the nuclear negotiations, and the united states determination above and beyond the nuclear issue that we have security interests and security commitments to our partners in the region, that we will stand by and maintain. they will talk about, i imagine, the situation in egypt. there will be a range of issues on the agenda, and you mentioned operate in particular. that obviously is a topic of importance to both. >> i just want to know, --

[inaudible] >> we've been working very closely with saudi arabia on the issue of syria. our cooperation at the present is excellent, in fact, and we expect to be discussing ways to deepen it further. >> last one. >> you talked about the bbc and the divisions there. is there a role for the u.s. to play to branch those differences during the meetings with the uae and saudi arabia? will it be pursued? >> first of all as i said we have very good relationships with each of the gcc countries, and we look forward to maintain those and we look for to continuing what has been really a pattern of collaboration between the united states and the gcc as a whole. i don't, i don't think that mediation is perhaps announced i would use, but certainly we will be interested in the perspective that we will hear from our important partners in saudi

arabia and the united arab emirates. that will inform our efforts to encourage the continued cooperation among those partners in the gcc, which we think is mutually beneficial and in the united states' interest. thank you. >> tanks. thank you, ambassador rice. i'm here to take questions that you may have for about 15 more minutes if you need me. roger? >> the ambassador said that the u.s. is reassessing relationship with russia. what's the effect of that on the iran talks? >> we view that it is in russia's clear interest that iran not be allowed to or pursue possession of a nuclear weapon.

thus far, russia has been an up or in p5+1 process, and we hope and expect that that collaboration and cooperation will continue. because of the shared interest that all members of the process have, and that russia has in particular. for the reasons i just noted. this is true, i think of as ambassador rice said to chok earlier, -- chuck. when we look at other areas where there are joint interests that the united states and russia share. and we obviously expect russia to continue to participate in a constructive way in these processes, whether it's a nuclear security summit and the pursuit of greater nonproliferation efforts and nuclear security, or the p5+1

process, which is related. so we are going to monitor that situation very closely and continue the thus far useful process that's been underway through the p5+1 in order to try to resolve diplomatically and peacefully the challenge posed by iran's nuclear program. >> any damaging affect? >> we have not seen any indication that russia has changed its posture with regard to the p5+1. >> given everything ambassador rice just said about the changing state of relations with russia, the fact that people are talking in terms of a new cold war, as the president thinking now about talking to the american people on this subject, putting this in some larger context? >> you heard the president speak yesterday on this subject, and he noted very clearly that white russia has done in ukraine, and

specifically in crimea, violates a sovereign nation's territorial integrity. it violates russia's commitment under the united nations charter, and its commitments through agreements with ukraine itself. it also is at odds with what has been a 20 year effort, mostly, mostly, not entirely, mostly of one direction towards integrating russia further into the international community and into international the fabric of europe and the global economy. so what we have seen obviously represents a serious step away from that integration. and it's very concerning and problematic. it is not good for europe. it's not good for the united states. it's not good for the world, but it is least good for russia and the russian people. we've seen the impact already on

the russian economy that ambassador rice noted, in further escalation will result in further isolation and higher costs that russia will incur because of these actions. i don't have a schedule for the next time the president will address this issue, but it is clearly one of concern, one that he's been speaking about breaking the for the past several weeks. and i expect he will in the future, we pursue this matter with a clear eyed focus on our national security interests on our commitments to our allies through the nato alliance, and our commitment to the ukrainian people and their right as a sovereign nation to choose their own future. >> one question about that expression of support for the new ukrainian government. how much do you feel it undercuts your message that the loan guarantees are --

[inaudible] >> we believe that there is broad support on capitol hill for providing direct assistance to the new ukrainian government in order to help ukraine get back on its feet economically. which in turn will help it move forward, especially towards holding elections. which had been scheduled. we believe that process can and should move forward quickly through congress as soon as congress is back. we also believe that part of that commitment to ukraine and the new ukrainian government is the need to ensure that the quote reforms for the imf will pass as well. if the lawmakers of both parties believe that the president does, we need to maximize the assistance we can provide to ukraine, the way to do that is

to pass legislation that includes these reforms, these quota reforms at the imf because that will increase the flex build and leverage the imf has to provide assistance to ukraine. the bilateral assistance we envision providing and that congress supports generally in providing, the loan guarantee program and is a key, a piece and and a complement to the more substantial assistance that the imf can provide and should provide. alexis. >> yesterday the russian federation impose travel restrictions on some of the congress and white house officials. some members on the hill took that lightly and i have to question. one is, to the white house greek debt responds by taking it lightly as some members on the hill did? or is the white house concerned that the reaction from the russian federation signals that this will be ping-ponging sanctions back and forth for some prolonged period? >> the way they look at it here, alexis, is that it certainly

unfortunate that an action like that would be taken in response to the firm commitment to united states has made to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of in any event nation. and to the effort that the united states has participated in an led to provide support to the ukrainian people and the ukrainian government and to oppose the clear violation of international law, that the russian military intervention in crimea represents. but we are focused on everything on the back half of that paragraph, which is what can we continue to do to support the ukraine people? what actions can we take as necessary to ensure that russia understands that there are serious costs associated with the decisions that the russian leadership is making. we are also focused very much on

strengthening already what is the stars aligned in the world, nato, to take the steps we have taken with increasing our deployment in the baltic nation and poland. because of the importance of that alliance. and then having the kinds of collaborative consultation with our european partners that we will see the president purchase but in personally this week. [inaudible] he's apologized to chuck hagel for questioning u.s. statements, and trashing john kerry. can you confirm that he did apologize and the u.s. conference, or has the was received any assurances from netanyahu that the minister will no longer be an obstacle to our efforts? >> i don't speak for him. i was quite clear about our view of his previous comments which are simply inconsistent with the truth when it comes to this

country and this administration and secretary kerry's commitment israel's security. i would point to the affirmation of that prime minister netanyahu has made, when it comes to the singular nature of the specific and concrete commitment to israel's security that president obama has made, and his administration has made. i would point you to comments of other leading officials in israel to that effect as well. >> any details about the who what where of the mcgee this afternoon with the internet ceos? >> i can tell you that the president looks forward to having that meeting in which he will sit down with a number of executives from tech firms to continue his dialogue with them on the issues of privacy, technology and intelligence following the president january 17 speech. we will have more information after the meeting, if we can

provide it. i can tell you that the following ceos are beginning. we tastings of netflix, drew houston of dropbox, doctor karp, aaron levy of fox, eric schmidt of google and mark zuckerberg of facebook. yes? >> how did he meeting with chinese president president get set up for this trip next week? is it about anything special they want to discuss or a wide range of east china sea tensions, what exactly? >> i don't have more on the agenda for that meeting then susan and been outlined and in terms of how it came about. we look forward to opportunities for president obama and president she to me whenever practical. as you know, they met several times now, including out in california it is a very important relationship that includes a panoply of important issues, economics, security and environmental issues, for

example. so i'm sure you can expect a full range of topics to be discussed. >> the deadline will be coming up of the present is just returning from a trip. and you talk about what kind of preparations are going on while he's away? he's been making a big last minute push. and can you do some of the critics have been saying you haven't released the numbers on how much people were previously uninsured who are now being injured as part of the 5 million plus that have been assigned a? >> let me come on that one, in terms of that breakdown, if anything how to i would have preferred you to cms. what i think is still confusing to some viewers out there depending on the outlet is the fact that this system that the affordable care act created is a system of private insurance, specifically aimed at the

individual market. most americans who have health insurance receive it through their employer. others of course if there senior citizens are on medicare and other americans receive health care through medicaid. the private insurance market set by the of for air act and by the state marketplaces are obviously aimed at the individual market. and in that case the uninsured with in those marketplaces. so i know that this sort of criticism is a movable feet because as each strawman in this debate is knocked down there's a new one that's set up. maybe this is it, that somehow the fact that in some places somebody in a state is finding out that through the marketplaces, the insurance available is more affordable and higher quality than what they

had before, and that certainly often the case because the standards are higher that are set by the aca. that would be good for the individual who was able to get the insurance, and an improvement for them. so we're going to focus instead on making sure that the system is working so that americans can get their options and avail themselves of insurance plans that they can find on healthcare.gov, and to further government the affordable care act. because millions of americans are demonstrating through the federal and state marketplaces that they want this product, and you know, i'm sure that no matter what the number is, april 1 them no matter what the demographic is, no matter what we will still hear from the critics. >> on march 31 deadline, is there going to be any kind of grace period at all if people are having trouble with a

website on the last day because there could be a lot of traffic? >> march 31 is the deadline for enrollment. you heard us make that clear. and you know, i would refer you to hhs and cms for procedures that might be in place for dealing with what will probably be an increase in interest toward the end of the enrollment period. you will see all kinds of enrollment is like this, and how that volume will be handled. but the march 31 deadline is the deadline. >> if you sign up on april 1, you won't be able to schmidt i mean as a -- >> that was the case for the december deadline. we want to make sure that people who are already in line can finish their enrollment. but for how that process works, i would point you to what happened in december and how that played out. and then -- >> if you could --

>> i would refer you to cms to how to explain, how that worked. again, we want to make sure as we did in december on the deadline that folks who have begun the process are able to complete it. we certainly expect naysayers notwithstanding that there's going to be continued interest right up to the deadline and that interest will probably increase as we approach the deadline. yes, sir. [inaudible] >> the united states is deeply concerned that the kurdish government has blocked its citizens access to basic mutation to the we impose registration on a turkic people exit the bridge which undermines their ability to exercise freedoms of expression and association, and run contrary to the principles of open government, governance rather

that are critical to democratic governance and universal rights that the u.s. stands for a round the world. we have conveyed our series of concern to the turkish government. we urge turkish authorities to respect the freedom of the press ipad mini the independence and unfettered operation of media of all kinds, and we support the people of turkey in the call to restore full access to the block -- block technology. >> is the white house considering a change that smart phones, even blackberry -- >> i can tell you, mark, that the reports on this are somewhat, i don't want is a misleading, but they create the misimpression, the white house committee nation's agency is part of, department of defense, as veterans like you know, the question about their devices i would refer you to them. i can tell you that the executive office of the president is not participating in a pilot program with regards

to our handheld electronic devices. >> could you comment today on the statement from u.s. ambassador to poland that the u.s. is preparing military exercises in public that will include full czech republic, bulgaria, et cetera speakers i would refer you to the defense department. [inaudible] my second question is, what is the white house definition of breaking news? >> laura did not submit to that question in advance. [laughter] and the answer i'm about to give, i'm going to make out the right here. [inaudible] >> yes. [inaudible] spent watching what some 20 some news channels are doing? >> what i would say on this first question is, as you know

the united states is providing assistance to the malaysian government in its investigation and in its search for the missing plane. and we have not come here in the united states, reached any conclusions about what happened to the plane or where it is. we are as part of that investigation that's being led by the malaysian government, engage in an effort to try to look at different scenarios that make decisions about and conclusions about what happened, but we are not there by any means. this is odyssey a challenging situation for malaysia, and for everyone participating in the investigation and the search. on the other one, you know, one man's breaking news as another man's news of the day, i would say. but i'm not sure that means anything. i know, i've got to go in a few minutes but i'm not going to wade into that debate.

[inaudible] spent i lost three games yesterday. no, i have -- i've been meeting with my boss pretty soon. i'll take one more. >> i wonder if you could clarify, you said -- [inaudible] could be deployed in the event of -- now that russia has formally annexed crimea. >> that would certainly constitute -- >> without russian moving into ukraine, could those economic sanctions be imposed? is that the only -- >> i think that you could follow that road a long way and try to create specific parameter but i can tell you is the are a variety of ways that escalation could take place. we certainly hope it doesn't.

the scenario you outlined represents escalation were it to happen. but the fact is it's not our preferred path to have to resort to impose impose sanctions on sectors of the russian economy that the president described, but we have the authority to do so should russia choose to further escalate, too, you know, make the situation worse. instead what we hope is that russia will choose a path of de-escalation, one, that recognizes ukraine's sovereignty, recognizes that it has an opportunity to engage in a dialogue with the ukraine government about any additional concerns they have. and one that understands from the beginning that the world will not recognize the illegal seizure of territories that was part of and remains part of a

sovereign nation. >> if nothing changes on the ground for certain period of time does not count as escalations because i'm not going to speculate about that. we obviously as you see in the president's trip this coming week have worked very hard with our partners to make it clear to russia that sustaining this disposition, continuing this kind of action will result in further isolation and further harm to the russian economy and the russian people. and will erode the authority and prestige that russia could have if it were to choose to abide by the rules of the road that ambassador rice discussed at the top of the briefing. thank you all very much.

[inaudible conversations] >> if you missed any of the briefing you can always watch it online. it will be up on c-span.org. during the briefing ukraine's mentioned a number of times. more on that situation this afternoon from george washington university with college professors from ukraine and estonia taking part in the discussion about russia's intervention in ukraine. a discussion hosted by the institute for european, russian and eurasian studies. that will be live at 3:30 p.m. on our companion network c-span. tonight at 8 p.m. eastern a recent house hearing examining brain injuries in sports with officials from the nfl and the nhl as well as scientists, doctors and athletes. here's a quick look at some of

adhering. >> american football is an inherently violent sport. that's one of the reasons we love it. that's one of the forces encountered in football can be huge. consider a big hit between a running back and a linebacker at full speed. we can show using newtons suck a lot of the forced each player exerts on the other exceeds three quarters of a ton. this is why football is called a contact sport. to pursue collide at full speed helmet to helmet are expecting the same force that one of them would feel if he had a 16-pound bowling ball dropped on his helmet from a height of eight feet. medical knowledge of concussions is in its infancy but we know one thing for sure, forces to the head and neck cause concussions and we just heard how big these forces can be. here's another problem. they're getting bigger. since 1920 the average weight of a pro lineman has increased

almost 60% to just over 300 pounds. at the same time these players have gotten about 10% faster. combining the factors of speed and mass to calculate kinetic energy, the energy available to cause injury to we find that the amount of energy dumped into the pit at the line of scrimmage on any given play has almost doubled since 1920. and exact opposition to this trend is the fact that the players are shedding their protective gear, buying the past they used the centimeters thick, now bear a remarkable resemblance to teacup doilies. horse collars popular with lineman of my generation have gone the way of a flying wedge. modern football helmets are technological marvels of players choose and not for the collision cushion ability but for how cool they look. another problem is the state of her medical knowledge bu that we i'm not confident to explain these issues, i think it's safe to say that a roomful of head and, physicians will not agree on the details of what

concussions are or what causes them. this means that diagnosis and treatment of concussions has a long way to go. as her understand of these issues can prove we may find injury rates due to the increasing energy of the game and the wholesale shedding of equipment has increased faster than we thought. >> you can your more about sports related injuries tonight at 8 p.m. eastern on our companion network c-span. here on c-span2 its booktv in bn prime time with jesus over afterwards program. -- with a series of our afterwards program. all that tonight starting at 8 p.m. eastern here on c-span2.

spent c-span to providing live coverage of the just senate floor proceedings and key public policy defense and every weekend booktv now for 15 years the only television network devoted to nonfiction books and authors. c-span2 created by the cable tv industry and funded by local cable or satellite provider. watch us in hd, like us on facebook and follow was on twitter. >> we will take a look now at balancing privacy and security and concerns about data collection by the governmen govd the private sector to this discussion was hosted by stanford law school. also on the panel, two attorneys who represent target against claims resulting from last years data breach which affected about 70 million customers. the discussion is about two

hours. >> before we begin we want to give you all one reminder. this is being taped for c-span. so that explains the lights but also as you might be asking questions or if you want to interject, we'll try to get a microphone to you. we might ask you to repeat it. also, keep in mind because of that you may want to think twice about what to say. we are delighted to see giunta of a great panel. i'm a piker and his crowd. i practiced here in california, the san francisco office and also a certified privacy professional which those of you who practice in your you know what that is. that's enough about myself. by join me on the screen from the beautiful wilds of new jersey, professor ed felten. he's actually director center for information technology policy, and among other things has a pretty interesting blog

that he has on his website. i let professor felton introduces a little more probably in a second or so. to my immediate left is joanne mcnabb. she's the head of the policy institute. and knows more about privacy and policy issues than i can possibly ever get into my head. to her left is michelle dennedy. michelle is the chief privacy officer of mcafee, both john and michelle are a certified privacy professionals and on and on. michelle more important is the author come one of the authors of this brand-new book that came out this week that are sure she will put at some point, the privacy engineers manifesto, available because you're at a talk array from the nearest

amazon.com website. and to her left is my partner and good colleague, mark szpak was a litigator with a firm, ropes and gray. he has been doing an amazing amount of privacy and data security litigation but he's modest so i will see more. he's in everything from data breaches -- [inaudible] i actually learned how to do similar things that marks the when i was a young associate. [inaudible] wanted to compare our gray-haired. each of you, we thought each of the panelists would start out with about five minutes of discussion just the kind of set the stage and to explain their perspective on war and to introduce themselves. i'm going to shut up and i would ask professor felton to take us away. >> great. so thank you. it's a pleasure to be addressing you from here in the cloud.

sorry i couldn't be with you there in person. let me give a very brief introduction to myself, to give some context of what i'll be talking about. i'm a professor at princeton in computer science and in the woodrow wilson school, which is our public policy school. i'm a computer scientist by training, and i've done work on privacy both from a technology side and policy site. i served at the federal trade commission in 2011-12 as the agency's first chief technologist. so obviously recent events have drawn a lot more attention to issues of privacy and data. we hear about leaks of data from corporate data centers. we hear about leaks of data from apps and other kinds of technology that we use but and, of course, we are hearing a lot about collection and use of data by governments.

we are realizing quickly that we leave -- lead -- leave a big trailer day behind us. but as we move to the physical world as well. it's no longer the case that the kinds of pervasive data trail and information collection that we are used in the digital world is only in the digital world. now really the digital world and the real world are fused and we leave these records behind us as we move through the physical world. and so the data trails that we played in this part of data we provide willingly. debut it at a website or information about a particular information that you provide to someone. and the data that we provide is sometimes available for collection or capture on a device that we own, say data that you entered into your phone or your computer, information that you sent the e-mail, for

example. that information is sometimes available for collection or capture at our own phone or computer. the information didn't typically traverses across the internet to some kind of server, affiliate with the servers that we are using or somewhat connected to our activity, and the data is then taken typically at rest on the server. and attention available fare for use to leak. and then, of course, in? >> guest: in between the local devices and the servers and data centers where data ends up, the data is also often available to be captured there because we rarely use it to protect it. so in addition to data that we provide explicit, there's a lot of data that's collected about our behavior and activities raced on what to do. for example, almost anytime you read something online, information is collected about the fact that you read that particular piece of content,

whatever it was. similarly information about where we tried and what we do in the physical world is often available for capture, even if we don't explicitly provide it. so what does this have to do with big data? why does it matter that this data set and this collection of data is big? well, what's really important about big data, data allows inferences to be made so that when a piece the data is provided it reveals not only what is written on the face of that data but it also reveals implicitly everything they can be inferred from it. and so if are going to understand the privacy implications of data as collected gum we need to think carefully about this issue of inference but the problem is that inference that the torso difficult to model or understand or predict. even experts have a lot of trouble understanding what implications of -- [inaudible]

might be. generally though more data means more inference and, in fact, inference tends to change to each inference that's made a batch is in the fact that somebody knows and that fact can enable more inference is in a kind of chain reaction. one of the reasons why inference is difficult to understand and model, it makes it difficult to protect ourselves is it's difficult to think about those sort of chains of inference that we can set off by reviewing has been revealing one more seemingly not very sensitive fact. so with often in the past talked about government collection of information versus corporate collection of information. one of the things learned i think in recent months by think about and learning more about government collection is that government and corporate collection are really connected more tightly than we thought. it's increasingly clear that the government often follows a strategy of piggybacking that corporate collection of waiting for a company to collect data

and import to get it, or the captured information off of a network where a company is conveying that david. conveying data from your computer to their server. then whatever that information is, if it's about what you're doing, if it's about where you are or who you are, it's susceptible to being captured. so if you take, and finally probably the biggest thing we've learned from the government, data revelations lately is that when we talk about big data, big, bigger than we thought, there are data sifting collected and analyzed certain by governments to go beyond what i think many of us expected what was going on, that sharpens this issue was as well. so with a very brief introduction let me pass it off to my fellow panelists. thanks. >> great, thank you, professor felton. john? >> good evening. very happy to be here.

first of all al-qaeda a bit about me. my training is as a medieval, medieval us. i always explained the connection as privacy as it turns out is a very byzantine world. so i was well prepared. i've been working in privacy since 2000 when i headed up the former office of privacy protection in california which was a small state office created by the legislature which was originally part of the department of consumer affairs that was basically a consumer education and advocacy organization. didn't have any regulatory authority, but from its first operation, it was part of the beginning of a real flourishing consumer privacy legislation passed in california, which continues to this day even as we speak, california has been

acclaimed in some circles as the leading state in consumer privacy protections, in some other circles they describe it differently. we have a lot of privacy statute. we also of course have a constitutional right to privacy, which if you haven't looked lately is not just the right to pursue, but also to obtain privacy security and happiness. sigh hope we're all getting our full share. the office of privacy protection ceased to exist was eliminated at the end of 2012 and not exactly coincidentally, attorney general harris at the time created a new privacy you. the present enforcement and protection unit. to which i moved along some of my former staff. it represented a real advancement in privacy protection by government in

california in that it added to the same kind of work that was done of education and policy advocacy that was done in the old office. it added account and enforcement. so in addition to educational activities, we also enforce privacy laws, both state and federal laws that allow the attorney general enforcement. and it's particularly significant that this level of resources is dedicated to privacy protection by the attorney general's office because most of our privacy statute in california are really pretty much left to the attorney general and district attorneys to enforce. most of them do not have a private right of action. they depend upon enforcement through the unfair competition law, which thanks to an initiative a few years ago, allows individuals to use it only if they can demonstrate monetary or property damages,

which is often difficult to do in describing a privacy harm. so that leaves it to enforcement by the ag. and our current ag is very interested in using this tool and really enforcing many of our new and older privacy laws. in looking at bring about compliance with fair information practices, with good privacy practices, privacy respectful policies, we use more tools than just enforcement i usually call it the three e's. encouraging businesses to practice to a higher standard than their legal compliance by educating them and working with them on developing best practices, to educate consumers and empower them with not only

information about their rights, but also with information and strategies that can help them to protect the privacy even when they don't have legal rights, which is often the case. and then finally enforcement. and enforcement, i also would point out can be very educational in developing enforcement policy we are looking among other things at practices that we wish to raise to people's attention and point out the wrong way to do things, and suggest some better way to do things. i am very interested in this big data topic from the perspective of a regulator, and big data -- i guess we will probably talk about defining it, but here's my definition. a whole lot of data. enough data, enough different data points about an individual that even if no one of those

points is personally identified, the accumulation of them makes the whole stream potentially identifiable. so that our basic legal structures for providing consumers, or individuals with controls over information depends on, on notice and consent and dealing with personal information in restricted ways. when you can't tell when the data at the time of collection and at the time of aggregation isn't necessarily personally identified, that whole structure doesn't work very well and that's kind of where we are with the big data. so both from a perspective of big david and from the perspective -- big data, privacy collections in general i'm interested in regulatory innovation. we have so many things changing so fast that affect our personal information, not just things like a big data but new technology and new business

practices that the laws really cannot keep up with. there are things we can do to keep sort of refreshing them and really understanding them. but it's hard for them to keep up and i'm interested in a number of different proposals that are being discussed now for alternatives to command and control laws and regulations. before i pass it over to the shameless promoter of her book, i was very disappointed at a technological and marketing fit on the part of amazon who understood was going to be able to anticipate what i would want to order in advance, and they should've gotten it to me by now but had actually order it. it wasn't hungry in the over my house or anything. but when i get home i think it might be there. >> there was no drone? i'm hoping for a drone strike filled with -- that would be a really good thing for me. good evening, everyone.

thank you for coming. there are so many friends in the audience but i'm excited to be here. my name is michelle dennedy. i'm chief privacy officer at mcafee take anything i say will be exhibited to ropes and gray. just because competitive by my old firm where i started out as a young lawyer. great old law firm and i started out in the world as an intellectual property lawyer and specifically a patent litigator. looking at big data. when my very first cases of the what i will talk about, not the naughty when a user do within the realm of the aids cocktail drugs and ownership over molecules. and specifically the molecule that actually work in the instance it's like when passengers go. it's amazing stuck in my brain but it was because a certain molecule had an aversion of peralta, it's like a jolt of your hand, then not identical

and it turned out that one was effected and was not and it was unexpected and it was new and not obvious and that was the case. i think it's an interesting it comes to datasets is that things that everybody knows sometimes can result in analytics that create absolutely fundamentally new advances. and in the case began a path where we could go after searching for disease and now they with no therapy fail at that time. so here we are back again talking they did all the sugar on going to -- was but a shamelessly plug but now i will. wrote this book with john who some of you may know what microsystems whose with me now as a global director of data privacy, and my dad, tom, who's been in the data architecture and strategy of since the 1950s. that's important because i think big data is the ultimate in getting together artistry,

chemistry, law, policy, user, consumerization of data in the true sense to i've been getting to better place and that minnesota armageddon but i'm going to shamelessly region a couple paragraphs that can shift my thinking in this area. from the introduction. the world is certainly flat. everyone said so at the government said so. the church sets a. your wise old aunt and the richest guy in town since it. everyone, except a few explores, dreamers, scientist, artist and plainspoken folks looked at a satellite more like a bowl and notice that the ground and this got always met for a brief before the observer wondered ever closer in the meeting became a loose of once more and shadows and tides into the indications seem to suggest there might be something more than dragons be on the edge of the world. and so is a turn of the not, in fact, flat. there was a seemingly endless to

set up new possibilities to discover. privacy is certainly debt. everyone said so. rich people with big boats who sold stuff to the caa in the 1970s, you know who you are, founder of important hardware companies said so. he knows who he is. someone who blogs said so. the government can't make up its mind which person should say so or if the polling numbers look like, but it might say so. somebody tweeted and even really old technologist who invented the whole thing since the. everyone said privacy was dead. except a few explores, inventors, philosophers, children affairs and even government regulars who looked at a sea of data and still could see how a person can be distinguished from a pile of metadata. this is true for people who wish to decide for themselves the story they wish to tell about

themselves and to whom these people see a different horizon. the privacy engineer sees this horizon where privacy and security combined to create value as a similarly challenging and exciting time for exploration. this is the book for you. so that's how we start off the boat and it really is, i won't shamelessly plug it tonight but it really is the culmination of 15 years of thinking and partnership with security architects, our ford is written by an artificial intelligence analytics ceo. so we really do think that yes, there are more and more identifiable moments that are happening out there, but i also think that we can think organically. even though we have all the element of armageddon, we have all the elements for doing something they can be incredibly in reaching and human survey. so that's my big we are the world policy fix for stanford.

that's all i've got. >> hello, everybody. thanks, jim, joanne and michelle, professor felton. i am mark szpak. as jim said i've been a litigator at ropes and gray in boston since 1985. i'm intrigued where going to work on even finding a data debate in boston we call it large data. [laughter] large data. and after the intellectual property connection is really, part of this for me, jim and i years ago started off and we had a case together where we were working on a trade secret case, the have to do with who invented the pump sneakers, for those of you who remember a. there's an aspect of trade secret law that sort of carries through to this context for me,

it's a very fundamental rule. in order to be able to assert rights with respect to a trade secret you've got to keep it secret. if you don't keep it secret, it's gone and your rights go with it. just like a day. once your data is out there, it's gone. and trying to reel back right as part of a but here is talking about, whether that's even possible. i've been working on data breach and data security cases, like jim said, ever since ropes and gray served in the case in 2007, seven years ago, but at least for me and i think for a lot of people that really started a lot of attention in this area. it was at the time the largest cyber attack of its kind, and it stayed that way until the heartland payment systems case came along in -- target. as we counseled as well. and we at ropes and gray advised

-- [inaudible] including the criminal intrusion of sony a couple of years ago, at nationwide where motion to dismiss the class action litigation that followed was granted just before lack of injury under the clever case which i'll talk about later on. probably as well. we worked -- clapper case. we assisted where my colleague doug is challenging the authority and the theory that i've been claimed by visa in assessing fines against merchants have been attacked, and i the ftc in its efforts to claim the ability to enforce reasonable security standards in the hotel franchise context. we are now working on issues for target as well. so not able to talk about any of the particular client matters in

detail, but it's a very interesting time to be here and to be able to talk in general about some of things that are in the news in the last few years. so my perspective, my gym perspective is that you look at big data issues from the perspective of someone in the trenches as a litigator dealing with cyber attacks against company data, bodies of company data, aggregation of company data. sometimes even as the attack is still potentially underway, we get called in. right at the moment when companies are faced with sudden challenges dealing with the reality of finding out what happened, finding out what exact data is at issue, working with law enforcement, and dealing with all of the range of things that happen immediately, regulatory inquiry, class action complaint, counterparty claims and obligations all of which

fall around you all at once if you're a company that has been attacked in this fashion, like a ton of bricks with extreme pressure to act very quickly, and also to do it right by all of those various other actors. very, very challenging and interesting task that we've gone through a number of times. so my introductory comment on this is that in the litigation context which is were i the, the analysis all starts and ends with injury. if any information about an individual is taken or exposed or lost, the courts will say what's the injury? and the recent clapper decision, a decision involving challenge to a fisa provision involving surveillance cam at the supreme

court issued in march of this year come supreme court makes clear that any federal courts, at least come we not talking about a risk of injury. we're not talking about the possibility of misuse, not even an objectively reasonable expectation of misuse. instead, to get into federal court under article iii of the constitution you need actual injury or injury that is certainly impending. just to satisfy article iii to get your foot in the door but even if you can satisfy that standard, you still need to have enough of an impact, enough of an injury to meet in the elements of a cause of action that you're trying to assert it, whether it's negligence or breach of contract, or the level of injury that might be necessary under the statute, if

that's how you're proceeding to otherwise you don't have the injury comes those two levels of injury. this is the fact future presenting to the court don't present a situation where the courts will intervene. courts won't socially engineer the situation for you by purporting a remedy unless you have an injury. and that's a structure that companies find familiar. ..

talk about privacy data security issues with different language, talk about reasonable security which is different and that is something that we can discuss as well. but in that context where you are talking about unfair practices it seems different. in the deception case for example, you talk about materiality instead of injury. instead you talk about whether the representation is a material one. in an unfairness case many of the cases you talk about doing sometimes you hear concerns not about what's happened but what

might have happened as the professor earlier said when you are dealing with these very difficult to model and predict but that is what you hear people expressing. you hear a discussion and the use of words like m. kennedy ends and distress, unpredictability, worry. all of those being discussed as warranting the need for possible action. that wouldn't be enough for the court. and there are almost no judicial decisions in the context validating or addressing the difference in approach as a supply by regulators acting under statutes but you don't have a body of case law where

the court have weighed in and validated or adjudicated determinations in the same way that you do. at least in the data security context you may in other and i think that other black of -- lack of judicial authority and the difference and approach that you see being discussed sometimes in the regulatory sphere is part of the difficulty that would be used for the reliability, predictability to grow the values that are tremendous but the companies are growing hand over fist very quickly. what are the rules and the risks likes who is going to be -- what

can we do with this data and how responsible will i be if a breach occurs? it is less clear than in the traditional. so that is my introductory. >> perhaps we should pick up on that theme. you have the damage piece of it thinking about it. might not be starting from the beginning trying to find what the data is that one of the things that seems to drive a lot of our thinking is what is the harm of the collection and analysis and analytics and putting it to use in some way. you did mention the inference is as well as i look at almost the

shrugging that occurred that maybe or maybe was only 20% of the traffic coming and i know professor yoo commented on the blog recently. is there any harm in this from the regulator's perspective what are the potential harms you are concerned about in regulating that and i would leave it to the professor to take the first of the technology and regulatory perspective. >> let me talk some about this from a technology standpoint. as i said before committing to be difficult to understand how it might be used. and it's difficult to say if the data is being used. if a particular his present life is published in a way they don't

want published or reached somehow they may never know about the job offer that it doesn't come, about the invitation to -- about the invitation to something that doesn't, or whatever it is. and so, the result is that people tend to think about this in terms of risk, and risk is the rational way to think about a situation in which causality is the need to exist but it's difficult to tell the exact mechanism or the exact way in which a negative consequence can manifest itself. and if so, the way people tend to think about this, and i think it is a reasonable way is to begin terms of risk and think in terms of a body of data being collected and being maintained and used. it's almost like an environmental risk. you can think of the data that is being held in an underground

oil tank. there are a lot of things that you can do to ensure that it's safe and replace it periodically and that it's going to end up leaking into the ground but you can never make that risk zero. if you want to minimize the risk of all your leaking into the ground of the best ways to not have an oil tank in the first place. that doesn't mean that you shouldn't have the oil tank ever but you need to think in terms of risk and exposure. and that's the way that i think many people think about these issues and i think it makes a lot of sense. >> i would like to step back from the regulatory position to a sort of policy philosophy perspective. when we are talking about protecting from harm, what are we trying to protect? and i would suggest it isn't merely a matter of protecting

individuals from harm to them by the abuse to the use they didn't want in their information, but there's alsthere is also a sociy dimension to privacy that respect for individual privacy or the lack of has an impact on the society as a whole that for a healthy functioning society, we need to be autonomous individuals with a certain amount of respect for our dignity and our autonomy so that we can operate freely and to deliberate and be innovative and speculative. it's essential to the scientific method and freedom in that there is a -- there are harms to society as a whole to the massive collection of information on individuals that amount to pervasive surveillance

and how we live and develop as individuals and as a society and we can run ourselves down the wrong pathway if what we are protecting is simply protecting an individual from harm so that's one thing we need to bear in mind that there are societal values and benefits to respecting privacy. but, so looking at what is the harm to individuals still, i am not speaking as a regulator because i don't think the wall that as we have been hearing are necessarily have come to conceive of and recognized privacy harms many of us would

perceive. would proceed. there's an interesting study of privacy by the professor in which he has categories of harm that include things like surveillance and collection, like disclosure, the distinction between information that was public about me such as stuff published in phone books or records that is left in a record or a book some place compared to that same information which was already published being posted on the world wide web, where now it is exposed to more people. it is searchable and it's a different degree of exposure and i can't tell you how many times we get constantly called letters to get the office. we got it in the oval office from people who are enraged to discover information on the

website where it's not like medical information that it's their name, address, other stuff from not just public records but the social network. and they are sure that there is a law that can't be there without their permission. but it's put there by somebody that they have no relationship with exposed to all of the world. so, i don't have the legal answers to how we can start to expand our definition of harm but i think that we should put on the individual impacted on the impact of society. >> now just to kind of follow up on that, don't we have them all pretty that kind of help protect us from some of the things on the credit for putting effort goes directly to some of these accuracy data collection issues that pop up for various purposes

to speak to some very specific types of harm but not for some of the others that have a real impact on our lives and society. it's only the u.s. view. you are walking onto the global stage and it is a very, very global stage and it is a hard outside of the u.s. borders into space on the human rights and infringement upon your freedom and it is much broader than trying to define the individual harm for the case and standing in that must always be kept in mind. in particular in the context of the big data because we are not targeting it and if we did we would be accused of overly monitoring. and so that was one point i

wanted to make. the other was thinking about the public databases to give a personal example on the real estate i own a home, there's real estate sites. its public findings, good reason for it to be a public filing in certain circumstances, but i also do something i call the identity project that they have been a part for quite some time and really helping the kids and parents understand the danger of identity theft and how that ties into the human trafficking. the identity theft for children in particular importing and exporting from usually the source is always some sort of something out of the mail or something that is talking about i am from so and so.

that bothers me a great deal and it's a chilling effect not just one individual who happens to have a cause that she believes in that sometimes the chilling on being able to stand up against things and being worried that someone is going to be where your children are impacting them. the other thing is where the harm ca it can collectively hapn is another personal example of healthcare we teach people and in doing so you have people coming in and out of your room. you happen to have a medical condition and i guarantee there's medical devices if

you've ever been around it's a constant flow. when your doorbell you have all of these double bulls from people that you crack down if you have time and have a speakerphone you track them down and say what service is actually provided for the colossal it's turned out a bunch of them were just observing the medical condition. it wasn't anything that was fair credit report is a teaching hospital it was a group of students but it resulted in what i would say collective insurance problem. and it can be hundreds and thousands of dollars. they are bleeding in the context

of part of privacy. >> my only thought is that there are specific areas where legislators act to implement a specific set of rules for the privacy statute. the rules that apply to the financial institutions. it was a way to proceed because you do end up with specific rules and regulations are implemented and the kind of rule making process that is that is generating the perfectibility that at least commerce is looking for above continue. there are a lot of others that

will be coming up to take all those different statutes overhauled it wouldn't happen. you couldn't do that. you couldn't have a single hit by statute so that is the tailoring of the rules and treatment that really has to be context specific. >> i agree with michelle. this is a very parochial discussion here because it's very u.s. centric it self has a

lot of impact not just the nsa was causing people to avoid data centers in the united states. it's the difference in rules and perceptions that companies have to worry about if they are going to get the dat to the data conts they think about where they are going to be looking for those differences do make a differen difference. we have to find a way to reconcile and work together but here the tradition of the united states has been more of a sense of less explored opportunities that are available from the big data and you have to make a choice between collecting the data in the first place so that it can be analyzed for its maximum potential for limiting

the collection of data so that in deference to the privacy concerns and then a eliminating imakeeliminating it from its availability for analysis. i think that we have gone more in the other direction. there is a great illustration that following the floods in indonesia a couple of years ago they were able to use the cell phone data collected on people's phones to analyze where people were going and how people were acting in relation to the floods and it helps give a trend this boom to the crisis management studies as a result of being able to get that data into the end of a shame we are not going to allow the cell phone data to be collected. so my sense in the united states

is that we will be more receptive in the united states. we are going to focus on issues with the use of data in a context specific way. >> i think that here the discussion on harm the professor talked about risk mitigation and try to get that risk as close as possible but i think that most of us would agree that there's not going to be a company that would take it to the zero-point and say let's not put that in the ground because there is this opportunity that there is a harm of surveillance that goes with the potentially financial loss or reputational harm that is best used in some way that we have some that protect. the folks take a look at washington at the big data at how do we balance these risks and potential arms and the

opportunity to spur innovation because going back to your experiences working at some of those analytics that we saw in the genetic records based talking about the geographic trends and the course of the flu is voluble information that we know comes from the analytics and so if they come up to you these days and ask you how would you invite the president to balance the risk and that opportunity with the harm, how would you approach that? it starts with you. >> i dig it's too much to ask the president to. [laughter] there are some important public policy things that have been done and they start i think with

some pretty fundamental concepts for example to try to strengthen the idea from the consumers and citizens in the commercial context. right now we have a phenomenon that are sometimes called privacy theater in which someone pretends to disclose how the data is going to be used and then i pretended that i've understood and consented to that. that doesn't help anybody. getting to something like the real consent is helpful. there's been a meeting of the minds about what the expectations are. i also think that outside of the policy process we are starting to see and we are going to see more technical self-help by the end users and that means people are acting in a way that denied the data collection that adds

noise to the data. they are behaving in a way that is that causes interactive data. we are going to see all kinds of tactics carried out and we are already seeing this we are seeing a rise of privacy protected products for use online but we are going to see more and we are going to see more sophisticated ones not only with respect to the big data how to analyze but there's also sophisticated theories of how to modify and manage in ways that further protect privacy and i think we are going to see them taking matters into their own hands like we see sometimes with people of waiting medical care because they don't want something to end up in their

record often people are getting more sophisticated things and orchestrating or simulating certain online behaviors to give the impression certain things about them are true which are not. >> asking the president to solve everything which 130 get to decide the countries where we do business but the second is i had a great conversation once upon a time i said i would love to come as a technical community and just have a closed door like let's talk about what the ip address actually is. it's not a piece of spyware it is the internet as it turns out. so i said to the commission or don't you think a little more technical doesn't mean you have to be up to date on everything and he said we have to help us. [laughter]

i said at the fact that you can name this guy is problematic. maybe that is the case. hats off to you. you were the name and technical awareness and i applaud you for that. the other thing that is exciting in this area as it turns out it seems really fun. it turns out we have behavioral data and we understand what they want to entertain themselves etc. so the big movement i'm excited about is artificial intelligence in particular is just as we learned how to sandbox and use the data to test the applications before they

went wide and remember when that was a thing. as it turns out, you can. you can have a simulated data sets in terms of big data and in particular looking at people how they behave and shot. they don't need to pay what would amount to like $5,000 per shopper to have a communicator, have permissions all over them all. you just put the sporting goods stores to the right and you are off to the races and it sounds kind of silly but what you can do is actually simulates the various data sets that you want to combine so that you don't have to get the live data and we did this when we were creating the identity solutions back.

we said okay instead of just getting all the data that we can do is to simulate firs first wht would it take if there was a massive outbreak how would a fly with st do and anonymous practie run and as it turned out. i think for the smaller case practitioner that will continue to come that are going to be winners in the space. there's a couple companies we are looking at right now because it is a hot topic and it takes a lot of risk off the table to do things. the other thing is that we also need to have some building

standards set completely in my latest project it is responsible that any engineer graduates without a course in the fair information practice principles. to know that they don't have to learn about security these are programs that are available but it should be absolutely no one gets to practice in the u.s. without a license. not for the developers and other people creating the critical infrastructure and creating mass quantities of data. so it is not the big silver bullet that every engineer must be conversant in uses of data collection strategy, transparency strategy, all of the information practice principles but we have had around us since the 1960s. they might not need our need or technologies that the ethics into the framework we haven't even tried to exploit yet, so i refuse to believe something that has been that the static

overtime and tested through. and i just remember what was in the back of my head which was as a practitioner, to give you a real life example without the company attached we had a big crisis where one of our important research centers was cut off by a raging wildfire and we wanted to find out very quickly the kids needed to be picked up at school, families needed to know their loved ones were safe. we had to find out who was traveling that day or not. we have to crack open the the databases and in some cases very personal where we had non- custodial parents but had access to kids, so the point of that was that during that contract at a time because we planned and it wasn't necessarily technology but because we planned to do that, we knew if there was a beginning, middle and end. and i knew when we shut down access to the databases as soon

as i knew when we open access and that is a troubled white house while we are always in a crisis. people throw things at the walls. but you have to practice for the end of the crisis when everyone is exhausted and going home to make sure the data that is critical data or you wouldn't have been in the emergency for the first place has been closed again. it is the boring details that really amounts to safety. it's kind of a big day to say it's great for penicillin is available. it's terrific but hand washing turns out to be the number one thing that actually lowers diseases in large facilities. so there's a low-tech, high tech and understanding and education components that i think is where innovation needs to happen. >> there is a lot sort of an extension of the sand boxing but there is a lot you can do with the data and get a lot