BHP Billiton to stem corporate corruption | Bizcommunity.com

Mail & Guardian Online reports that global mining, oil and gas company BHP Billiton is working to stem corporate corruption in-house and among its local business associates – who received in early January an “anti-corruption expectations” notification from Billiton.

The document, which requires signed acknowledgement of receipt, summarises the company’s anti-corruption policy, which bans everything such as “gifts, travel, entertainment, meals or other things of value” that might improperly influence a government official to “facilitation payments”, defined as “small payments made to government officials to expedite routine actions”.

BHP Billiton SA spokesperson Johnny Dladla said the company’s code of conduct and internal policies prohibit corruption. “Specifically, our policies specify risk assessment and due diligence requirements for engaging business partners who interact with others on our behalf,” he said. Although the action is commendable, experts say that moves such as these by large multinationals are because of tougher international legislation, such as the United Kingdom’s Bribery Act, introduced last year, and The United States’s Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), introduced in the late 1970s, are being enforced more actively.

via BHP Billiton to stem corporate corruption.

Schmidt: ‘Google doesn’t do data mining’ • The Register

Google boss Eric Schmidt has claimed that his company doesn’t “do data mining.” But this may be some sort of joke. Schmidt was speaking on The Colbert Report, the famously satirical US current-affairs show, and apparently, even when he’s speaking with The Wall Street Journal, there’s no way of knowing whether he’s earnest, flippant, or completely mad.

During Schmidt’s appearance on the show Tuesday evening in the States, host and friend of The Reg Steven Colbert accused Google of making its dollars “by essentially data mining.” And though Colbert seemed to conflate Google’s mass collection of user data with its search algorithms, Schmidt was adamant that data mining isn’t something that Google does.

“You do know things about Americans that we, maybe, when we were children, didn’t think people would ever know about us,” Colbert said. “Our likes, or dislikes, are codified, regionally if not individually, correct?”

“It’s true that we see your searches,” Schmidt says. “But we forget them after a while.”

This is apparently a reference to the company’s latest data-retention policy, which says it erases the last octet of a user’s IP address from its server logs after nine months, and that it removes cookie data after 18 months. The policy was announced in the fall of 2008, and it was implemented sometime before November of 2009.

But Google only agreed to such scrubbing after years of pressure from governments and privacy advocates, and the European Union data protection authorities still say that the policy does not comply with EU law.

via Schmidt: ‘Google doesn’t do data mining’ • The Register.

Data mining on the Web is shaping our world. Are we ready for it? – UB NewsCenter

Each day, we exchange a mess of content through Facebook, Twitter, blogs, discussion boards and other online forums. What does this digital information reveal about our real selves, and how are companies and other organizations using our data? In a July cover article titled “The Web Means the End of Forgetting,” the New York Times Magazine explored how the Internet is changing privacy. In August, the Wall Street Journal reported on Google’s “soul-searching” over the question of how far to go in “profiting from its crown jewels — the vast trove of data it possesses about people’s activities.”

Rohini Srihari, who teaches classes on Web search and mining and is founder and CEO of Janya Inc., a text analysis/text mining firm, understands the potential of data mining — and the complicated concerns it raises.

via Data mining on the Web is shaping our world. Are we ready for it? – UB NewsCenter.

Google has been fibbing about data mining – Consumer Watchdog reckons it’s in cahoots with US gov | TechEye

Consumer Watchdog has said that the Energy and Commerce Committee really must conduct hearings into Google privacy violations, with information coming to light about Google’s classified contracts with the US government.

Consumer Watchdog’s John M. Simpson wrote in a letter to the Energy and Commerce Committee: “It appes that Google holds classified US government contracts to supply search and geospatial information to the US government. In addition, White House records show that Google executives have been holding meetings with US national security officials for undisclosed reasons. Finally, it also appears that Google’s widely criticised efforts to collect wireless network data on American citizens were not inadvertent, contrary to the company’s claims.”

The letter suggests that an affiliation between Google and the US intelligence squad on collecting data, or indeed any giant corporation, will be a “toxic combination” for the US constitution.

via Google has been fibbing about data mining – Consumer Watchdog reckons it’s in cahoots with US gov | TechEye.

N.Y. bomb plot highlights limitations of data mining – Computerworld

Saturday’s botched bombing attempt in New York City provides an example of why the use of data mining approaches to uncover potential terrorism plots is a little like weather forecasting.

“You definitely need to do it, because it gives you warning of major storms,” said John Pescatore, an analyst with Gartner Inc. and a former analyst with the National Security Agency. “But it’s not going to tell you about individual raindrops.”

Faisal Shahzad, a naturalized U.S. citizen of Pakistani descent was arrested Monday at New York’s John F. Kennedy International airport in connection with an attempt to detonate a car bomb in Times Square. Shahzad, who is scheduled to be indicted on terrorism-related charges in Manhattan today, was pulled off a plane bound for Dubai, minutes before the jetliner was scheduled to take off.

Shahzad is alleged to have parked an explosives-laden vehicle in Times Square, apparently with the intention of blowing it up. Media reports quoting the FBI and other authorities said the bomb could have caused a substantial number of deaths and injuries had it detonated.

The anti-terrorism task force was quickly able to identify Shahzad as the prime suspect in the case thanks to a series of mistakes the would-be bomber made. But for the moment, there is little to show that authorities had any inkling of either Shahzad or of his plot beforehand.

via N.Y. bomb plot highlights limitations of data mining – Computerworld.

Hugo Restall: The Rules in China – WSJ.com

After a Chinese court sentenced four executives of Australian mining company Rio Tinto to lengthy prison terms for bribery and stealing commercial secrets yesterday, Canberra was quick to respond. Foreign Minister Stephen Smith pointedly stated, “As China emerges into the global economy, the international business community needs to understand with certainty what the rules are in China.”

In the eight months since Australian citizen Stern Hu and his Chinese colleagues Wang Yong, Ge Minqiang and Liu Caikui were arrested, we've learned a great deal about the lack of certainty and rules not only in China, but also in the global commodities trade. Some of that is China's fault, but hardly all of it. The Australian government and Rio Tinto must share the blame for lack of transparency and failing to play by the rules.

Foreign media coverage of the arrests and trial has focused on whether the Chinese authorities pursued this case for political reasons. Remember that early last year, cash-starved Rio Tinto angered China by inviting Aluminum Corp. of China, or Chinalco, to take a $19.5 billion equity stake and then backing out of the deal under a combination of shareholder, government and public pressure. Rio was also driving a tough bargain in iron-ore price negotiations with Chinese buyers. Many observers speculated that the four executives were pawns in a high stakes game of tit-for-tat orchestrated from Beijing.

Certainly the timing of the case makes such suspicions inevitable. But the reality is probably more complicated. The Chinese justice system may be manifestly unfair, and once it gains momentum a guilty verdict is a foregone conclusion. Yet Rio itself put forces in motion that led to four men losing their freedom.

It all started with the boom in the global iron-ore market in the early 2000s. That’s when China’s steel industry embarked on a massive expansion of capacity, turning the trade in ore from a buyer’s market to a seller’s market. China’s large state-owned steelmakers bought at the benchmark price negotiated by Japanese and Korean mills, while smaller firms had to pay the higher spot price. This created an incentive for arbitrage and corruption, but unfortunately both the Chinese government and the mining companies were slow to take account of this in their internal controls.

via Hugo Restall: The Rules in China – WSJ.com.

Rio Tinto Executive Admits to Taking Two Bribes – NYTimes.com

Stern Hu, an executive at the British-Australian mining giant Rio Tinto, has said in court that he accepted two large bribes in late 2008 and early 2009 totaling about $1 million from Chinese steel mills in exchange for agreeing to sell them long-term supplies of iron ore.

The confession came at the high profile trial here of four Rio Tinto employees charged with accepting $12 million in bribes and also with stealing commercial secrets from Chinese companies, according to Jin Chunqing, a lawyer representing Mr. Hu, an Australian national.

The hearing was generally closed to the public, and details of the proceedings have been slowly trickling out. The details of these two bribes and who they came from had so far gone unreported until Friday.

via Rio Tinto Executive Admits to Taking Two Bribes – NYTimes.com.