A wonderful article was posted today in the ReadWriteWeb concerning ‘Questions to consider in the coming privacy wars‘.
Although the entry reaches perfection, I would like to express my opinion about some points.
How do we balance the benefits of data openness with the need for privacy?
Now this is a tricky question. I’m afraid we (the ones participating to the online community) have gone beyond a threshold, where privacy is a very thin layer. Facebook gives us the option to find long gone relatives, acquaintances, love affairs; and be found. With twitter we allow everybody to follow our every move. And anyone can keep a database of these entries.
Our need for privacy (if there is one) is in great danger, if not lost, when we decided to actively enter so many online social communities.
Welcome to the global village.
Are users savvy or motivated enough to control our own data?
If we weren’t capable of controlling our own data, we would be (at least indirectly) allowing the centralization of data in a single vendor (Point No. 6). Either way if we are dealing with private data, then each user alone is responsible for his/her information. I find decentralization a better way to protect information, than leaving it in the hands of a central power.
The result
Our private data are not being threatened from one day to the next. It is a situation, which slowly evolved, elevated; and therefore it is a situation, that is hard to recognize. We don’t realize to what extent our privacy is actually at stake, because we embraced each step of this development. We gladly participate in all these communities, without really considering the side-effects, because we are taking our privacy (each one has a different conception of privacy) for granted. But examples have come forward, proving that these communities can evolve differently. I don’t know if you have heard about the StudiVZ (facebook service in Germany) and how it evolved (see also Karsten Wenzlaff’s post on the subject. this one too). Even facebook phishing scams have been developed, to get a hold of people’s data.
Last thoughts
Under that perspective, maybe a central authority protecting us is needed. But who can guarantee, that this central control will not take advantage of its knowledge?
The subject Marshall is discussing goes beyond the web. With the shadow of national security, individual privacy is constantly at stake. But I wonder if the public has actually a say in the whole process?
Marshall Kirkpatrick responded on 03 Jan 2008 at 4:26 am #
Thanks for your thoughts here! I’m going to link to this post from the original. Gotta get talking about this stuff.
gregory responded on 04 Jan 2008 at 3:30 am #
people do things because they can…. same with governments… i calmly think all operating systems, all telcos, all social networks, all financial institutions have back doors, for the use of the powers who control economic and social activities, call it the government…
it is not even a question that “is privacy an illusion”… of course it is an illusion
from the personal level, where others often know things about us we are blind to in ourselves (and we are all open books to each other, though we think inwardly that nobody knows), just ask your friends or your spouse…
to the global level, where the personalities of entire countries are clear to everybody except perhaps those who live in them…
this has to do with a “metaphysical” reality, there is only one mind, only one consciousness…
a good yogi, anybody with just a bit of inner calmness, can know anything about anybody, the information simply exists on a slightly more subtle plane…
in fact, there are many powers that a developed consciousness has, they are called siddhis, in sanskrit, and there is a list of them in patanjili’s yoga sutras…
technology is after the fact of what the mind can already do, something like a crutch, or a tool, and if awareness can potentially be infinite (it can), then of course technology is simply the process of doing this in the so-called outer reality…
so you who are in this business of manifesting or materializing the abilities of awareness technically, will certainly see changes looking a lot like “loss of privacy” but it is only the revelations that come up on the way to materially “authenticating” what already is…
we are on the way to omniscience, and the river will not be stopped….
enjoy,
gregory
robojiannis responded on 04 Jan 2008 at 12:27 pm #
@Gregory
you are talking about a metaphysical level of knowledge and privacy, i think. Where technology is just like tool, doing actions the brain can already do.
But the implications of the “loss of privacy” can be comprehended in what you say ‘outer-reality’.
A good yogi - as you say - may not be affected by that fact (he has inner calmness), but the rest of the global community might.
Don’t you think?
gregory responded on 04 Jan 2008 at 3:12 pm #
the privacy that we have had up until now has been comparable to the privacy an ostrich has when its head is in the sand, is what i was attempting to say…
technology is removing the sand
robojiannis responded on 04 Jan 2008 at 6:36 pm #
I agree, we are entering a new age. But we shouldn’t blaim technology for everything…