Showing posts with label privacy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label privacy. Show all posts

Sunday, December 4, 2011

Where did all of the "who ate my privacy?" posts go?

For those of you who enjoyed reading my occasional article about Facebook, Google, and invasions of privacy, don't worry, I haven't stopped writing them. What I have done is started a new blog, called, rather modestly, "I Own All Information." The name of it is intended to correct any misconceptions that Facebook's Zuckerberg and the Google crowd might have. I think they have been misinformed about the legal status of information gathered using Facebook and Google searches, as they don't own that information, I do, of course.

Me and Al Franken, we have a lot in common.

You can find the new blog here. Actually, I'm not moving any of the posts that have appeared in Vorpal Trade. There are a bunch of the "I Own All Information" stripe that have appeared here, and since they are part of the Vorpal Trade history, they will stay here. New articles that are mainly about outrages over misappropriation of information, spying, surveillance, and all that juicy, gossipy stuff will show up in I Own All Information, while all of the articles on economics, investing, business, finance, psychology, and the peculiar blind spots that people live with will continue to appear here.

For those who are curious about what the heck a "privacy outrage" is, here is a short list of the articles appearing in Vorpal Trade that were more about information and privacy than economics or business:

Thursday, October 20, 2011

Emergence of the Real Chronoscope

In 1956 a story by Isaac Asimov was published in Astounding Science Fiction, titled "The Dead Past". The story, ostensibly about Government control of acadamic research, is also a horror piece in which privacy is effectively destroyed through the invention of the chronoscope, a device that can look into the past. And since five minutes ago is the past, that means the chronoscope can see everything.

We are quickly headed toward that future, in which there is no privacy because all of the details of anyone's life, actions, beliefs, acquaintances, and shortcomings can be known by anyone else, anywhere in the world, at any time. Exhibit #1 is Facebook, which is suspected of or has been discovered keeping "shadow profiles" on pretty much everyone on the planet. It doesn't matter whether you have a Facebook account or not. They have a file on you anyway.

And it is a very, very deep file indeed. People who have used a legal option to obtain copies of the data Facebook maintains on them have received 1000-page documents, and that is after redaction of data that Facebook claims is trade secret. Typically, when these Facebook-is-up-to-no-good stories appear, there is a rash of people who defend Facebook, saying that it was the fault of the Facebook users for using the service, but this time the tenor of the dialog is different.

While internet stalking, by neighbors, ISPs, criminals, police, or whoever, is creepy, there have been proposals in the United Kingdom to make the contents of all computer subject to police inspection at any time. Separately, EU MEP Tiziano Motti of Italy has proposed that black boxes be installed on all computers so that police can detect criminal activity automatically. Clearly, given the nature of computers that means that each hard drive would be an open book. And given the nature of mankind, that means the contents of each hard drive would then be available for sale on the black market.

Exhibit #2 is the evolution of face recognition algorithms that can attach names to faces in a photo of a crowd. Depending on which software, company, interest group, or programmer you speak to the current rate of success is anywhere from poor to scary. Google has built facial recognition into Picasa, and claims to have backed off on some uses of the technology on the web because it was scary. The Carnegie Mellon lab that developed PittPatt has been acquired by Google. Facebook has put facial recognition into its software to help people tag others in their photographs. Governments use face recognition at customs to save time spotting terrorists and miscreants. With the proliferation of cameras on city streets, the low price of cameras, and the rapidly declining cost of processors to perform facial recognition on video streams, it is conceivable that real-time citywide monitoring of citizen locations is not very far off.

So whether you are an introverted stay-at-home computer user, or an extroverted on-the-go social butterfly, the future is clearly heading in the direction of keeping close tabs on everything you are doing, whatever its religious or political leaning.

In July, my comment about reputation shredding mentioned a reliance on anonymity for bad actors to cause damage to people falsely accused. With sufficient surveillance and the preponderance of public opinion on your side, however, you wouldn't need to be anonymous at all, because you would have the approval of the majority, and being mean to people isn't against the law.
-------------
For those who are interested, here are some links to materials about The Dead Past.


IMDB entry about the BBC dramatization of the short story (part 1 of 7):

Saturday, January 22, 2011

Eric Schmidt out, but we still want updates on BMs

Word is that Larry Page will take over as Google CEO, replacing Eric Schmidt. Eric is famous for many good things, but also famous for one or more statements in the "you have no privacy now get over it" initiative that he shares with Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg.

Well, dropping out of the CEO slot doesn't let you off the hook, Eric. We still are entitled, in this there-is-no-privacy era, to know everything about you, including the timing and quality of all your bowel movements. And, come to think of it, all your other bodily fluid emissions, including when, where, and with whom. If anyone. Sorry, but those are your rules.

Wednesday, June 23, 2010

Apple is as Big Brother Does

Reported today in Slashdot and elsewhere: Apple's iTunes, iPhone, iPad, iPod terms of service require that you grant your location data to Apple for unlimited sales to third parties thereafter.

Does this grant Apple the right to collect the location data of specific political candidates and their staff for use by the opposing side(s)?

Tuesday, May 25, 2010

All Your Informations Are Belong to Me

A storm is brewing around Facebook and its cavalier treatment of users' privacy. Over the weekend the Washington Post published an op-ed piece by Facebook's CEO designed to defuse some of the criticism. Commenting on that piece was a Monday Wall Street Journal article by Jessica Vascellaro that re-lit the subject, making it look like the Facebook pledge was fairly weak. But WSJ wasn't alone, the criticisms have become a flood:

Facebook CEO pledges another privacy rework (CBC)
Tension Building At Facebook As Staffers Challenge Zuckerberg's Approach To Privacy (BusinessInsider)*
Facebook Grapples With Privacy Issues (Wall Street Journal) (Jessica Vascellaro)
Dumb f***s (Forbes) (Meghan Casserly)
Facebook CEO Accused of Securities Fraud (slashdot)
Facebook CEO’s latest woe: accusations of securities fraud (VentureBeat)
Facebook Issues Statement On Latest Zuckerberg IM And Company Attitude Toward Privacy (BusinessInsider)

The shape of Facebook's grand strategy seems to be to take advantage of naivete wherever possible, then expose user data and expect that users will then forgive this slight by agreeing that it was all for their benefit anyway, as though Facebook knows better what is good for users than the users themselves do. From the WSJ article: "he [Facebook's CEO] has made no secret that he believes users should and will want to make more information about themselves public over time. "

Developers Can Exploit Facebook User Data
Facebook earlier deployed a series of programming tools that developers can use to add content to their websites. A lot of that content comes from the private data of individual users. One such site is YourOpenBook.org.

As of the time of this blog post, these were recent Searches:
my vulva
"I'm over it"
"jose gomez"
nigger
gay
win borden
interracial
acne
shaved my head
my new pictures
skinny dipping
lost virginity
my new number
"lost my virginity"
getting a divorce
naughty pics
had a threesome
slutty pictures
im a lesbian
radical muslim

Pick anything, and you get real pictures of real people, complete strangers, telling you exactly about their vulva or divorce or how they had a threesome or are radical muslim.

Go ahead, try it.

Coming Next
There is so much more to write on this topic, and how it intersects with economics and politics and the future of commerce. Future posts will explore each of these in turn.


* I first encountered a Forbes story, but that story is little more than a wrap of a BusinessInsider story which is in turn a wrap of a Wall Street Journal story. So for this news story, in effect, Forbes is suckling from the WSJ information stream. We chose the BusinessInsider headline because it was more colorful.

Wednesday, January 13, 2010

Zuckerberg's Rights to the Privacy of Chinese Activists

Facebook's Zuckerberg Says The Age of Privacy is Over
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/facebooks_zuckerberg_says_the_age_of_privacy_is_ov.php

Is Privacy Already Dead?
http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=120500

Facebook Does Not Understand the Meaning of Privacy
http://business.theatlantic.com/2010/01/facebook_does_not_understand_the_meaning_of_privacy.php

FaceBook’s Mark Zuckerberg: The Age Of Online Privacy Is Dead, And We Killed It
http://myhosting.com/blog/2010/01/facebooks-mark-zuckerberg-the-age-of-online-privacy-is-dead-and-we-killed-it/

Google threatens to leave China after attacks on activists' e-mail
The company said it has evidence to suggest that "a primary goal of the attackers was accessing the Gmail accounts of Chinese human rights activists..."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/13/AR2010011300359.html

Wednesday, December 30, 2009

More on Google's Rights to Your Privacy

Perhaps the best article I've seen pointing out the intellectual deficiencies of Eric Schmidt's views on private information is "Eric Schmidt's privacy policy is one scary philosophy -- Offhand comments by Schmidt about privacy hints that Google is spying, critics say" by Julie Bort and posted on networkworld.com. I'll quote just one of over a dozen of Julie's stinging points:

"...If you don't want to share with people what you've eaten for lunch, maybe you shouldn't eat it..."

One thing that is good about this tempest that started December 8th: The subject is hot, and the ferment will almost certainly result in multiple academic papers that prove beyond any doubt that Schmidt's position is false, destructive, misleading, self-serving, or all of the above. Just in researching this short article I encountered a multitude of well-stated, rational arguments that rapidly lay the foundation for such a paper.

Commentators on this posting should post their addresses, home phone numbers, and most recent sexual liason's name in their posting, please.