Don't Build a Database of Ruin 209
Hugh Pickens writes "Paul Ohm writes in Harvard Business Review that businesses today are building perfect digital dossiers of their customers, massive data stores containing thousands of facts about every member of our society. He says these databases will grow to connect every individual to at least one closely guarded secret. 'This might be a secret about a medical condition, family history, or personal preference. It is a secret that, if revealed, would cause more than embarrassment or shame; it would lead to serious, concrete, devastating harm,' writes Ohm. 'And these companies are combining their data stores, which will give rise to a single, massive database. I call this the Database of Ruin. Once we have created this database, it is unlikely we will ever be able to tear it apart.' Consider the most famous recent example of big data's utility in invading personal privacy: Target's analytics team can determine which shoppers are pregnant, and even predict their delivery dates, by detecting subtle shifts in purchasing habits. 'In the absence of intervention, soon companies will know things about us that we do not even know about ourselves. This is the exciting possibility of Big Data, but for privacy, it is a recipe for disaster.' According to Ohm, if we stick to our current path, the Database of Ruin will become an inevitable fixture of our future landscape, one that will be littered with lives ruined by the exploitation of data assembled for profit. The only way we avoid this is if companies learn to say, 'no' to some of the privacy-invading innovations they're pursuing. 'The lesson is plain: compete vigorously and beat your competitors in every legitimate way, except when it comes to privacy invasion. Too many companies have learned this lesson the hard way, launching invasive new services that have triggered class action lawsuits, Congressional inquiries, and media firestorms.'"
Resistance is the answer (Score:3, Interesting)
According to Ohm, if we stick to our current path, the Database of Ruin will become an inevitable fixture of our future landscape, one that will be littered with lives ruined by the exploitation of data assembled for profit.
No doubt, but what we need is a path forward that avoids the pitfalls of ubiquitous databases while retaining the benefits.
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:5, Funny)
Did Ohm meet Resistance?
(-;
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:5, Funny)
I have some potential differences with his current opinions.
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:2)
V = I R
Yes he did.
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:2, Funny)
Why hide? If you have something to hide then you shouldn't have done it in the first place.
A.C.
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:5, Funny)
hide. If you have something to hide then you should have done it on your neighbors wifi it in the first place.
Fixed that for you
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:2)
No doubt, but what we need is a path forward that avoids the pitfalls of ubiquitous databases while retaining the benefits.
Do you have an idea for how to attain this?
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:5, Insightful)
spill everyones secrets at once so we all look dirty and would be hypocrites for judging anyone else. then any demagogue can have all of his problems pointed out by the opposition so he has no power either. When everyone knows your dirty secret it has lost its power because you also know theirs.
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:3)
My own personal solution is to not give a shit. You know that I have baboons living in my kitchen? So what.
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:3)
It's not so much that you have baboons in your kitchen, or even that you fondle them. But with fetuses scavenged from civil war victims? You disgust me.
Stupid jokes aside, not giving a shit is compelling, but it's a tall order, and one we have to do all at once for it to be effective. At least the idea of airing all of our dirty laundry at once gets us on that path (though I'd much favor putting the genie back in its bottle).
I think the lesson is that we're going to be hard pressed to find answers without costs. We're going to have to work hard and fast, and be honest and forthcoming about these costs.
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:4, Funny)
Stupid jokes aside, not giving a shit is compelling, but it's a tall order, and one we have to do all at once for it to be effective
Nah, it's definitely something that makes you feel better as soon as you do it. Try it. You'll feel better.
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:2)
The hard part is getting the emotional part of your brain to join the rational brain.
Much easier said than done *sigh*
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:2)
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:2)
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:2)
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:3)
Heck with the kitchen, I know a city chock full of baboons, its a little district near Maryland.
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:2)
Heck with the kitchen, I know a city chock full of baboons, its a little district near Maryland.
A little district, but you will enjoy its presumption and its powerful bouquet.
--
Never look a baboon in the face; they take it as aggression.
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:2)
Heck with the kitchen, I know a city chock full of baboons, its a little district near Maryland.
They painted their faces with woad, and you fell for it.
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:2)
It's blue face, red arse, isn't it?
I'm always getting that wrong. Anyone got one of them there mnemnomnics?
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:2)
Well, when face and ass are so similar, does it matter which one is red and which one is blue?
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:2)
Anyone got one of them there mnemnomnics?
Republicans.
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:2)
The arses are red
And the faces are blue
Get that in your head
Or no baboon paint for you
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:5, Insightful)
I think that most of the things people hide are things about their sex lives.
Dr. House has the rule that everyone lies. I have my own rule, which is this: Everyone is a pervert. There are no exceptions. The only differences between us are what kind of pervert we are and whether or not we keep it under wraps.
The Database Of Ruin[TM] will reveal what kind of pervert everyone is. As a result, we can all come out of the closet. While ultimately this has some potential to be a Good Thing [TM], the destruction that will be caused in the short term is too terrible to contemplate.
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:2)
We are running this experiment now and the results aren't good.
We force greater and greater disclosure, to the point of being punitive, on politicians, so they only ones who become politicians are ones who don't care about their privacy. And so when they pass laws they pass ones that have no respect for privacy either.
There are a lot of important reasons for sunshine laws, but seriously, releasing your tax returns???
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:2)
Soon, the only people electable for office will be hermit Luddites.
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:2)
It might be easier just to make everyone wear transparent clothing and live in glass houses.
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:2)
It might be easier just to make everyone wear transparent clothing and live in glass houses.
Why bother with the clothing at all? The global warming is at our doorstep and will remove the need for this useless artifact.
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:2)
Just riding the skeuomorphic wave [slashdot.org], baby.
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:2)
It might be easier just to make everyone wear transparent clothing and live in glass houses.
Why bother with the clothing at all? The global warming is at our doorstep and will remove the need for this useless artifact.
Sounds attractive, and I'd vote for it, but only in some parts of the world. Consider a place like Finland, instead.
In summer, there are mosquitoes [wikipedia.org], midges [wikipedia.org], blackfly [wikipedia.org], horse fly [wikipedia.org], deer ked [wikipedia.org], and other blood-sucking and/or biting horrors. The insect-repellent sprays, lotions, and suchlike which allegedly deter those buggers don't work very well (and might be unpleasant on one's delicate bits). I'll take the transparent clothing for summer.
In winter, there are just about no insects to be found (at least, not outside). However, when it's around -40C, the transparent clothing would need a good insulation value, and would likely be layered and thick so its transparency would be somewhat debatable. And have you seen the boots we have to wear outside in winter?
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:3)
If you keep on being let down by details like those, how do you want to embrace progress? I mean, really?
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:2)
In winter, there are just about no insects to be found (at least, not outside). However, when it's around -40C, the transparent clothing would need a good insulation value, and would likely be layered and thick so its transparency would be somewhat debatable.
Aerogel [wikipedia.org] is a good thermal insulator, and can be transparent. Now we just need to make the flexible types transparent, or make the transparant types flexible.
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:2)
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:2)
Sure because untargeted advertising is vastly preferable.
I don't have any dirty little secrets waiting to be aired - or at least, none worse than would appear for most other people if such a database got into public hands.
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:2)
Re:Resistance is the answer (Score:3)
And how do you propose building such a firewall within the same database?
A hammer can build a house--or tear it apart. A fire can spur life, save life, or destroy life. Nuclear fission can supply massive amounts of energy, or it can destroy everything in its path. We can't do away with hammers, fires, or nuclear energy, it would be devastating to society, moreover there's no putting those genies back in the bottle. What we can do with the first two items is punish those who act with malice through vandalism or arson. Nuclear energy remains an ever tangled morass. We can try to regulate it, contain it, and hope that no party with the means uses it with destructive intent. There'd be no effective punishment for a nuclear missile attack, aside from a retaliatory strike.
So too with one giant database. We can hope that access to its contents remain extremely limited and that those who do always act with benevolent or at least benign intent. History isn't looking terribly favorable to either of those measures: Those with access to information tend to exploit it for personal gain at the expense of others; an information is rarely if ever, adequately protected from unauthorized access. What's worse, unlike a nuclear first strike in which the actors are fully aware of the repercussions, unauthorized use or abuse of a centralized database may not have any clearly delineated consequences.
Poison the well (Score:5, Funny)
I, Anomalous Coward, I am involved in a sexual relationship with a goldfish.
Basically, if I can make up enough too-crazy-to-be-true BS and post it all over the internet, nobody will know how much I am attracted to giraffes.
DAMMIT.
Re:Poison the well (Score:2)
Are you the person with the baboons?
Correction (Score:5, Insightful)
Shouldn't that read "Too few companies have learned ..."? Otherwise the problem would not exist.
Anyway, I think this can only be fixed by legislation. Companies have too much monetary incentive for privacy violation to do anything else than token improvements. "Industry self-regulation" is nothing but newspeak for "foxes guarding the henhouse".
Privacy? (Score:2)
All the time here people are drivelling on about the "privacy violations" of shopping in a big chain store and paying for it with their credit card which lets the stores build up a picture of their buying habits.
I suppose these are also the same people I see wandering around the streets in stained clothing screaming "STOP LOOKING AT ME! STOP LOOKING AT ME!" to nobody that the rest of us can see.
Levels of "public" (Score:5, Insightful)
There are different levels of the word "public". You can look through my windows and see the interior. So that view is "public". Any burglar who wants to break in would have to come to my house and look inside to see if there is anything of value. If the same view is visible on Google Streetview, it is by far more public. Burglars can monitor thousands of addresses from their own home, without being seen themselves. This is why harvesting public data can be enormously evil.
The ability to pay anonymously is getting less and less by day. In Europe, it is not yet that bad that you are seen as a terrorist if you pay cash, but there are far too many places where you have to pay, but real money is not accepted. So you may think people are stupid if they pay with a credit card, but often there isn't even a choice.
Orwell was wrong. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Orwell was wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
no he wasn't. In his future, the difference between the state and the corporation was zero. We're damned close to that now where one passes the puck to the other to get over some legal or functional limitation the other isn't limited by. When it's done, the puck gets passed back.
"The puck stops here." (Score:3)
no he wasn't. In his future, the difference between the state and the corporation was zero. We're damned close to that now where one passes the puck to the other to get over some legal or functional limitation the other isn't limited by. When it's done, the puck gets passed back.
I dunno, but that sounds kinda Canadian, eh?
But Huxley was right, in the New Brave World. (Score:2, Insightful)
People don't even care. And sadly actively participate in their own destruction.
Re:But Huxley was right, in the New Brave World. (Score:2)
Re:But Huxley was right, in the New Brave World. (Score:3)
Re:But Huxley was right, in the New Brave World. (Score:2)
Part of me doesn't want to see soma legalized.
Re:Orwell was wrong. (Score:4, Interesting)
Holy fuck how did this get modded up? As someone else said already, money IS (one form of) power.
To me, Nineteen-Eightyfour is first and foremost about language that deceives and cripples critical thought, not about televisors and war with Eurasia. Those things have been made possible by the actual subject matter of the book, namely the obstruction of the ability to say 2 and 2 make 4. But don't feel bad, most people seem to miss that.
Re:Orwell was wrong. (Score:2)
Amazon knows me better than myself . . . ? (Score:5, Insightful)
. . . than how come I am not interested in any of those products that Amazon tells me should interest me?
Maybe there is something wrong with me?
Maybe not conforming to their purchase expectations is a sign of criminal activity . . . ?
Re:Amazon knows me better than myself . . . ? (Score:2)
Re:Amazon knows me better than myself . . . ? (Score:2)
I'm sure by now they know there are two children and two adults, who is a boy or a girl, and all their likes, dislikes and habits.
Actually, they probably know there's a baby as well
Re:Amazon knows me better than myself . . . ? (Score:3)
Re:Amazon knows me better than myself . . . ? (Score:4, Insightful)
That is a really important element here, I think you have nailed. Its not a big deal that Amazon or Target can guess you are pregnant from the products you buy.
So could they guy running the general store in your small 18th and early 19th century town. It was the only place you had to go for goods and his list of customers was short enough he could pay attention to everyone's specific needs, which he did so he knew what products to order / stock. He also knew allot about you regardless of how much or little your spoke to each other because of what you bought and how often. It was only a brief period human history late 19th thru 20th century that our economic options for providers grew faster than our ability to collect and correlate information about individuals.
The issue do we need to address / control what information entities are allowed to exchange with each other. Target knows my buying habits, I shop there. That is sorta implicit in the activity. Should there be rules about them selling / giving / exchanging information with other entities be they corporate, government, individuals? Knowing my buying habits at Target and having access to the other sources you mention paints a much more compete picture of my life and destroys my ability to protect my privacy. Where if there was some product I needed that I was really really embarrassed about before for example I had the option of driving across town and making a single purchase at some other vendor.
Re:Amazon knows me better than myself . . . ? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Amazon knows me better than myself . . . ? (Score:2)
Re:Amazon knows me better than myself . . . ? (Score:2)
Re:Amazon knows me better than myself . . . ? (Score:2)
In the hands of some ideally benevolent government, all data may be benign. In the hands of a despotic one, it can be used to detect and eliminate any and all opposition - a witch hunt to end all witch hunts.
And when you factor in the "transnational" status of our world's largest corporations (i.e. they aren't "American," "British," or "French" companies anymore but "multinationals") the number of governments that you could be targeted by is essentially unlimited, since corporations have no conscience (by definition they don't: They aren't living things) they'll sell the product to anybody they can legally sell to that has money to spend.
Had a conversation about this recently and was pretty shocked at the apathy. Granted, I was talking to a Facebook addict at the time, but its shocking how little people think about what permanent records exist of their private lives.
Re:Amazon knows me better than myself . . . ? (Score:4, Insightful)
The more you know about someone the easier it becomes to ruin them. Imagine a world where any sufficiently motivated extortionist could have their pick of targets. Eventually those extortionists would infiltrate whatever system was overseeing the information aggregation and, if it were not also the system controlling society, they would soon merge the two and run both.
The scum who fit the mold for the flaws in a system always end up running said system, if there is any benefit to them to do so. The system in question just so happens to be one favoring extortionists. They are one of the worst types of scum to give a foothold to, and by virtue of human nature one of the hardest to get rid of, which is why the entire idea presented is so thoroughly disturbing.
Re:Amazon knows me better than myself . . . ? (Score:2)
The more you know about someone the easier it becomes to ruin them. Imagine a world where any sufficiently motivated extortionist could have their pick of targets. Eventually those extortionists would infiltrate whatever system was overseeing the information aggregation
It gets worse: An infiltration wouldn't even be needed--a successful extortionist could simply use his profits from the previous extortion attempt to BUY access to the data since these databases would undeniably be "commercialized" by some scum-bag looking to make a quick buck.
Re:Amazon knows me better than myself . . . ? (Score:3)
*somewhat-whoosh-but-not-really*
That it is not accurate for you is half of the point. The people / processes that rely on that data will insist that it is perfect.
I can call the police and fabricate an accusation of rape against you. With any form of evidence, they can and will arrest you. When my rouse is discovered, the charges will be dismissed immediately, and I'll be in trouble, blah blah blah... but meanwhile, YOUR arrest record will be entered into the local and national databases as a felony/sex/violent crime.
And for the rest of your life, you will be subject to Felony Stop procedures any time a cop pulls you over.
See the problem? Database isn't accurate, but every player involved on that database-side has no incentive to challenge it. The cops on the beat will want to know you're a probable felon, right? Who's going to be dumb enough to remove that data record?
Even better, since you'd now be tagged as a not-yet-convicted sex offender, and nobody is going to remove *that* record, either. The database... is perfect.
Re:I can see it now (Score:2)
That sounds UNMUTUAL, number 41. No, I didn't say Commy-terrorist-pedo, I said something worse. To call you a commie, I'd have to have some proof, like you saying commie things to the last guy we called a commie, or a card in your wallet, or something. Otherwise, somebody might debate whether you're a commie at all. There could still be an honest journalist out there. We can't go calling eveyone we don't like a pedo, cause a few of them would still demand actual trials and evidence and stuff, and it just might make other people aware of what we are doing. But unmutual - that's perfect. If we say you are, you are. If our databases says you are, you are. No trials - you're auto guilty. Nobody can debate if you really are, because we get to define what it means, and it means whatever our database says.
Pay Cash (Score:3)
Pay in Cash, don't use store discount cards. Don't let "them" tie the purchase to you. Problem solved.
Or, take the discount, pay with your convenient credit card, and don't give a crap what they think they know about you.
Your choice.
Re:Pay Cash (Score:2)
Like the 'war on terror', the 'war on cash' always cites some form of morality as its justification. In the UK we recently had a political storm [guardian.co.uk] about cash payments to tradespeople being 'morally wrong'.
It's clear to my mind that this position goes beyond tax-collection benefits, and moves into the realm of ensuring all financial transactions fall into the uniquely-identifiable big-data indexable kind for just-in-case future use by law-enforecement. (Along with telecoms data, and all the other interesting information governments like to collect.)
Re:Pay Cash (Score:2)
There's a subtle but definite trend by governments to paint cash as the currency of criminals.
It may be a lot of things, but subtle it ain't. At least in the US.
In some areas of the US if you are pulled over for a routine traffic stop and they find cash over anywhere from $100 on up (there are typically no specific amounts specified), you may well end up having your cash confiscated and perhaps also your vehicle, and possibly be arrested as well.
Many times in these situations, even if you've broken no laws you may end up losing your cash/property thanks to US laws and policies regarding criminal forfeiture.
You'll also have no recourse if they decide to keep your cash and/or property, as the beauty of the forfeiture system (for them, not you) is that they charge the cash/property with a crime (as illogical as it is that inanimate and legal property/money is capable of committing a crime by themselves by simply existing), not you, so you have zero standing to challenge whatever they decide in court because you're not charged with anything.
Land of the free, my ass!
Strat
Re:Pay Cash (Score:2)
What you're talking about is actually civil forfeiture.
Gah!
Of course, you are correct and I wasn't awake enough to be posting. :)
Yeah, it's something one would only expect out of some corrupt dictator-run banana republic, not a 1st-World "free" country.
Had a friend that lost $1200 that way that got pulled over for a bad brake light while on his way to buy a vintage guitar from an individual. The probable cause? The officer "smelled marijuana", strangely, after he discovered the cash in the bank envelope laying on the console. My friend had also had a minor misdemeanor marijuana possession charge (ticket/fine) a couple years previous. Something the officer may well have been aware of before he even approached the vehicle, after running the plates and owner prior to the stop.
Maybe it was all for the best for the PD, as coincidentally, the department had a couple of shiny, brand-new parked cruisers set on fire and totaled a few weeks later. That $1200 may have helped defray at least a small part of the replacement costs. Such a tragedy. They never found those responsible, as far as I know.
Strat
Re:Pay Cash (Score:2)
*Citation needed*
Seriously, I'd be interested, but I've never heard of any incidents like you drscirbe.
Done and done.
http://www.ij.org/texas-civil-forfeiture-background [ij.org]
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202447265145&Report_Blasts_States_for_Abusing_Civil_Forfeiture_Laws&slreturn=20120729114549 [law.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLSz_p7Q1lg [youtube.com]
A bit of Googling brings up tons of horror stories, news articles, blog posts, and discussions/debates. Those were just a few of the top results. The YT link is to a Stossel interview with Scott Bullock from the Institute for Justice.
Strat
Re:Pay Cash (Score:4, Funny)
Did you drive a car to the store?
ANPR cameras now have your plate number.
Buy cigarettes, liquor... or ever been sick (cold medication is now a restricted substance)?
A little mag strip on the back contains everything listed on your driver's license.
Ever want to make a purchase over about $500?
You'll need to pay with something other than cash... and all those other somethings have your name on it.
Ever order anything through the mail?
Post office now keeps permanent records of the to/from addresses, package size, and description.
Did you ever live anywhere other than a cardboard box or your parent's?
You had to submit to a credit and background check.
Ever owned a cell phone, signed up for internet access, or needed, say, electricity?
Yeah. more information on your credit report. Bonus: Your internet habits, electricity usage, and where you live can tell me loads about you. I can buy a report on all of those for less than $5.
The list goes on. And on. And on. You can't simply unplug and walk away. Sooner or later, someone's gonna have something you want -- and chances are good they'll record that transaction in a computer. Which goes to a database. Which becomes part of other databases. It's like rain -- eventually, all the water runs to the river, and the river to the ocean. The problem is not that the information is being collected... it's how it is being used. And let's be honest: The only way you're going to get your personal data back under your control is over their dead body.
On an unrelated note; Aren't we a bit overdue for storming the castle and killing rich people? You know, for oppressing us? Whelp, better go find a ringtone to match my unique and dynamic personality for only $0.99!
Re:Pay Cash (Score:2)
Re:Pay Cash (Score:2)
Use the store discount cards but lie liberally on the application form. Don't give them your real name or address or anything else that's real. Problem solved. The discount cards are the only way to get a decent price at many grocery stores now.
Good luck with that (Score:3)
Calling for commercial organisations to stop profiling their customers is about as worthwhile as asking a four year old not to eat that marshmallow you just placed in front of them.
The problem is Joe Average is just too willing to give up their information for the smallest of perks, be it filling out a personal survey to win an iProduct, or swiping their supermarket member card at every transaction to save a few percent.
The crash... (Score:4, Interesting)
Of human culture colliding with human technology. As long as we continue to honor our lowest primate drives, then the amplifying effect of technology will generate results with greater and greater negative impact. The good news, is that such circumstances would be unsustainable, precisely because they would be socially unacceptable. At some point human beings will communicate at the speed of thought through imbedded technology. Secrets will become passe even impossible. Humanity will have to evolve into a species that is capable with dealing in absolute truth, and it will not be a society any of us recognize today.
Appealing to ethics is utterly futile here (Score:5, Insightful)
Realistically, you have to look at a Wal-mart or a Bank of America or a Progressive and ask 'Are they really going to hold back on egregious privacy violations just because it's icky?'
The answer, of course, is hell no. As Corporate People they're rapacious sociopaths who'd happily burn puppies or African orphans to death for a few extra cents of shareholder value. There is no possible appeal to ethics here, the best you could do is appeal to possible corporate black eye that would outweigh the profit. Which I don't see.
And then of course there's Homeland Security with their Spy on Everyone Echelon type initiatives and fat pipes right from the heart of every telecom company.
Your Database of Ruin already exists somewhere(s). You've just got to assume it does and figure out how you deal with that.
techno-deterministic dystopianism; a false premise (Score:4, Funny)
To the extent of increased personal hardship from these databases; in non-totalitarian societies its unlikely to result in significant transition towards worse ( or better ) treatment of people outside social and political norms. People outside social norms have been "abused" in small circles for ages; in a larger more "anonymous" society the abuse is built into other layers of the social fabric ( id cards; state oppression etc ); Not to say all circles are created equal; but techno-deterministic dystopianism is a false premise. Technological social changes are bound to the societies in which they take place.
Within "our" global "democratic" "free market" capitalism context the macro implications of concentrated power being able to better micro manage public opinion with powerful tools for life pattern recognition models; may be more problematic then direct loss of privacy abuses that the article outlines. That is to say; all our search for "personal" connections with others may be easier to be mediated. i.e an online video chat "hang out" support group which is moderated by an inquisitive supportive digital agent. That in addition to connecting us to exactly who we needed to talk to and giving us heart felt sense of well being in the short term; is simultaneously creating voids in meaningful existence by commoditizing your values towards particular life style choices, entertaining distractions, and consumption habits that don't enable a sustainable social structure.
Where by every piece of information we look for and every social connection we make is mediated towards these "a-political" life style choices bounding political discourse and participation making it impossible to regulate such abuses enabling increasing concentration of power etc.; there-by creating a vicious cycle in which our autonomy is transformed even more dramatically then in the previous century of mass media consumption.
False is even worse (Score:4, Funny)
Even worse is when this "database of ruin" makes FALSE categorizations/predictions about an individual and then treats them as such. It already happens.
Welcome to the future- guilty without proof, guilty until proven innocent, guilty without due process, guilty by association, guilty without even knowing it.
Re:False is even worse (Score:2)
No, it's a future of people realizing the data is useless. Just like we're moving to a future where no one will care what stupid shit you posted on facebook.
Ob "A Logic Named Joe" (Score:2)
Yeah (Score:3)
I like how (Score:2)
he doesn't dwell on the large mistakes these analytics make.
A new society (Score:2)
Marketplace of Ideas (Score:2)
I can't help but believe that many individuals will set themselves up in business offering software, hardware, services and advice to people to help them confound the data-keepers.
Can't believe it's not already the plot of a hundred Sci-Fi novels
So, then ... (Score:2)
I don't understand ... (Score:2)
Its interesting to note just how inaccurate some of these databases are. I challenged a friend of mine in the private detective biz to do a background check on me. They have addresses for me that I've never lived at. They are missing some important information about me, including underestimating my net worth by a few orders of magnitude (something that should be important for targeted marketing IMO). They are also missing the identities of many of my business associates.
Its also interesting to note that most of the missing financial information on me involves with foreign investments. In countries who have much better laws concerning privacy protection. So the end result on lax data protection in the USA will be to drive private capital offshore.
Too late (Score:2)
Between Facebook, Google and the NSA this database already exists.
Too Late (Score:2)
Insurance companies already have this database. [wikipedia.org]
Re:Exploitation? (Score:5, Insightful)
yeah because you know, when cable tv showed up, it claimed zero ads on its premium non-movie channels.. now look at it.. tons of money and it's loaded with them.. You are purposely misconstruing the actions of advertisers.. if all they were doing was throwing up billboards, that's one thing.. active electronic surveillance of buying habits is COMPLETELY different.
Re:Exploitation? (Score:2)
It's near impossible to buy something through a site with anything but a credit card.
Re:Exploitation? (Score:2)
Which are already disappearing. Really? I have to explain the relevance of what I said to the topic? It concerns mass db merges over time to the point where it's basically one giant record of all purchases/recorded behaviors and the output of the heuristics that data was used with.
Re:Exploitation? (Score:3)
Re:Exploitation? (Score:4, Funny)
What stops you from not having a membership card, and paying in cache ?
I tried that once, I dug a hole behind the tree at the intersection, put my money in, and left a square rock on top to identify the place. But the seller claimed they never got it.
Re:Exploitation? (Score:2, Insightful)
I think of it more like this... a handful of organizations are aggregating everything there is to know about me. Between the sites I visit, the contents of my email and chats, my searches, my friends, family, coworkers, and acquaintences, what I buy or want to buy, things I read or watch, etc., maybe three companies have it all. Data storage is virtually free. Data collection mechanisms are simple and effective. Mountains of other data can be extrapolated from what they have, and these few companies are everywhere. And don't kid yourself that a browser plugin is hiding you effectively.
Now imagine those two or three datasources are compromised at some point, either by hack or by purchase. There's something in there that would make it impossible for a person like you or me to, say, be elected to a public office. I'm not even be sure what mine is, but there's something in there. Maybe it's me talking to someone on a dating site, or something I said via IM, or adding a certain book to a wishlist and forgetting about it, or watching some YouTube video.
Things are going to change at some point. We're either going to get a lot more liberal about what defines a person's character, or we're going to have to deal with data collection and security in a very different way. I don't know which, but either way it'll probably be a painful transition.
Re:Exploitation? (Score:2)
Right, because perpetual growth is not the Holy Graal of every capitalist corporation.
I can already hear the advertising executive: "We have enough money already, no need for more ads".
Re:Look at the bright side (Score:2)
diminished return safety paranoia does not really make anyone safer.. I'd rather have my freedom and my rights back, thanks. Without that, what are we really defending? If it's our lives, well lets just declare war on muslim countries and send them back to that stone age utopia they want to drag the world back to. I wonder if you'd have this same attitude if those three letter agencies decided based on the same bad heuristics and ever increasing amounts of out-of-context data that you were a 'threat to national security'..
Re:Muddled Fears (Score:2)
A society with 'perfect history' at the individual level would have zero growth because individual risk would be too great to justify taking any chances whatsoever.
Re:But who will use this database ? (Score:2)
Yes, they will instead invite the person who fondles baboons in his kitchen.
Re:But who will use this database ? (Score:2)
The Internet & Purchase Background Checker will be integrated into the Resume Keyword Checker to pre-screen applicants.
Re:And this Database... (Score:2)
...will let us know all about the analysts, and their owners. Who drinks with the bigots, who is lying about their own lives. Who... is turning up to protest queer people being treated as humans... WHO is treating women as mere sex cattle as opposed to humans. They will know all about us... including what each of us knows about each of them.
Don't be silly. First, they'll never give you uncensored access to the database. Second, you'd never know who the analysts and owners were, they'd just have "names" that they assumed when they sat down at their desk, like you see now when the Indian help-desk person says his name is "Fred" or a cop who says he's "Badge Number 1001". And third, the people who really have power will be able to keep their own personal data masked "for security reasons".
Re:Send me a copy of my secret info (Score:2)
Even better is if *I* can get a copy of your information and correct it, just as with your credit reports.
Re:Obviously (Score:2)
I'll go on record here. I've bought sex toys from an overseas company online, as gifts for my ex. (That part's complicated). I used a Visa card to pay, so it's pretty likely that's integrated in a database. The point is, I'm extremely anomalous that way - what percentage of people are in a happy, long-term, successful monogamous relationship with the person they are no longer married to?
What I worry about here is not just the persons who might judge me for this, but the ones who would believe the literal truth in this case simply never happens, and I must be concealing something else. I'm concerned about the background check that goes to an employer who's really big about 'family values' style marriage, but more concerned about the 'progressive' employer who would be ok with my dating whomever I chose, and might even have a policy forbidding gender orientation discrimination, etc., but would drop me from their lists because I was in some undefinable way different and it's too much trouble to figure out if it's a harmless difference or one they already have procedures and policies to cover, or not.
Just about all of us have some area where we are in 'less than 1%' land. Something we share with less than 1% of the populace. That means 99% of people out there don't share the interest, but also that 80% or so really have no idea what the difference is. So when a report says, for example, that somebody is into Zydeco, 80% or so of the people dealing wiith that report may have no Idea what that is. Why bother to find out when you can waste-can that resume and move on, or flag that police report for the attention of higher-ups at homeland security just on the off chance that Zydeco is an Arabic word? Ubiquitous reporting makes such rejections and actions more and more a random thing, a sort of lottery. And it's legal to discriminate against Philatelists, say, even if you thought that term was gender, ethnicity or political party related, even in areas where it's illegal to discriminate on those actual grounds. You can think a Phillatelist means he's from an ex-Soviet periphery state, and fire someone for being one, and If you'd been right, you could be sued, but if you're wrong (and a damned fool), you can't.