Newer posts are loading.
You are at the newest post.
Click here to check if anything new just came in.

April 04 2012

Privacy, contexts and Girls Around Me

Last weekend, I read two excellent articles on the problems that privacy presents in a mobile, digital age. The Atlantic presented a summary of Helen Nissenbaum's thoughts on privacy and social norms: When we discuss the use of online privacy, we too often forget the social context in which data exists, even when we're talking about social media. And Amit Runchal posted a TechCrunch article about the Girls Around Me fiasco, "Creating Victims and Blaming Them," where he points out that the victims of a service like Girls Around Me shouldn't be blamed for not understanding the arcane privacy settings of services like Facebook:

"But ... the women signed up to be a part of this when they signed up to be on Facebook. No. What they signed up for was to be on Facebook. Our identities change depending on our context, no matter what permissions we have given to the Big Blue Eye. Denying us the right to this creates victims who then get blamed for it. 'Well ... you shouldn't have been on Facebook if you didn't want to...' No. Please recognize them as a person. Please recognize what that means.

Runchal's powerful "no" underscores the problem: People sign up with Facebook and Foursquare (which quickly blocked Girls Around Me's access to their API) to communicate with friends, to play games, to find former classmates, and so on. They don't sign up to have their data sold to the highest bidder. And while Facebook and Foursquare have a legitimate right to run a profitable business, their users have a legitimate right to be treated with some respect, and it's hard to construe hundreds of inscrutable privacy settings as "respect." Even if you understand the settings, it's next to impossible to block apps that you don't even know about. Perhaps the only way to protect yourself is a complete retreat into privacy, which defeats the purpose of Facebook.

Runchal's article demonstrates the principles for which Nissenbaum is arguing. Privacy and data don't exist in the abstract. Privacy and data always exist in social contexts, and problems occur when data is taken out of that context. Users give data to Facebook all the time; that's normal, and the service couldn't exist without that happening. Hundreds of millions of people use and enjoy Facebook, so the company is clearly doing a lot of things right. However, handing that same data to another application rips it out of context: Facebook data on its own might be fine, Facebook data crossed with location data from Foursquare is getting fishy (almost any use of location data quickly becomes "fishy"), and that combination published via an app that's designed to encourage stalking has crossed the line. Nissenbaum has articulated the general principle; Runchal has provided an excellent case study.

In a similar vein, Tim O'Reilly has argued that we should regulate the use of data, and expect data collectors to obey cultural norms about reasonable and unreasonable uses of data. A doctor could share your medical history with researchers, but not with an insurance company that might use it to cancel your policy. That's the only way to get the medical progress that comes from sharing data without the chilling side effect of making medical care inaccessible to anyone who actually needs it. Tim has defended Facebook for being willing to push the limits of privacy because that's the only way to find out what the new norms should be and what benefits we can derive from new applications. That's fair enough, and in this case (as I already pointed out), Foursquare was quick to yank API access.

It's useful to imagine the same software with a slightly different configuration. Girls Around Me has undeniably crossed a line. But what if, instead of finding women, the app was Hackers Around Me? That might be borderline creepy, but most people could live with it, and it might even lead to some wonderful impromptu hackathons. EMTs Around Me could save lives. I doubt that you'd need to change a single line of code to implement either of these apps, just some search strings. The problem isn't the software itself, nor is it the victims, but what happens when you move data from one context into another. Moving data about EMTs into context where EMTs are needed is socially acceptable; moving data into a context that facilitates stalking isn't acceptable, and shouldn't be.

The Atlantic's article about Nissenbaum ends with some pessimism about our ability to define social norms surrounding privacy: "It's quite difficult to figure out what the norms for a given situation might be." And that's true. We don't yet know what cultural norms for privacy are, let alone how to regulate for them, or how regulations should evolve as technology evolves and cultural norms change. Locking in our present norms through some badly thought out regulation strikes me as a recipe for disaster. I care much more about the TSA's scanners at an airport than about Google photographing my house for Street View, but I'd be ecstatically surprised to see legislation that reflected my priorities. The New York Times reports that cell phone tracking is routinely used by local law enforcement agencies, with little or no court oversight; and in the current climate, I'd be surprised to see privacy regulation that challenges the widespread use and abuse of surveillance by the police.

But this isn't the time to throw up our hands. It isn't as if we're completely lacking in clue. With that in mind, I'll give Amit Runchal the last word:

"The line is this: When you begin speaking for another person without their permission, you are doing something wrong. When you create another identity for them without their permission, you are doing something wrong. When you make people feel victimized who previously did not feel that way, you are doing something wrong."

Those are words I can live by.

Related:

February 02 2012

Strata Week: The Megaupload seizure and user data

Here are a few of the data stories that caught my attention this week.

Megaupload's seizure and questions about controlling user data

When the file-storage and sharing site Megaupload had its domain name seized, assets frozen and website shut down in mid-January, the U.S. Justice Department contended that the owners were operating a site dedicated to copyright infringement. But that posed a huge problem for those who were using Megaupload for the legitimate and legal storage of their files. As the EFF noted, these users weren't given any notice of the seizure, nor were they given an opportunity to retrieve their data.

Moreover, it seemed this week that those users would have all their data deleted, as Megaupload would no longer be able to pay its server fees.

While it appears that users have won a two-week reprieve before any deletion actually occurs, the incident does raise a number of questions about users' data rights and control in the cloud. Specifically: What happens to user data when a file hosting / cloud provider goes under? And how much time and notice should users have to reclaim their data?

Megaupload seizure notice
This is what you see when you visit Megaupload.com.

Bloomberg opens its market data distribution technology

The financial news and information company Bloomberg opened its market data distribution interface this week. The BLPAPI is available under a free-use license at open.bloomberg.com. According to the press release, some 100,000 people already use the BLPAPI, but with this week's announcement, the interface will be more broadly available.

The company introduced its Bloomberg Open Symbology back in 2009, a move to provide an alternative to some of the proprietary systems for identifying securities (particularly those services offered by Bloomberg's competitor Thomson Reuters). This week's opening of the BLPAPI is a similar gesture, one that the company says is part of its "Open Market Data Initiative, an ongoing effort to embrace and promote open solutions for the financial services industry."

The BLPAPI works with a range of programming languages, including Java, C, C++, .NET, COM and Perl. But while the interface itself is free to use, the content is not.

Strata 2012 — The 2012 Strata Conference, being held Feb. 28-March 1 in Santa Clara, Calif., will offer three full days of hands-on data training and information-rich sessions. Strata brings together the people, tools, and technologies you need to make data work.

Save 20% on registration with the code RADAR20


Pentaho moves Kettle to the Apache 2.0 license

Pentaho's extract-transform-load technology Pentaho Kettle is being moved to the Apache License, Version 2.0. Kettle was previously available under the GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL).

By moving to the Apache license, Pentaho says it will be more in line with the licensing of Hadoop, Hbase, and a number of NoSQL projects.

Kettle downloads and documentation are available at the Pentaho Big Data Community Home.

Oscar screeners and movie piracy data

Andy Baio took a look at some of the data surrounding piracy and the Oscar screening process. There has long been concern that the review copies of movies distributed to members of the Academy of Motion Arts and Sciences were making their way online. Baio observed that while a record number of films have been nominated for Oscars this year (37), just eight of the "screeners" have been leaked online, "a record low that continues the downward trend from last year."

However, while the number of screeners available online has diminished, almost all of the nominated films (34) had already been leaked online. "If the goal of blocking leaks is to keep the films off the Internet, then the MPAA [Motion Picture Association of America] still has a long way to go," Baio wrote.

Baio has a number of additional observations about these leaks (and he also made the full data dump available for others to examine). But as the MPAA and others are making arguments (and helping pen related legislation) to crack down on Internet privacy, a good look at piracy trends seems particularly important.

Got data news?

Feel free to email me.

Related:

Older posts are this way If this message doesn't go away, click anywhere on the page to continue loading posts.
Could not load more posts
Maybe Soup is currently being updated? I'll try again automatically in a few seconds...
Just a second, loading more posts...
You've reached the end.

Don't be the product, buy the product!

Schweinderl