Privacy Part 1: Corporate Data Gathering

April 1

A persistent fear throughout all of the Internet’s operation is the Internet’s treatment of a person’s own privacy. We have a hard time defining the term, much less determining what role it should play in deciding the whos, whats, and hows of Internet governance. Nevertheless, the Internet’s present evolution indicates that unless we spend time contemplating the reinforcing privacy online, our interests may fall to the interests of profitability, online behavior regulation, and cybersecurity.

Over the next two weeks we'll look at privacy, beginning with general concepts of privacy, how data is measured and gathered on the web, and some specific legal responses to privacy concerns. Next week we'll build on these concepts with an eye toward government surveillance and law enforcement.

Our own David O'Brien will be leading the class discussion this week.

Assignments

The deadline for Assignment 3 moved from March 25th to today, April 1st. Please upload your assignment prior to class today.

Readings

Conceptualizing privacy

• Daniel Solove, Understanding Privacy (Chapter 1) (skim)

Privacy and data

• Chris Anderson, The End of Theory (Wired appears to be having some troubles with their links this week, so if that doesn't work, try this cached version.)

• Viktor Mayer-Shoenberger, The Rise of Big Data

• Bruce Schneier, Why Anonymous Data Sometimes Isn't (see the note above about Wired - try this cached version if the link above doesn't work).

• Play around with some of the websites by Latanya Sweeney

• The Data Map

• About My Ride

• About My Info

Corporate data practices

• Jeremy Singer-Vine, How Dataium Watches You

• David Veldt, LinkedIn: The Creepiest Social Network

• Jennifer Valentino-Devires, Jeremy Singer-Vine, Ashkan Soltani, Websites Vary Prices, Deals Based on Users' Information (if this appears behind a paywal, play around with the WSJ's interactive graphics)

Optional Readings

• Jonathan Zittrain, The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It (Chapter 9)

• Hal Abelson, Ken Ledeen, and Harry Lewis, Blown to Bits (Chapter 2) (pages 36-42)

• Lawrence Lessig, Code 2.0 (Chapter 7) (focus on "Privacy in Public: Data")

• danah boyd, Why Parents Help Children Violate Facebook’s 13+ Rule

• Wikipedia, Privacy Laws of the United States

• Solveig Singleton, Privacy as Censorship

• Noam Cohen, It’s Tracking Your Every Move and You May Not Even Know It (New York Times)

• Bruce Schneier, Surveillance and the Internet of Things

Class Discussion

Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (~~~~) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: Andy 15:12, 7 November 2013 (EST)

This week's readings on privacy have been really thought provoking. Whether we have a 'right' to internet privacy is a tough subject to ponder, as we have no obligation to use the internet, thus making our use subject to a company's terms, yet there are also a number of other factors to consider. Some of the biggest concerns are that the "data collection" isn't merely studied but disseminated, and also that that collection doesn't end at internet usage. It infiltrates every aspect of our lives, with surveillance footage being taken unbeknownst to those being viewed. I'm not sure if it was in this class or in another discussion, but supposedly we're not far away from a kind of optical monitoring whereby stores can track what a shopper looks at most intently to cater advertising to them specifically. Where does this invasion of privacy end?

Adding to the links above, I found this article linked in one of the above articles. It's very informative and interesting.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE3DD1F3FF93AA3575BC0A9609C8B63

Sidebar- loved the article by Veldt on LinkedIn... I, too, have always wondered HOW they can suggest people who I know in real life but with whom I haven't had any connection with via social networks or even e-mail.

Castille 16:33, 29 March 2014 (EDT)

Great questions on privacy, Castille, just to piggy-back on what you've brought up….

Data gathering will become more intrusive, especially as we advance technologically. This will impede on personal privacy to a point where it becomes a major issue. For example, Google glasses will open many avenues for companies to gather personal data.

But where do ethics come in?

Companies don't have moral ethics if it means they can convert personal data into potential profits. It may already be too late to legislate laws and then how do we enforce them? Its actually quite alarming how much personal information is available digitally and more to come as new devices (such as wearables) make it easier for companies (and other individuals) to exploit. Marissa1989 02:09, 31 March 2014 (EDT)

I agree, Castille, that thinking about online privacy is complicated by the fact that users agree to certain terms of use and are not truly compelled to use the Internet, though it is undoubtedly next to impossible for some of us to avoid. I think that in spite of this (in spite of the fact that we automatically check the box agreeing to these terms of use), people will always feel that they have the right to privacy at least in the sense of having the right to be left alone. The mentality may be that if I'm not doing something wrong, if my behavior doesn't effect other people, then I shouldn't be bothered, shouldn't be observed without very explicit consent, and shouldn't have to feel like I'm being watched. Jkelly 23:11, 31 March 2014 (EDT)

I really enjoyed the chapter from Daniel Solove's book in which he tries to develop a new understanding of privacy. One of the bits that resonated the most with me is where he writes "Instead of attempting to locate the common denominator of these activities [that are disrupted by violations of privacy], we should conceptualize privacy by focusing on the specific types of disruption."

---

The data we can gather through automation is undoubtedly incredible. The weakness with big data lies in the quality - relying too much on the results spit out from the tools could lead to numerous mistakes. That’s when human intellect comes into play; real-time observation and analysis will be critical for spotting errors. Human ingenuity is the source of progress. Any company can better leverage the data available to them and generate a competitive advantage, as long as they’re equipped with inquisitive minds and critical thinkers who can best apply the data presented. Marissa1989 02:01, 31 March 2014 (EDT)

---

Not related to this week's lecture, but for those interested, a major revamp is in the works for copyright law in the UK, including the addition of a US-like fair use clause - Modernising Copyright: A modern, robust and flexible framework --Seifip 17:43, 31 March 2014 (EDT)

---

I ran across an article shared through Reddit this week and I think it relates somewhat to the topic this week. It describes how Dropbox is able to know when copyrighted content is being shared, without infringing on a person's privacy. It is able to do this by "file hashing against a blacklist." It's an interesting read, especially for someone like me who isn't too familiar with computer technicalities. You can find the article here: http://techcrunch.com/2014/03/30/how-dropbox-knows-when-youre-sharing-copyrighted-stuff-without-actually-looking-at-your-stuff/

Lpereira 19:58, 31 March 2014 (EDT)

---

I can't say I was surprised by anything in Schneier piece ("Why 'Anonymous' Data Sometimes Isn't") about how easy it is to take "anonymous" information and attach it to a specific individual. The ease with which I can find someone online (on Twitter, Facebook, or other social media) with just two or three pieces of identifying information-- name, college he/she graduated from, workplace, username, etc.-- long ago left me assuming that anyone could do the same. When you factor in huge amounts of data and more sophisticated techniques to leverage that data, I wouldn't imagine anything would remain hidden. A few seemingly trivial bits of information can certainly add up very quickly. Jkelly 23:01, 31 March 2014 (EDT)