Text archives Help


Re: [projectvrm] Privacy is SO overrated - Scoble


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Kevin Cox < >
  • To: Kaliya - Identitywoman < >
  • Cc: Jon Lebkowsky < >, Renee Lloyd < >, Devon M T Loffreto < >, Tom Crowl < >, ProjectVRM list < >
  • Subject: Re: [projectvrm] Privacy is SO overrated - Scoble
  • Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 06:14:52 +1000
Yes Kaliya I do mean the book by Alex Pentland.  Social Physics - How good ideas spread.  http://www.amazon.com/Social-Physics-Spread-Lessons-Science/dp/1594205655

When I first heard the phrase "Social Physics" I did not want to read the book because I thought the book would be some sort of pseudo science dressed up with a name.  My apologies for not giving the link to the book and the full title and describing what the book was about.  The full title explains why I referenced it in this thread.  We are trying to spread the word about VRM and this book gives many ideas that we can use.  The book could also be titled.  "How to CrowdSource good ideas" or  "How Intelligent Agents use feedback in Complex Adaptive Systems to adapt the system".  On reflection "Social Physics" is a better title :)

In the last chapter Pentland talks about personal data and he paraphrases Common Law on Property Rights.

You have the right to possess data about you.
You have the right to full control over the use of your data.
You have the right to dispose of or distribute your data.

One idea we are using, and that the book confirmed, is that social incentives are stronger than economic incentives when trying to introduce a new technology or idea.  To that end we are using social economic incentives to encourage people to take control of their own data.  To do this we are working on an identity system where if you take control of your personal data and this adds value, then the value is distributed by you to others that you choose.

Kevin



On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Kaliya - Identitywoman < " target="_blank"> > wrote:
Oh you mean the book by Sandy Pentland who basically stole the phrase from mary ruddy and Paul Trevithic enabled by John Clippinger?

Credit should be given where it is due...not forgotten when men behave badly using women's work without even giving credit. Oh look her email address...it's mary at socialphysics.org

Sent from my iPad
I do urge all those reading this thread to read "Social Physics" if you haven't read it; and to reread it if you have.  The book suggests tools and ways to spread and develop good ideas like VRM.

Kevin


On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 12:27 AM, Jon Lebkowsky < " target="_blank"> > wrote:
Just read through all (or most) of this thread. Appreciated Mary's comments about P3P. I occasionally mention P3P to people, and get the blankest of stares. 

I've been trying to explain VRM to some of my colleagues at Consumers Union. More blank stares.

~ Jon


On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Renee Lloyd < " target="_blank"> > wrote:

Well said and darn insightful!  

Sent from my iPad

On Jun 20, 2014, at 9:32 AM, Devon M T Loffreto < " target="_blank"> > wrote:

Scoble is a reminder of that quote : "fool's names and fool's faces often appear in public places"...

Problem is... the "Rights of the Individual" is an extreme position currently.

"We" is expressing itself with mammoth ramifications.

"Free" and "Open" have been co-opted as a means of isolating power in hands of few, at the expense of many, but to the improvement of some... which justifies the entire flow.

That gets confusing.

At this point, Individuals are behaving like the kids who get stuck at the top of the see-saw for a bit... some jump off, others complain, and still others actually like the passive aggressive game that ensues.

Transitioning from a "We" construct to an "I & I" construct is no small feat.

The tools we have are better than the tools we dont have, but right now "We" is putting "I & I" to shame when it comes to the structure of our network effect. 

Devon


On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Tom Crowl < " target="_blank"> > wrote:
I'm here... so its fair to assume I support the ideas of VRM. But to me the core isn't about privacy... though that's very, very important.

For me the core of VRM is about power. And how to ensure the capability of the individual to respond to a landscape that has evolved... and continues to evolve in ways that concentrate that power in narrow hands and a few institutions.

I also believe its this broader political issue involving the individual vs centralized institutions (whether government or private) that offers solution. This is the issue that unites OWS, the Tea Party and I suspect quite a few more... and around the world.

People simply aren't pissed-off enough about Google ads or an X-box silo... they DO offer SOME benefits... and the perils.... though real... aren't immediately felt... and the perverted directions they may take may not appear for many years. (and they are truly dire if ignored)...

BUT people ARE pissed about feeling left out and cheated.... that's the middle class, the poor, women , students... both here and elsewhere.

There's a general feeling that all the productivity gains in the last several decades went to the top.... and THAT pisses people off.

And THAT'S connected to VRM!!! (the weakness of labor in the political sphere is all about the destruction of their tools for response... and frankly the Ayn Rand wool that's been pulled over their eyes by neoliberals.)

This connection must and can be made.

Privacy's importance is inversely correlated to the level of control a person feels between him or herself and his/her social organism. Its an issue arising with scale. Hunter-gatherer's had less privacy... but they had more awareness of the 'secrets' of their fellow... and power within the group to respond to felt intrusions.

Sooner or later I have to believe it will be realized that solutions (imperfect though they may be) must lie in the creation of a public component of the Internet landscape which is tied to a fundamental of human interaction within this landscape.

Mechanisms of transaction are landscape fundamentals (like roads). It remains clear to me that there are few paths left to correct the faulty evolution in both transaction and currencies except that fortuitous chance offered by the still unmet needs of the micropayment outside of closed ecosystems.

What I"m suggesting is that the same natural forces of concentration (not a total concentration but nearly so... and for unavoidable reasons)... that have come to certain areas of this now substantially privatized landscape be used to create a different model for at least one of these natural unifications.

Sooner-or-later this is going to be figured out. I hope before its too late. The micropayment is key to the creation of a much needed Internet public institution.

P.S. If anyone knows Lawrence Lessig... please tell him that the quickest and surest way to public finance of elections and general election reform... is to give people a way to voice their support for limits and transparency... as well as retaining a means to better equalize the opportunities for advocacy 






On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 2:57 AM, Katherine Warman Kern < " target="_blank"> > wrote:
"/  

You'd think even Robert would like transparency - then he can watch all the effort that goes into serving him while he rests on his laurels.

Katherine Warman Kern
@comradity

On Jun 19, 2014, at 3:48 AM, Panagiotis Stathopoulos < " target="_blank"> > wrote:

Well I dont want to sound rude but I think the photo on the article speaks of itself... 
Btw among others the matter at hand here is not only privacy per se, but the algorithms and data mining over someone's profile. These are totally opaque and I am impressed he does not understand that.
And finally is targeted ads a way to really "greatly improve ones life "?
Dont think so...
Regards

Panagiotis Stathopoulos




On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 4:43 AM, Christopher Herot < " target="_blank"> > wrote:

Robert may have been deliberately provocative, but I think he makes an important point that the recent media attention to privacy will cause some percentage of the populace to engage in futile tactics such as deleting their LinkedIn profile, with the net result being reduced exposure to economic opportunity.

Those of us old enough to remember when Caller-ID was introduced may recall the privacy advocates of that era denouncing it as an evil plot by pizza parlors to capture your phone number. People who fell for that one and blocked it on their phones eventually relented when they found their friends were no longer willing to answer calls from “Private Number."  



Strikes me as just plain self-serving. Which company does he work for in the Big DAta business?

Katherine Warman Kern
@comradity

On Jun 18, 2014, at 3:11 PM, Doc Searls wrote:

See Rule #10 here?

Robert no longer believes that. In fact he doesn't believe a lot of the stuff he said eleven years ago. (It's cool. Most of us veer. We call it growth.) 

But Robert really does believe the unexamined life is not worth living

Not exactly.. he's a data exhibitionist.. but that doesn't mean he self-examines.. in the vein of that quote: "the unexamined life isn't worth living"
refers to being willing to look at all the hardest parts of yourself.. not others.

If he were, he would have to admit that he has an internal belief that others less fortunate should do what we does, maybe in his need to be right,
and that those less fortunate who don't do what he does deserve what they get (a less fortunate life.. but that's likely due to many other forces
and circumstances that have nothing to do with being a data exhibitionist). Or that he's better than others? I don't know.. just speculating,
but underlying beliefs like that are often at the root of a post like that.

The problem is the Robert is part of the privileged who are getting fewer but for a few short years, we all thought we could blog with impunity
without consequence.. in fact that's not true.

Robert is one of the few people for whom that remains true.. (blogging, FB, saying what you want online).

My point with him yesterday was that he could look at this with compassion and empathy for those less fortunate. His commenters mostly want to be like
him.. privileged, micro-famous, and doing whatever he wants, and they are angry that the world is changing and so take the techno-libertarian
view of others .. again with beliefs they don't consciously acknowledge but that are quite uncompassionate and uncool. 

Then there is his posting of the Boing Boing article:

Which is full of the same people rejoicing in the same techno-libertarianism that Robert exhibited.. and reducing the whole thing to either complete
exhibitionism, OR privacy advocates locking everything down.

I think more than anything we are here to let people have choice, and autonomy over their own experiences, data, privacy, etc. 

It's not one way or the other with haters on each end. Boing Boing's articles isn't extreme.. it too just asks for empathy and compassion.

The issue is mostly in the middle. But that doesn't make for 250 comments on the first Scoble post. or 100+ on the second.



— so long as Google, Facebook and other surveillance & personalization robots do the examining.

He's like Cypher in The Matrix: a red-pill swallower who would rather be jacked into The Matrix than live as a free and independent soul.

Maybe that's a bit harsh. I'm sure he doesn't believe he's giving up his independence, much less his soul, and maybe he's right that our feudal overlords have our best interests (which they know better than we do) at heart.

And, even though I'm one of those "privacy advocates" he's tired of, we remain friends.

And maybe he's right that he speaks for a bigger crowd than ours.

But minorities make revolution. And that's our job here.

Doc


On Jun 18, 2014, at 7:51 PM, Nitin Badjatia < " target="_blank"> > wrote:

I can't remember the last time Robert was relevant, but I suppose he's ok exposing himself...um, or something like that...

http://boingboing.net/2014/06/17/robert-scoble-so-tired-of-th.html








--
Jon Lebkowsky (@jonl)



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.

§