Slashdot Mirror
Don't Build a Database of Ruin
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.'"
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.
Did Ohm meet Resistance?
(-;
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".
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
---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
. . . 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 . . . ?
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
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 have some potential differences with his current opinions.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
The problem is that certain jobs - hell some entire fields, like health care - do care about what you've done in the past, and will actively discriminate against you. That's not a problem if you're, say, fifteen, because you don't have a real job yet, and you can steer yourself toward other things. Not so great if you're in your forties or fifties and trying to save for some hint of retirement. Plus, every life insurance, etc., form I've ever seen has a box that says "have you ever used an illegal drug?" Canceling seventy percent of America's cheap term life policies could be a problem...