Slashdot Mirror
Are We Living in a World Where You Can't Opt Out of Data Sharing? (fivethirtyeight.com)
Long-time Slashdot reader Mr_Blank quotes the senior science writer at FiveThirtyEight on a new type of privacy violation:
It's what happens when one person's voluntary disclosure of personal information exposes the personal information of others who had no say in the matter. Your choices didn't cause the breach. Your choices can't prevent it, either. Welcome to a world where you can't opt out of sharing, even if you didn't opt in... We all saw this in action in the recent Cambridge Analytica scandal. The "privacy of the commons" is how the 270,000 Facebook users who actually downloaded the "thisisyourdigitallife" app turned into as many as 87 million users whose data ended up in the hands of a political marketing firm.
Much of the narrative surrounding that scandal has focused on what individuals should be doing to protect themselves. But that idea that privacy is all about your individual decisions is part of the problem, said Julie Cohen, a technology and law professor at Georgetown University. "There's a lot of burden being put on individuals to have an understanding and mastery of something that's so complex that it would be impossible for them to do what they need to do," she said...
[E]xperts say these examples show that we need to think about online privacy less as a personal issue and more as a systemic one. Our digital commons is set up to encourage companies and governments to violate your privacy. If you live in a swamp and an alligator attacks you, do you blame yourself for being a slow swimmer? Or do you blame the swamp for forcing you to hang out with alligators? There isn't yet a clear answer for what the U.S. should do. Almost all of our privacy law and policy is framed around the idea of privacy as a personal choice, Cohen said. The result: very little regulation addressing what data can be collected, how it should be protected, or what can be done with it.
Much of the narrative surrounding that scandal has focused on what individuals should be doing to protect themselves. But that idea that privacy is all about your individual decisions is part of the problem, said Julie Cohen, a technology and law professor at Georgetown University. "There's a lot of burden being put on individuals to have an understanding and mastery of something that's so complex that it would be impossible for them to do what they need to do," she said...
[E]xperts say these examples show that we need to think about online privacy less as a personal issue and more as a systemic one. Our digital commons is set up to encourage companies and governments to violate your privacy. If you live in a swamp and an alligator attacks you, do you blame yourself for being a slow swimmer? Or do you blame the swamp for forcing you to hang out with alligators? There isn't yet a clear answer for what the U.S. should do. Almost all of our privacy law and policy is framed around the idea of privacy as a personal choice, Cohen said. The result: very little regulation addressing what data can be collected, how it should be protected, or what can be done with it.
"There's a lot of burden being put on individuals to have an understanding and mastery...
There's no choice. It is the only solution.
You cannot depend on governments to guard your privacy. Snowden's disclosures showed the 5 eyes / 11 eyes / whatever group wants to harvest your data just as much as FB and G.
And even you could trust Norway or whatever, what about all the people who don't live in a nice friendly western democracy? What about those living in repressive regimes?
No, we have to protect ourselves, and take back our digital privacy.
And why shouldn't people be expected to understand what they are doing with all of their data? We expect drivers to understand the rules of the road. We expect pilots to understand how to safely operate airplanes. We expect HAM radio operates to abide certain rules to avoid destroying the common medium. Why shouldn't we also expect internet users to act responsibly toward the internet, and stop supporting the worst ideas?
We let anyone flood not the net in the 90's without a shred of comprehension or willingness to learn. We sat by while they made terrible choices, while they made companies like Facebook into international surveillance behemoths, while they spied on we who made better choices by acting as proxies of FB after installing spyware on their own devices.
No... it's long past time to expect better, and for there to be real consequences for those who act poorly, just as we remove driver's licences from people who abuse the public road network and endanger others.
No law can solve this. The solution can only be cultural.