I recently watched a documentary on You Tube called “Code 2600” which looked at computers and the evolution of hacking and surveillance over the years. And it was creepy on all kinds of levels, but one thing (not the only one) that stuck with me is that one of the subjects in the film came out and said that privacy is not an explicit right and therefore should not be a consideration of application developers. When I first heard him say it, I wanted to throw my shoe at the monitor. But now that it’s been running through my head like an insidious virus, I’m beginning to think that it might be a valid point.
Privacy is not an explicit right that is laid out in The Bill of Rights or anywhere in the Constitution. The right to privacy has actually been defined through a series of court decisions. The founding fathers were clear on what they considered to be basic rights for every person and one should consider the fact the there might have been a very good reason for not specifying privacy as one of those rights. My immediate suspicion is that they wrongfully assumed that individuals would protect their privacy as a given and not needing to be enumerated in a list of human rights. I think it’s also safe to assume that they could not have predicted the rise of social media and big data.
This is the point where I must admit to being a fan of big data. I like nothing more than going through the minutiae of data to find trends and predictive analytics. As a teen my dream job was to be a data analyst for the CIA. Consequently I don’t see why the Facebook scandal was such a big deal. Particularly when Google has been collecting data for decades and has been even more pervasive at doing it. It’s a little hypocritical to lay blame at only Facebook. And I’m not sure where I first heard it, but I have heard and read multiple times that nothing on the internet is private. And that once it’s on the web, it’s out there forever. Warnings on a regular basis and from multiple sources that using the internet in any way risks exposing an individual’s privacy. Warnings that were around prior to the advent of Facebook. Knowing that the warnings exist, then isn’t it safe to say that you use the internet at your own risk? In my mind that means that the amount of risk exposure is strictly in the hands of the individual.
Some would argue that this still doesn’t give the right of an application developer to sell your data. And in an ideal world, I would completely agree with this but we don’t live in an ideal world. We cannot expect an application like Facebook to be free for our use and not monetize the only item they have of value – data. (I do however have a huge problem with my phone provider keeping tabs on calls and text messages. I pay for the right to use those services and it’s not free data.) Facebook is still a business and most businesses exist to make a profit. We expect them to employ people and pay good wages. How can we expect them to not make money with their main commodity? Now if there was a subscription or fee to use the application then I would say that we have the right to say what they can or cannot do with our data. The business model would be different because as consumers we are paying for the right to use the application. And that’s not to say that I don’t want to know that they are selling my data. I absolutely do but I’m not going to pretend that I really thought I was getting something for free. Everything has a cost and nothing is ever really free.
And then there’s the extended concept of not owning information that you put on a computer or site that is not specifically yours. Think of your work computer. Most company policies lay out in the employee handbook that the company owns everything that you do on their computer. Create a new concept on a work related computer and they could potentially sue you for the a portion of or the entire ownership of that concept. It is not a giant leap to then say that anything you post or upload on a website that you do not own is no longer yours. That the company who controls the site attains some portion of ownership because you gave it to them when you posted or uploaded. No one is forcing you to use these sites. It’s a choice. Your choice.
Facebook messed up, but only in the fact that they weren’t transparent with the intent to sell your data. Without any clear rules regarding the cyber world, then it is on the individual to do their due diligence in protecting their privacy and not on the companies that they do business with on a daily basis. To be fair, I’m not against government regulation as a whole, but in this case I don’t think it would really help. A government cannot be expected to protect its citizens from themselves in every instance. Big business should not be expected to care more about personal rights than a person. At some point the citizen has to be accountable for their own protection and I believe that privacy falls squarely in that category. I should be demanding my privacy not asking for it. Maybe the founding fathers had it right after all – privacy is a privilege and not a right. A luxury that we have taken for granted for too long.
* * * * * * * * *
There is such a thing as being too truthful and forthcoming – I was recently asked if I was a picky eater. My response was that I didn’t really think I was too picky. I only have a few rules when it comes to food. I don’t like beans, coconut and anything that looks like it was when it was still alive. Ask me where a steak comes from and I’m going to tell you the grocery store. If I had to hunt my own food then I would be a vegan without any real principles. The person asking the question looked confused and asked what I meant by not eating food that looked like it did as it was still alive. I used fish as an example. In the nicest possible way, I told them that I won’t eat a fish that still has its head and tail attached because it still looks like a fish. A dead fish. Or rather the dead body of a fish. I’m pretty sure they now think I’m one step up from being a cannibal…
