I’ve just attended the workshop Datastream: My own private
info
at the Open World Forum in paris. A
very sensitive topic nowadays and the speakers around the table raised
a number of interesting points.
Sunil Abraham, Policy Director, Center for Internet and Society
(India), started his contribution pointing out the privacy is very
much a related to the local culture and history of a country. In India
for example, the expectation of privacy is dramatically different from
western countries. A very interesting example is the amount of
information that is already “encoded” in the name of the person. Being
India a country based on a cast system, the name of the person, not
only gives away the social status and religion of a person, but also
his sex and location. Very common question during every day
conversation are also related to salary, spending and wealth.
Questions that are somehow taboo in western countries. This lead to
very different perception and expectation of privacy that is not
clearly reconcilable with western practice and policies. This also
allows the Indian government to establish policies that that from a
western point of view are completely unacceptable.
A different angle is proposed by the sociologist Dominique Cardon
working for Orange. He points out the important difference between
government surveillance versus collateral surveillance, as the stoking
from people in their circle as parents, neighborhoods, etc. The large
majority of people when confronted with questions about privacy often
show great concerns and fears about the big brother spying on them,
However, he points out, there is a clear cut between these concerns
and the quantity of information that each individual then puts on the
web. The problem being the distinction that unconsciously people make
between data they want to share with their social network and the
world as a whole (composed of governments and unknown individuals).
Facebook and other social network greatly emphasize the idea of a
network of friends giving people the false idea that the data they
share is truly private, or restrict to a small circle of friends, when
reality shows that these tools are often exploited by other individual
or entities to dig information and make profit on personal data.
Somebody in the audience framed the same problem as and identity issue
in the digital worlds. As he put it, people starts to develop split
digital personalities (i.e. a personal facebook account and a work
facebook account) in order to defend themselves from snooping and
surveillance. There is clearly a need to reconcile these personalities
by technological means creating privacy contexts instead of fostering
the creation of completely separated and antithetic digital personae
that can have repercussions on the way poeple behave in the real world.
Djordje Djokic (European rights and privacy protection on the
Internet), gave a quite broad overview of the political issues related
to privacy. Despite privacy being a fundamental right upon which many
other rights are based, from a legal prospective it is impossible to
define privacy. This is due to the fact that national policies are
local while digital privacy is a global problem. If we put together
this with the cultural difference among states, in the short term it
will be very difficult to safe guard citizens against privacy
speculators. He also made an interesting points about privacy safe
heavens that can attract activists and agencies due to better legal protections.
I point I made is about the future. It seems that the entire debate
was focus about the state actual state of affairs. The FLOSS community
has debated for long time now about privacy and technological
solutions. Enlightening talks like Eben Moglen many times this
year gave rise to
interesting projects like the freedom box
project . The Diaspora
project that will hopefully take off
the ground sometimes soon, promises to offer and distributed and
decentralized alternative to facebook. Status Net
and Identica are also two very interesting
platforms built on free and open source software that I hope will take
over, or at least pave the path for commercial alternatives.
One of the biggest challenge of course is about education. People
don’t understand the pitfall of many so called “free” services like
facebook or twitter. These companies effectively make money on your
willingness to give away information about you, your friends and your
life. The large majority of the community is not aware of these
problems. This makes it very difficult to privacy advocates to push
policies changes because of the lack of interest with the general
public. Politicians in particular do not really grasp these problems.
Now we even start to see regional and national politician embracing
privacy-less social medias making it difficult to for the public to
move away from them at the price of being excluded from the democratic
life of their country.
National education certainly do not have yet in their curricula topics
such as privacy and new medias. Kids often learn from their peers and
are enticed by the rich offer of these companies. This state of affair
allows facebook or google founders to declare that people today do not
have anymore an expectation of privacy. I personally strongly disagree
with this position and I hope these will change in the future with
privacy aware social media, maybe decentralized, but certainly built
in a way to let individuals to retain complete ownership and control
over their digital life.
The path to shift the actual tendency is certainly steep. A first
step, from a technological point of view, is to create something
stable and sound. But the second step, to get weight among todays’ big
players is to create new and exciting services. Selling an alternative
to somebody that does not understand the problem of privacy is already
difficult enough (and the story about desktops on linux should already
have show why this does not work in this monopolistic world). The
strong selling point should be about new services, exciting new way to
interact and seamlessly integration with nowadays platforms.