4 ms·

I love the idea of data portability and data dividends. I love it dearly. It gets at what are by far the most critical principles here - data sovereignty and da

by Kalium 5y ago

I love the idea of data portability and data dividends. I love it dearly. It gets at what are by far the most critical principles here - data sovereignty and data value. So it is with a heavy heart that I similarly always find myself deeply concerned by the security implications of such a world. As soon as you create data import and export functions, we will collectively realize that most people both have absolutely no idea how to handle it and are incredibly resistant to education on the subject. A lot of well-meaning ordinary people are going to get hurt when they get tricked into mishandling their data. There's already a sizable black market for personal data, and increasing transparency and access is going to grow that by both providing more ways to access data and more ways to use it. I don't know a good way to reconcile these two. The tension hurts my heart.

jraph 5y ago
We should work on making user privacy more private, not more portable. If it does not exist it does not need to be ported. A piece of data which has been put somewhere is there forever. It cannot be moved, only copied. And we should disincentivize data collection by making it worthless or costly, so only the strict minimum to make something work is collected. edit: and having a central place where companies can request personal data is to be avoided: it should be hard to know where to find someone's data. Instauring data dividends would risk encouraging people to share personal data because it could benefit them financially, and that we probably want to avoid as well.
- AlbertCory 5y ago
  > "We should work on making user privacy more private, not more portable." I don't understand this; can you explain? I focused on getting data out of the FAANG Data companies. There would equally be regulations on getting it in. If you want to outlaw face recognition, you would make it illegal to add any data about facial characteristics. Or political affiliations, or porn history, etc. etc.
  - zucked 5y ago
    At the risk of sounding like a dimwit, because this is the edge of my mental abilities here - is the concept, then, that data _itself_ becomes a regulated asset? Such that no company, should they not desired to participate on your REIT-like scheme, would be able to collect "data" without it being akin to holding a regulated asset?
    - AlbertCory 5y ago
      I appreciate the humility. So rare! I think that's it exactly. I suspect HIPAA is a model for this, although not a perfect one. It's like holding health data on large numbers of people -- you need to be registered & bonded, and you have to control access to it. Why is data on your friends & political beliefs any less sensitive than your health? I hope no one thinks I have a whole manual of how this would operate. That would be the result of a large group saying "This sounds interesting. Let's try to flesh it out." On the other hand, as I said: breaking up Ma Bell took 14 years. Just saying "break up Big Tech" doesn't answer all the questions, either.
      - da_big_ghey 5y ago
        What do you believe to be a "legitimate" use for this data then once it his holding by such a company with register and bond? Most times somebody need to authorize data for HIPPA people just sign and say it is fine, why wouldn't this happen here? People become used to some site saying "this site needs access to your data"? How is there any difference except one more layer of indirection? Or perhaps I am misunderstanding your statements.
  - VRay 5y ago
    What's your plan for "anonymized" data that's all hilariously easy to de-anonymize? Example: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/12/20/opinion/location-data-national-security.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/12/20/opinion/locat...
    - AlbertCory 5y ago

by Kalium 5y ago

jraph 5y ago

We should work on making user privacy more private, not more portable. If it does not exist it does not need to be ported. A piece of data which has been put somewhere is there forever. It cannot be moved, only copied. And we should disincentivize data collection by making it worthless or costly, so only the strict minimum to make something work is collected. edit: and having a central place where companies can request personal data is to be avoided: it should be hard to know where to find someone's data. Instauring data dividends would risk encouraging people to share personal data because it could benefit them financially, and that we probably want to avoid as well.

AlbertCory 5y ago
> "We should work on making user privacy more private, not more portable." I don't understand this; can you explain? I focused on getting data out of the FAANG Data companies. There would equally be regulations on getting it in. If you want to outlaw face recognition, you would make it illegal to add any data about facial characteristics. Or political affiliations, or porn history, etc. etc.
- zucked 5y ago
  At the risk of sounding like a dimwit, because this is the edge of my mental abilities here - is the concept, then, that data _itself_ becomes a regulated asset? Such that no company, should they not desired to participate on your REIT-like scheme, would be able to collect "data" without it being akin to holding a regulated asset?
  - AlbertCory 5y ago
    I appreciate the humility. So rare! I think that's it exactly. I suspect HIPAA is a model for this, although not a perfect one. It's like holding health data on large numbers of people -- you need to be registered & bonded, and you have to control access to it. Why is data on your friends & political beliefs any less sensitive than your health? I hope no one thinks I have a whole manual of how this would operate. That would be the result of a large group saying "This sounds interesting. Let's try to flesh it out." On the other hand, as I said: breaking up Ma Bell took 14 years. Just saying "break up Big Tech" doesn't answer all the questions, either.
    - da_big_ghey 5y ago
      What do you believe to be a "legitimate" use for this data then once it his holding by such a company with register and bond? Most times somebody need to authorize data for HIPPA people just sign and say it is fine, why wouldn't this happen here? People become used to some site saying "this site needs access to your data"? How is there any difference except one more layer of indirection? Or perhaps I am misunderstanding your statements.
- VRay 5y ago
  What's your plan for "anonymized" data that's all hilariously easy to de-anonymize? Example: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/12/20/opinion/location-data-national-security.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/12/20/opinion/locat...
  - AlbertCory 5y ago