6 ms·

> The difference between a smartwatch and an ankle monitor ... The real difference is who can access and control the generated data. An ankle monitor's purpose

> The difference between a smartwatch and an ankle monitor ... The real difference is who can access and control the generated data. An ankle monitor's purpose is explicitly to send your location history to the government. A smartwatch's purpose is ostensibly to help you record your activities so you can analyze and optimize your life, which on its own is not unreasonable, but in reality there is little separating the government from that data so it's practically the same as an ankle monitor. The solution here isn't more regulation, it's individual sovereignty over data you generate. Maybe that means software goes back to being software and the market for a 'data service provider' is squeezed out.

sokoloff 4y ago
I’m having a hard time drawing a conclusion of “practically the same” for a device you’re free to remove at any time without consequences versus one that gets you sent back to prison for a parole violation if you voluntarily remove it.
nonameiguess 4y ago
It's not even close to practically the same. What is the actual rate at which the government subpoenas smartwatch location history and the probability it will happen to you? This is like saying the fact the government has the capability to imprison or shoot you at any time and you would not be able to stop them is exactly the same as actually being imprisoned or executed. But yes, clearly the best way forward is individual data sovereignty. The reason intelligent personal digital assistants that knew you intimately didn't seem dystopian when they were in Star Trek is because nobody then envisioned that the software and data would be running on corporate servers. We envisioned these things being more along the lines of trusted friends in their own right, with a clear data boundary at the physical limit of the sensing devices they used, not that they would be perpetually networked and owned by third parties like Amazon. They weren't supposed to share information with anyone but you.
2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
> A smartwatch's purpose is ostensibly to help you record your activities so you can analyze and optimize your life It's an additional megacorp data collection tendril that they let you use a fraction of.
wnoise 4y ago
I don't see a feasible way to ensure individual sovereignty over data you generate, without more regulation.
- christophilus 4y ago
  My data is on my SSD managed by an operating system whose source code I can read whenever I want. If I’m feeling extra paranoid, I can monitor my network traffic to make sure my machine hasn’t been compromised. Nothing goes to the cloud. Nothing leaves my home without my consent. If you really want sovereignty over your data, you keep it non digital. My main problem is the crappy medical software complex that you have no control over. Visited a doctor any time in the last decade? Great. Your most personal details are scattered all over a bunch of insecure systems. At any rate, I have zero trust in the government’s ability to help here. Their incentives are misaligned with mine. It’s rare to find a legislator who really wants more privacy for the average citizen.
  - wnoise 4y ago
    > My data is on my SSD managed by an operating system whose source code I can read whenever I want. These days what we normally call an OS is really just another guest OS to the embedded OSes that are really running the machine. Yes, smuggling things out unnoticed would be hard. As you say, the problem is largely data on you held by others.
ClumsyPilot 4y ago
> The solution here isn't more regulation, it's individual sovereignty over data you generate. It us government regulation that protects your sovereignty over your body or anything at all, including from the government itself
- krapp 4y ago
  There's no such thing as government regulation that protects you from the government. That's like trusting sociopaths with following the honor system. They may be effective at pretending to follow the law, but if the government wants your body, your data, or anything at all, they'll just take it.
  - ClumsyPilot 4y ago
    So if your individual sovereignity is violated, who takes action? A band of hired mercenaries? Bear traps?

sokoloff 4y ago

I’m having a hard time drawing a conclusion of “practically the same” for a device you’re free to remove at any time without consequences versus one that gets you sent back to prison for a parole violation if you voluntarily remove it.

nonameiguess 4y ago

It's not even close to practically the same. What is the actual rate at which the government subpoenas smartwatch location history and the probability it will happen to you? This is like saying the fact the government has the capability to imprison or shoot you at any time and you would not be able to stop them is exactly the same as actually being imprisoned or executed. But yes, clearly the best way forward is individual data sovereignty. The reason intelligent personal digital assistants that knew you intimately didn't seem dystopian when they were in Star Trek is because nobody then envisioned that the software and data would be running on corporate servers. We envisioned these things being more along the lines of trusted friends in their own right, with a clear data boundary at the physical limit of the sensing devices they used, not that they would be perpetually networked and owned by third parties like Amazon. They weren't supposed to share information with anyone but you.

2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago

> A smartwatch's purpose is ostensibly to help you record your activities so you can analyze and optimize your life It's an additional megacorp data collection tendril that they let you use a fraction of.

wnoise 4y ago

I don't see a feasible way to ensure individual sovereignty over data you generate, without more regulation.

christophilus 4y ago
My data is on my SSD managed by an operating system whose source code I can read whenever I want. If I’m feeling extra paranoid, I can monitor my network traffic to make sure my machine hasn’t been compromised. Nothing goes to the cloud. Nothing leaves my home without my consent. If you really want sovereignty over your data, you keep it non digital. My main problem is the crappy medical software complex that you have no control over. Visited a doctor any time in the last decade? Great. Your most personal details are scattered all over a bunch of insecure systems. At any rate, I have zero trust in the government’s ability to help here. Their incentives are misaligned with mine. It’s rare to find a legislator who really wants more privacy for the average citizen.
- wnoise 4y ago
  > My data is on my SSD managed by an operating system whose source code I can read whenever I want. These days what we normally call an OS is really just another guest OS to the embedded OSes that are really running the machine. Yes, smuggling things out unnoticed would be hard. As you say, the problem is largely data on you held by others.

ClumsyPilot 4y ago

> The solution here isn't more regulation, it's individual sovereignty over data you generate. It us government regulation that protects your sovereignty over your body or anything at all, including from the government itself

krapp 4y ago
There's no such thing as government regulation that protects you from the government. That's like trusting sociopaths with following the honor system. They may be effective at pretending to follow the law, but if the government wants your body, your data, or anything at all, they'll just take it.
- ClumsyPilot 4y ago
  So if your individual sovereignity is violated, who takes action? A band of hired mercenaries? Bear traps?