The shocking thing about British Airways use of Google images to identify first class passengers is not that some have raised privacy concerns or even that BA seemed so tone deaf to the objections. The shocking thing is that so few seem to be alarmed by the program.
For example, when Gizmodo asked their readers if they were comfortable with the idea, the very first reply read “Any of my information that is freely available to [G]oogle is my own fault.” And the very next comment started “Yeah I don’t get these ‘privacy’ concerns. There used to be a time when everyone knew everyone else in town by name.”
The writer is mistaken in his believe that it is your own fault if such personal information becomes available to Google (or other big data harvesters like FaceBook and LinkedIn). Even at its most benign, the information in question might be posted by a third party, perhaps a stranger or a firm (possibly defunct) disclosed in violation of their own privacy policy. The information might be inaccurate or misleading. It might be completely false.
Or, the information might not be yours at all. It might have just “probably” have been associated with you. Remember Portland Oregon attorney Brandon Mayfield? He was jailed for two weeks as a suspect in the the horrific 2004 train bombing in Madrid. Mayfield had the misfortune to have fingerprints that were similar to those of a terrorist wanted in Spain, a match discovered by an FBI computer. He might be in prison today had the Spanish authorities not vigorously objected. The process of computing probabilistic “many-to-many” connections on colossal quantities of information invariably leads to many such mistaken inferences.
And if you believe that disclosing personal information is “your own fault,” I recommend that you invest 7 minutes to watch Gary Kovacs’ short TED talk “Tracking the Trackers.”
Even so, why, as second writer argued, isn’t this simply a return to times of yore when we all knew each other by name? Even a couple of hundred years ago, compiling a dossier on one of your fellow villagers could could get you sued for the tort of the violation of the right to privacy.
In nineteenth century Boston, one might sit at home and read the part of the newspaper or book as they pleased in utter privacy. But today the newspaper and the book are on-line. So, every turn of the page is available in your data stream, ready for near real-time correlation with your location, your last restaurant visit, what you ate there, who you were with, and the last thing that you bought at a store.
In the hands of big data scientists, this data stream produces ever more powerful inferences. And it is for sale to whomever Google (or FaceBook or LinkedIn) chooses to offer it. These are not your fellow villagers. They are huge, powerful organizations which can hold great sway over your life.
BA may be using the technology today to offer an innocuous, customized “Good morning Mr. Shear,” should I have the capacity and desire buy a first class ticket on that very good airline.
But consider, for example, targeted offers for credit, of houses for sale, of jobs available, scholarships available—all optimized against some objective profit or performance function of the sponsor’s own specific interests. The objective function can easily result de facto discrimination. If you are the victim, you will never know it. It is the targeted ad or personalized email offer that you never received.
The list of really harmful yet feasible applications is limited only by the imagination but, alas, not limited by law or regulation.
The New Humble Programmer 