The role of databases that store personal details has been very topical recently. Please read the story at this URL from the BBC on 4th November 2015:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34715872
What are your thoughts on huge databases that are mined for interesting patterns? What problems and opportunities do you foresee? What will it mean for GIS?
Please post your comments by 8pm on Friday of next week (13th) for the 1% mark
Paul McKenzie
An aspect of the debate on online surveillance I find interesting is the false assumption people often make that their interaction with computers is totally private and anonymous. I've worked on an IT help desk in the past and was always amused when I called someone out of the blue.
ReplyDelete- "Are you having problems accessing the system?"
- (shocked silence ... ) "Yes, but how did you know?"
- "All access requests are logged, and we monitor for repeated password failures as this could be an intruder trying to break into the system."
The internet permits behaviours that social norms would have previously curtailed. Ready access to sites for pornography, gambling, adultery (such as Ashley Madison), extremist and racist behaviour as taken for granted. While the proposed surveillance law may have issues, it can be seen as a return to a more human reality in which socially unacceptable behaviour is kept in check. We can be shocked and scared when Facebook recognises us in photos, but forgot that in the years before the internet, people were recognised in your community.
Within this, GIS and other mechanisms for information analysis play an important role. As the world moves to a "global village" the volumn of data quickly over-whelms us. The techiques of our predecessors such as talking to the community and observing behaviour directly do not work on a global scale. Maps and infographics can create meaning out of the masses of facts and figures. They can enable people to regain wisdom.
Hi Justin,
DeleteWith respect, I really dont think tools of this magnitude should used to manage things you consider "socially unacceptable", what you're suggesting is practically Orwellian in its nature!
:-) I almost made reference to 1984 when I wrote that. It's true that what is considered socially unacceptable varies greatly and evolves over time, is certainly not always beneficial to the person concerned, and should not be dictated by one person (and I'd be the last to do that). Lots of examples spring to mind including the harassment of gays in Uganda, female genital mutilation, etc, etc. Nonetheless ... I feel there is an element of truth in this false assumption of being anonymous behind the computer screen and the way it can unleash (let's call it) "regrettable" behaviour. Do you remember this guy Joshua Goldberg (http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-34292809) ? Cheers, J
DeleteBig Brother is watching you, haha!
DeleteIndeed, being anonymous on the internet has its inherent drawbacks in public forums but i feel this broad level of data collection is a bit like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
My main gripe with this law specifically is that the data can be collected and viewed without a warrant, therefore people who are not suspected of any wrong doing can have their data collected and I wonder then: why would a government want this kind of data on all its residents?!
Considering the amount of complex analytics that government security agencies must have at their disposal I feel that this bill may go beyond simply "streamlining" the collection processes. Even if it is seemingly low level data, the potential connections that could be made with it may be quite broad.
The problem with laws like this is that, in reality, they only catch the idiots and petty criminals of the world. It is laughably easy to circumvent this measure by using something like Tor and any major criminal element that exists on the internet knows this and more - therefore I consider this nothing more than harassment of ordinary people and a breach of trust.
ReplyDeleteData mining for commercial purposes, is something that I consider benign to the public at large and useful to modern industry, however I feel it is also something that should be "opt-in" you should be able to decide what is done with your "commercial data" and there is more robust legislation coming in from Brussels soon to deal with irresponsible use and storage of this data, which reminds me of this guy http://www.applefritter.com/bannedbooks , who was able to figure out peoples addresses using nothing more than public Amazon wishlists and a yahoo people search!
GIS and databases concerning the public in general require carefully balanced legislation as they are incredibly powerful tools in both a good and bad sense and any mismanagement will only serve to hinder the development of the industry.
This is definitely the biggest challenge of the internet era and heightens the fine line between privacy and surveillance. It also asks the question when does public information become private and vice versa. Personally I cannot see an agreement which satisfies both sides anytime soon and this debate will long continue.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of the GIS industry, I think first of all people should realise that for the most part, GIS applications use data that is publicly available and do in fact comply with privacy guidelines. This was highlighted in our EGM711 module reading ‘Privacy and GIS’ by Entchev. Here it was argued that GIS uses data that is available already and works on information that can be accessed freely. Link for the curious: http://www.directionsmag.com/entry/gis-and-privacy/123490
Hi Colin,I read that article for the essay too. My biggest take away from it was that Entchev warned that heavy-handed legislation could cripple GIS. Personally I think any crippling legislation would come as a result of public outcry caused by a lack of understanding of what their data could be used for or how it is collected and spurred on by sensationalist news articles.
DeleteA prime example of this kind of thing could be seen the other article for that essay:
http://junkee.com/google-maps-has-been-tracking-your-every-move-and-theres-a-website-to-prove-it/39639
Even though many commenters basically pick apart the piece, you've got to wonder how many other people read that and didnt realize that the tracking was an opt-in service!
I absolutely agree. It would be a shame if an GI industry suffers because of this. Of course people are entitled to their privacy, but as you said a lack of understanding is very much key here. Newspapers will always sensationalize these stories and create mass panic!
DeleteSome of you have probably seen this stunning image produced by an intern at Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/notes/facebook-engineering/visualizing-friendships/469716398919
ReplyDeleteWhile it's an interesting graphical image, but is thought provoking as well. It's "big data" transformed into a meaning message on the inter-connected nature of the world.
There is no denying that large data sets can offer a unique insight into topics that would otherwise remain hidden allowing for this new insight to be brought into the decision making process. Thus leading to better decision making (in theory….)
ReplyDeleteThere is also no denying that eventually large data sets such as the one discussed in the article will eventually be used for activities that could be viewed as unethical or even unlawful. History is littered with examples of organisations acting in an unethically manner but why do they continue to do so. Due to the simple fact that the rewards which can be gained greatly outweigh the punishment that waits if caught. There is no accountability when caught, combined with no real punishment as well.
The article talks about safeguards to ensure that these powers are not abused but for the average person the real issue is not how the safeguards work but how an organisation/ person is held accountable and punished when caught.
This article and legislation itself is part of the wider ongoing debate regarding individual privacy and state security, a very much 21st century problem which wouldn't be possible without the use or misuse of technology. Unfortunately all of the compromise which is deemed necessary for these two issues to balance out, seems to be at the cost of the individual and not the state.
ReplyDeleteMr Curvature has a good point, these security and tracking protocols are so easy to avoid by using encrypted browsers etc, all freely available on the web ironically.
I think large scale data mining is frowned upon by the public in general as it immediately conjures up images of someone else making money from our data, which is unsettling and almost seems unjust. Unfortunately I think GIS data may also fall into this bracket, as once it's out there someone will inevitably try and make a profit from it.
In my opinion, if data mining is conducted for just reasons, and done in an acceptable manner and no data is exploited then it can be a huge benefit to businesses etc. However, I understand the fear people have that their data will be 'public'. When privacy issues like this arise I can't help but be reminded of people I know that freely enter their name, address, etc in to websites simply because they offer a 10% discount or a chance for a free draw and they don't read the smallprint. My point being that people decide to be protective of their details when it suits them.
ReplyDeleteAs Kevin and Mr Curvature mention above, security can be avoided very easily. Is this going to be successful? I fear it may take many mistakes and many years in order to reach an outcome that will benefit everyone, and at the same time not exploit anyone.
In relation to GIS, it may be assumed that GIS is encouraging data mining. However, I agree with Colin who has rightly acknowledged the fact that GIS uses publically available data, and not sourced from 'private' databases.
I think that data mining has probably got itself a bad name and that the average person on the street automatically associates it with spam emails, unwanted text messages or cold calling. While there may be incidence of unethical behaviour and misuse of data stored in large databases, I think that generally the advantages are not stressed enough e.g. fraud detection or how it is used in the healthcare sector to improve patient care/treatment and reduce costs.
ReplyDeleteSo I would agree with Kevin in that data mining is frowned upon by the public, but I would also add that I don’t think the public fully understands what data mining entails. I do think that it is vitally important that the GIS community maintains the trust of the general public.
Regarding the article, will it matter that internet/mobile phone companies will have to store information for 12 months? I suspect that many privacy advocates will not like this.
I think that the majority of people have nothing to hide so why should it matter. Having a database which holds my browser history for the last year or my life would not bother me as long as it was used by the correct people. If the information was to be used by the PPI and claims companies to annoy you then I'd say no; but if its for the police and legal issues then, yes no problem.
ReplyDeleteWhen we search online currently Amazon and such give you targeted pop ups, because they know your browsing history. So it would be similar to that.
The main problem I foresee is the information being used by companies to target individuals or 'steal' information to use in an inappropriate way. The information should be used for detection of illegal activity or patterns which are believed to lead to crime.
As for GIS the information could be used to look for patterns which could be used to benefit the community. But as people have said before 'data mining' is not looked on favorably by the public. I think if the public knew more about data mining and what it was going to be used for then they might agree to it. A big problem is that the general public are 'scared' of the internet and as they don't understand what exactly the data would or could be used for.
I agree with you Fiona, a lot of the public don't fully understand the great benefits that GIS can bring and if they did they might be more willing to share their information. I find that the majority of the public don't even know what GIS is... when someone asks me what i am studying, very few of them have ever heard of GIS! Therefore greater education of the public is needed, but as GIS continues to advance this will most likely increase their knowledge of GIS.
DeleteFirstly, I think large datasets that are mined for interesting patterns can be useful when an individual gives consent to such information being used. My own personal details, such as my locations on Google or Twitter, are available because I allow it. However, this Investigatory Powers Bill is the unconsensual mining of data. I agree with Mr Curvature who says it is a harassment of ordinary people and a breach of trust.
ReplyDeleteI do not agree with the thinking that if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. Bruce Schneier, who is a privacy specialist, has said that too many people characterise this debate as "security versus privacy", when the real choice is "liberty versus control". I want to have the freedom to browse the internet without my every movement or click being stored without my consent.
GIS will continue to be a valuable tool for showing spatial relationships and patterns and many people are only starting to realise the benefits it can bring to a business or area of work. I hope that the amount of press that data mining and surveillance are currently receiving does not impact the use of GIS now or in the future.
Others have already mentioned the potential societal benefits of large data as well as the drawbacks. Personally, I am not convinced that surveillance of the online activities of the public will have any significant improvement on criminal investigations, as presented in the article. It seems to me like the main outcome of this bill will be further erosion of the public's perceived privacy.
ReplyDeleteWhat should also be considered is how the data would be stored and how secure it would be. We have seen recently that important personal details can be stolen from databases that are not sufficiently protected. Data such as this in the wrong hands could actually cause an increase in cyber crime such as fraud, extortion or financial theft.
I believe that databases and GIS as effective tools will depend on support from public opinion. This means that any data collected must be stored securely and access to sensitive information must be tightly regulated. It is important that people feel their data is being used for their own good, rather than for government control or commercial gain.
I agree Stewart, I don't think there are massive benefits to be derived from surveillance of online data. The real criminals know we are being watched and they will by-pass all that. They will just meet people face to face the old fashioned way! The only sector that will benefit from monitoring our online behaviour are marketing companies IMO!
DeleteYea I agree with you Stewart that surveillance isn't going to do much to improve terror and crime investigations. Your right also Claire that criminals will find other means of meeting with people.
DeleteI also agree with this. I don't think these laws will prevent people from carrying out criminal activity. They will still find ways to do it!
DeleteI don't know, it won't stop all criminal / terrorist activity that's for sure but it shouldn't stop us from taking whatever preventative measures we can. Better to stop some than none?
DeleteI agree that preventative measures should be taken but there needs to be a balance reached between stopping criminal activities and respecting what little privacy we have left. I think the surveillance of everyone's online data will do more harm than good.
DeleteI think one of the things that strikes me most about this arcticle and the comments above is how less human and more data generators we have. We are Facebook profiles, internet users and smartphone owners that generate big data that are used for creating huge databases about our behaviour and location. The opportunities that arise from this 'digital footprint' are massive for marketing companies that want to sell us things and big brother that wants to keep an eye on us. Not only are we now becoming disconnected from our environment and wildlife we are starting to become more disconnected from each other too, well the real us. Don't get me wrong, I love social medial, I think it has benefits but it's the sad reality of 2 'friends' sitting in a coffee shop and both are on their smartphones in a virtual conversation with other people that I struggle with!
ReplyDeleteI only see all this data capture as being an opportunity for GIS. In order to interpret the behavioural and location data in a sensible way skills like ours will be required.
We have more control over what data gets used by third parties now. I guess the responsibility is now for us to manage our own privacy settings in order to limit the amount of data we share. Any data getting into the wrong hands is dangerous.
I think most of us that have watched 'Spooks' and 'Homeland' are now aware that the fiction is not far from the truth. The satellites are up there watching all of us, to protect us from each other!
I think one of the things that strikes me most about this arcticle and the comments above is how less human and more data generators we have become!
DeleteI completely agree with everything that you have said. I definitely think that know it is our responsibility to control how much data we share. You mentioned how social media has made us become more disconnected with each other and in a way I agree. But do you not think it has also allowed for other people to become more connected? easier access to internet and apps to stay in touch with people who live far away. Just a thought.
DeleteObviously data mining has its benefits and consequences just like anything else. However it depends on how we view data mining, for example is it from the business end or from our own perspective. With regards to the business end of things, personally I think data mining is useful for business. Most of the time the general public are completely oblivious that they have gave over so many details which are continually stored. If this data is being used to benefit the businesses without jeopardising any of our own personal information then go ahead. From the human side of things just as I mentioned above some of us are don't even realise how much information we voluntarily give away. Reflecting back to our EGM711 essays, one of the main points I focused on was the power of an address and linking back to yesterday’s class with Paul McKenzie, if you have a house number and a postcode, this is your ticket to collecting data on lots of people. At the time when I give out my personal information I don’t think twice about it and to be honest it doesn’t really bother me what is done with my information.
ReplyDeleteWith regards to the new law mentioned in the article which involves storing internet activity for 1 year to fight crime and terror – I have mixed opinions on this. To an extent yes, this could go some way in protecting our society against criminals, preventing attacks etc, by looking at the browsing history. However surely these people who do abuse the internet for these activities will just find some other way to do so? The government needs to be careful to ensure that they don’t jump the gun and falsely accuse people etc. I think the most important thing that needs to be said here is that a balance needs to be struck. I see no problem with letting businesses use your information if it is going to benefit them but in the long term our data should be used to provide a service/product which benefits us. A line needs to be drawn as to how far they can go with releasing certain aspects of our data. A GIS system would be very useful when working with large data bases in terms of storage and highlighting spatial relationships. Whether it was for businesses or governmental purposes, they could use the tools to provide a service which would be of benefit to society.
I actually didn't mean for this to be this long lol.
Deletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/magazine/shopping-habits.html?_r=2&hp=&pagewanted=all
ReplyDeleteA very interesting (albeit long) read on relatively simple data mining processes that benefit companies.
The issue of data privacy is becoming increasingly prevalent in our society. Everyone has different views (as seen in this blog thus far) on whether increased surveillance as proposed in this bill will help to fight crime and terror. Personally I believe that while it may have slight positive impacts, on the whole I don’t think it will do much to help with criminal investigations. This is because criminals already know that their every move is being monitored online and they will find other ways to communicate with people so that their plans are not exposed to the police.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with this bill is that it has now further increased the public’s concern on the issue of data privacy. Many people are worried with the fact that their online history will be monitored, but in many cases such as Twitter there is an “opt-in” approach in which you freely enable your spatial location to be shared with others. Also the fact that it will be the police and intelligence officers monitoring and storing information in databases means an added since of data security because it’s not just going to be any Tom, Dick or Harry accessing your data (hope yous understand this saying… or maybe it’s just my Ballymena lingo!). However, I do acknowledge that their needs to be a certain amount of data privacy.
Finally, even though there is a heightened media attention with regards to privacy I believe and certainly hope that it won’t have a detrimental effect on the GIS sector.
I think mining of huge databases is becoming more 'normal' in society today. Our personal details have been recorded for a long time (for example, CCTV is watching our every move - as Mr Curvature said "Big Brother is watching you!").
ReplyDeleteI agree with the general consensus so far in the blog in that the main issue is with security and ensuring that the data is managed correctly to make sure it does not fall into the wrong hands. But I believe that in our post-9/11 society the use of such databases is vital tool for fighting crime and terror.
I agree with Alice that people 'pick and chose' when to be protective of their details when it suits them. Hopefully with people becoming more aware of their data being collected and held they will see the benefits of such databases and enable the growth of GIS.
Without seeing all the details of the Bill mentioned in the article it is difficult to say definitively whether or not it is, on balance, in the public interest. The threat of terrorist attack in the UK is real and we have consistently seen that the security services do prevent attacks by means to which we are not fully party. The recent prevention of the kidnapping of diplomats in Norway is a case in point. No doubt intelligence gathering of one kind or another was used in the lead up to the eventual arrests in this case.
ReplyDeleteThe other side of the coin for this Bill is the the innocent person attending a police station perhaps to report a crime, and all and sundry at the station having the knowledge that the person accesses porn, gambling and perhaps an extra-marital affair website and those officers have no right to have such knowledge – we don’t really have the detail to judge whether such situations will be possible, or likely.
If the data is to be held by the service providers for one year then clearly this data is vulnerable to the same security risks as Ashley Madison style attacks, perhaps for even more nefarious purposes. There is a new criminal act to be set in place but will this really be a deterrent?
However, I am concerned about privacy in the increasing digital age, and to be fair, the increasing insouciance with which we click away our rights to privacy on Facebook and Google etc we have reason to be concerned. With devices like smart phones we use location based apps which mean that many apps, Google, Apple, Facebook etc etc all know where we have been. Perhaps where we shouldn’t have been? Many of these companies have a proven shoddy track record in keeping our data private yet we gladly give them access to our location, our contacts, our photos etc with a scant reading of the terms and conditions which accompany acceptance of usage. We shouldn’t forget that when we sign away our privacy in these cases we are making a choice. But of course, the GIS aspect, location, of the various apps do provide many benefits – nearest Indian restaurant, mapping (where am I!) and Uber...
I believe this Bill ought to be scrutinised at every step, and at least there are plans to ensure that a judge will make the final decisions on whether communications should be intercepted in a more direct manner, rather than the Home Secretary who could potentially use this Bill for political ends. Can we have the same faith in a profit minded Apple executive?
I agree Paul that our data will be vulnerable being held by the service providers for a year. Given that Talk Talk has already been targeted, will the govt be willing to part with some extra money to ensure that the service providers/mobile phone companies can securely hold onto the data for a year ? Or will it just be business as usual, but potentially more enticing for criminals to target.
DeleteI think it is important to regulate the internet and update the laws. As others have said it is a controversial topic of this digital age, but it’s one we cannot ignore.
ReplyDeleteI think that most people fear their data becoming public but I disagree with Mr Curvature that this legislation would only protect against petty crime. Yes probably there are going to be criminals and big time terrorists likely to use measures to get around this surveillance but what about those who don’t? The murderers and kidnappers, paedophiles, rapists etc? They are hardly petty crimes (at least not in my opinion) and if they can be stopped (or at least reduced) then isn’t that beneficial to the public? I don’t believe the Internet should be completely unmonitored or unregulated so that any form of illegal activity can occur right under our noses. But at the same time, having my data collected and stored for 12 months is an unsettling and disturbing prospect. From my point of view, this legislation is not about making our private information public, it’s about making it easier for law enforcement agencies to access this data to stop criminal activity from happening.
Data mining has endless benefits and is an extremely powerful tool that cannot (and will not) be ignored. Obviously privacy is always going to be a concern, but I think the only way forward is to make clear legislation to both establish safeguards for the public and to enable judicial authorisation. The same applies to GIS, but as mentioned above, at the moment most GIS datasets are already available to the public.
After reading the article and each of the posts, I can see both perspectives. On one hand this data mining could be depicted as an invasion of each individuals privacy and on the other hand a beneficial step towards trying to curtail dangerous behaviours/ persons. We live in a world where the internet plays a major role in our lives i.e. I shop online on websites such as Newlook to Ebay. I hand over information regarding my details and cards easily regardless of being fully aware of the possible consequences. But that is my choice. Therefore I believe that if you sign up to the internet you have to accept that your digital footprint has been left there.
ReplyDeleteSimilarly I have a Facebook account, Instagram account and a Twitter account each of which (given my permission) can post exactly where I am at the point of writing the post. Each of us essentially being tracked physically and I personally feel that when you sign up to the internet you forfeit your right to entire privacy. You have a digital footprint that is likely to have been being tracked for years by other security companies so what difference does it make if the government use it too?
I understand however the fear that the information would be misused as personal details can be obtained i.e. the TalkTalk incident. Everything we do is tacked and monitored and therefore if our histories were to be tracked by the government what difference would it make? I do firmly believe that if you have nothing to hide then there shouldn’t be any problems as long as the overall data is managed correctly and cannot be used for detrimental purposes (for those of us who have nothing to hide).