Wanting a personal algorithm
I have a number of friends who argue for online tracking, with the aim of having a personalised algorithm on tech platforms. They want to see more of what they're interested in & want tailored ads, rather than generic ones.
This is a viewpoint I don't agree with, but there is no one viewpoint that works for the world. What I'm most happy about is the intentional choice about tech, & what the choice these friends have is intentional.
There may not be an opt-in button for tracking on a lot of tech platforms, but people of this opinion are aware of what information is being gathered about them. Many of them are also aware that what's collected is used in other ways, sold on, etc. They do not mind this arrangement & even see it as a worthy trade-off or exchange.
I still think this arrangement could be better.
A user, happily engaging with a tech platform, under the arrangement of data being shared, might decide they want to end this arrangement. Perhaps the tech platform has been found to be doing harm, or the person now has a connection to someone else who needs them to share less data for their security. At this point the user should be able to effectively opt-out.
Today, we rely on laws being in place to enforce this, but this is not effective...
As if on queue, whilst writing this, I received an email from the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) in response to a complaint I made about a company who had ignored my Data Subject Access Request (DSAR). After repeated reminders over the 30 days they had to respond, I heard nothing.
I wanted to find out how they got my phone number – ahead of requesting they delete my details – which I found out (through another DSAR) is available via a chrome browser extension:
We have considered the information you have provided in line with our published framework and have decided not to undertake a more detailed investigation. We will therefore record your complaint for information purposes.
...
In addition to raising your complaint with us, you also have the right to take proceedings to court if you believe an organisation has not handled your personal information appropriately.
...
We won't be in touch again about this matter, but we would like to thank you for taking the time to share information with us to help us to improve data protection practices.
-- ICO email response to me personally.
If the ISO hadn't been so useless, & having left me waiting weeks for a response (which I was told could take up to 40 weeks), I would have thought they could sense what I was writing & sent me further proof of a lack of enforcement.
When the issues are large enough, investigations & punishments (enforcement after the fact) does occur. Big tech platforms are being found to be holding on to data they were legally required to delete:
Other alleged violations include making deceptive representations that Alexa app users could delete their or their children’s voice recordings, including audio files and transcripts and their geolocation information, when in fact Amazon on some occasions failed to delete all such information at users’ request.
...
The complaint also alleges that Amazon engaged in unfair privacy practices with respect to Alexa users’ geolocation information and voice recordings, including (in some instances) by failing to honor users’ deletion requests and failing to notify consumers that it had not done so.
-- https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/amazon-agrees-injunctive-relief-and-25-million-civil-penalty-alleged-violations-childrens
I doubt this would be acceptable to anyone happy with a data-sharing agreement between them & big tech: a better experience in exchange for data.
I highly doubt Amazon have made 25 million dollars out of keeping children’s voice recordings, but I do think, more broadly, that the fines for violating privacy are treated as a cost of doing business, like paying an additional tax. Summed all together I believe big tech companies make more money by behaving unlawfully & dishonestly, factoring in the fines for the cases they are caught. This explains why they keep doing it.
And Apple:
Earlier this month, a small security research firm called Mysk released a video revealing that when you tick the box on your Iphone that promises "disable the sharing of Device Analytics altogether," your Iphone continues to spy on you, and sends the data it collects to Apple:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JxvH80Rrcw
-- https://pluralistic.net/2022/11/14/luxury-surveillance/#liar-liar
How can we hold companies accountable? In the Amazon case it took the FTC investigating & getting access to internal company files. What about an individual who wants trust in a process like this?
We could, & should, have a means of verifying that a request to company has been completed according to the law, & that they carry out what's required of them, when it comes personal information of so much value to individuals.
Regulated industries have audits & are proud to uphold strict standard. Any tech company that amasses a enough of a database of users & information about them should be be celebrated for going through an independent audit process. Companies looking to acquire them would have greater confidence in what they're investing in. And we would look for a badge on their website or app to show this, & be begin to be something we expect.
Those of us who expect that anyone holding information us follows the law, whether we're happy about the arrangement or not, could finally have some form of confidence.
