Just Privacy???
I've learned some very interesting things about our generation over the past week. I've thought enough about to to give it an entry. I'm sure papers can be written about what recently transpired on facebook, and the mass response to the changes, and subsequent apology truly have me thinking.
My question to our generation is, at what point did the burden of privacy fall out of our hands and into the hands of corporations? Obviously, any company that violates privacy is wrong, but are we not responsible for our privacy as well? So it baffles me that a social networking site where the individual willingly volunteers all the information about him or herself, can be accused of violating the privacy of its users. What is our definition of privacy?... because while it is a word that was thrown around, I don't think people felt their privacy was being violated. I think most people simply were not used to seeing such customized information in one place. I believe this lead to a feeling of being violated, and that privacy was the quickest and easiest thing to associate these feelings of violation with.
What was done on facebook isn't entirely new, it was just new for a social networking site, hence its genius and its misinterpretation. Many people, including myself, use newsfeeds on a daily basis, but a vast majority of individuals do not know what they are. So I will say that seeing it for the first time, especially in relation to friends and their most recent activities on the site, can not only be surprising, but also overwhelming. But before I explain newsfeeds, I want to reiterate that this is not an issue of privacy, it can't possibly be. If any site asked you for your social security number, I certainly hope you would think twice about volunteering that information. In this situation, if anyone's privacy was violated, the burden is on that individual, because that person volunteers the information that can be seen throughout the site. On the other hand, if a bank, with sensitive personal information necessary to be a customer of the bank, willing or unwillingly gives this information to anyone else, then the burden is on that corporation.
Think about all the sites you visit on a daily basis. You go there, you read new information, and then you move on to the next site. Sometimes you visit the site and there is no new information. Imagine if you can have a tool that not only tells you when a site is updated, but gives you the new information. On top of that, imagine that it presents all new information in one place, so that instead of going to 10 or 20 different sites all the time, you simply go to 1 place and read all new information. This is called RSS (Really Simple Syndication, or Rich Site Summary). It has been around for several years now, and most sites including blogs, and news sites utilize it. It can even be set up to show you recent email. If you check your e-mail often, there will be times when you check it and there is nothing new. I only check my email when there is something new, because I am notified about it. This is about efficiency, and for those of us who use computers often (most of our generation, especially the social networking site members), the little things that save time can end up saving a wealth of time. If you look in the pictures below, you will see that newsfeeds, or in this case called Web Clips, present new entries from my most visited blogs in one place on my desktop. I don't check the individual blogs to see if there is anything new, I only read new entries when they happen.
THAT is all Facebook did to the site. They incorporated RSS into social networking. Being the non-nerd technologist that I am (or consider myself to be), it was a logical next step, that business-wise gives them a major edge over their competitors. Without offending anyone, also meaning that I do not intend to offend anyone, I will say what has been said before... "The Masses are Asses." Look how quickly a misunderstanding, or lack of understanding turned into a movement... one that forced an apology because this is still business. Please correct me if I am wrong... These are my opinoins, so I welcome debate. I truly believe that out of all of this, we have a bigger problem to address. What do we really believe privacy is? and do people truly understand that it is their OWN responsibility FIRST to protect their privacy?
Another topic for another day, but I will mention, Bank of America has a service now that will monitor your credit report so that identity theft can be found quickly and stopped before significant damage occurs. It is a great service, but I would not sign up, because it costs money. For the longest I believed that identity theft (as it relates to a bank) is a burden that falls under their responsibility. Why should I pay for something that they should either be doing anyway, or when identity theft may be their fault? What I've realized over the past week is that the banks believe, and possibly rightly so, that identity theft occurs most because of the individual not taking steps to protect their own privacy. So, it makes sense for them to charge for the service. There is no clearer example of this than hundreds of thousands of members of a social networing site claiming their privacy is violated when THEY are the ones who volunteer the information.
I'll end with a few internet rules that I use...
Only use and visit sites that you trust. Some obscure sites, while informative or entertaining, are dangerous. A general rule... the more pop-ups there are, the less you should be there.
Never give your SSN or your mother's maiden name over the internet. If it is necessary, do whatever possible to give it in person or over the phone for whatever you are signing up with.
If you are giving personal information on the internet, make sure you see https:// - that "s" means that you are using a secure and encrypted connection.
Design means a lot. If a site doesn't look like much care or thought has been put into it, you can pretty much guarantee the same for its security and policies.
~JL
My question to our generation is, at what point did the burden of privacy fall out of our hands and into the hands of corporations? Obviously, any company that violates privacy is wrong, but are we not responsible for our privacy as well? So it baffles me that a social networking site where the individual willingly volunteers all the information about him or herself, can be accused of violating the privacy of its users. What is our definition of privacy?... because while it is a word that was thrown around, I don't think people felt their privacy was being violated. I think most people simply were not used to seeing such customized information in one place. I believe this lead to a feeling of being violated, and that privacy was the quickest and easiest thing to associate these feelings of violation with.
What was done on facebook isn't entirely new, it was just new for a social networking site, hence its genius and its misinterpretation. Many people, including myself, use newsfeeds on a daily basis, but a vast majority of individuals do not know what they are. So I will say that seeing it for the first time, especially in relation to friends and their most recent activities on the site, can not only be surprising, but also overwhelming. But before I explain newsfeeds, I want to reiterate that this is not an issue of privacy, it can't possibly be. If any site asked you for your social security number, I certainly hope you would think twice about volunteering that information. In this situation, if anyone's privacy was violated, the burden is on that individual, because that person volunteers the information that can be seen throughout the site. On the other hand, if a bank, with sensitive personal information necessary to be a customer of the bank, willing or unwillingly gives this information to anyone else, then the burden is on that corporation.
Think about all the sites you visit on a daily basis. You go there, you read new information, and then you move on to the next site. Sometimes you visit the site and there is no new information. Imagine if you can have a tool that not only tells you when a site is updated, but gives you the new information. On top of that, imagine that it presents all new information in one place, so that instead of going to 10 or 20 different sites all the time, you simply go to 1 place and read all new information. This is called RSS (Really Simple Syndication, or Rich Site Summary). It has been around for several years now, and most sites including blogs, and news sites utilize it. It can even be set up to show you recent email. If you check your e-mail often, there will be times when you check it and there is nothing new. I only check my email when there is something new, because I am notified about it. This is about efficiency, and for those of us who use computers often (most of our generation, especially the social networking site members), the little things that save time can end up saving a wealth of time. If you look in the pictures below, you will see that newsfeeds, or in this case called Web Clips, present new entries from my most visited blogs in one place on my desktop. I don't check the individual blogs to see if there is anything new, I only read new entries when they happen.
THAT is all Facebook did to the site. They incorporated RSS into social networking. Being the non-nerd technologist that I am (or consider myself to be), it was a logical next step, that business-wise gives them a major edge over their competitors. Without offending anyone, also meaning that I do not intend to offend anyone, I will say what has been said before... "The Masses are Asses." Look how quickly a misunderstanding, or lack of understanding turned into a movement... one that forced an apology because this is still business. Please correct me if I am wrong... These are my opinoins, so I welcome debate. I truly believe that out of all of this, we have a bigger problem to address. What do we really believe privacy is? and do people truly understand that it is their OWN responsibility FIRST to protect their privacy?
Another topic for another day, but I will mention, Bank of America has a service now that will monitor your credit report so that identity theft can be found quickly and stopped before significant damage occurs. It is a great service, but I would not sign up, because it costs money. For the longest I believed that identity theft (as it relates to a bank) is a burden that falls under their responsibility. Why should I pay for something that they should either be doing anyway, or when identity theft may be their fault? What I've realized over the past week is that the banks believe, and possibly rightly so, that identity theft occurs most because of the individual not taking steps to protect their own privacy. So, it makes sense for them to charge for the service. There is no clearer example of this than hundreds of thousands of members of a social networing site claiming their privacy is violated when THEY are the ones who volunteer the information.
I'll end with a few internet rules that I use...
Only use and visit sites that you trust. Some obscure sites, while informative or entertaining, are dangerous. A general rule... the more pop-ups there are, the less you should be there.
Never give your SSN or your mother's maiden name over the internet. If it is necessary, do whatever possible to give it in person or over the phone for whatever you are signing up with.
If you are giving personal information on the internet, make sure you see https:// - that "s" means that you are using a secure and encrypted connection.
Design means a lot. If a site doesn't look like much care or thought has been put into it, you can pretty much guarantee the same for its security and policies.
~JL
posted by JC at 8:48 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home