In 21 lessons for the 21st century, Yuval Noah Harari explains:
“Even if you don’t know how to cash in on the data today, it is worth having it because it might hold the key to controlling and shaping life in the future. I don’t know for certain that the data-giants explicitly think about it in such terms, but their actions indicate that they value the accumulation of data more than mere dollars and cents.
“Ordinary humans will find it very difficult to resist this process. At present, people are happy to give away their most valuable asset — their personal data — in exchange for free e-mail services and funny cat videos. It is a bit like African and Native American tribes who unwittingly sold entire countries to European imperialists in exchange for colorful beads and cheap trinkets. If, later on, ordinary people decide to try and block the flow of data, they might find it increasingly difficult, especially as they might come to rely on the network for all their decisions, and even for their health care and physical survival.”
We’re in big trouble.
Once people are aware of how vulnerable they are when they give away their privacy and data, it’ll be time to give them tools to actually control it. Today we’re not even close to have a solution. Even if many people praise blockchain as the ultimate solution, it still doesn’t solve it.
It doesn’t matter if Facebook says they want you to control your data. That’s an illusion. They offer more privacy options because that makes people share more stuff with them. Real control, though, comes from deciding who can access it, how they might use it and what for. Until you have that kind of control, the problem isn’t solved.
If you think about it, we’ve got more than 100 years of experience dealing with physical property, but we’ve got none when it comes to digital property. But the stakes are the same — and I feel it’s way more scary not to own your digital property.
We surely have to come up with a system to control data as personal property, but we need the right regulations. (That’s what Europe is trying with the General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR, and the Philippines, with the Data Privacy Act.)
One of the things we can also do is to apply political pressure to make sure tech giants and other organizations don’t do anything weird with our data. But, if the incentives are good enough, they still have the power to make use of it, and make sure they don’t get caught.
That’s not all, of course. The other danger is that the value of data increases over time. Nobody knows how valuable your data will be in 2035. But since it gets more valuable, you better keep it safe and not give it away.
However, people who don’t think they have a problem don’t seek for a solution. This is the same thing for privacy. We can have the tools (something that gives you ownership over your data), and even have regulations, but if people are not aware of why they shouldn’t give up on their privacy, nothing else matters.
Maybe it’s time to lay out the foundation of a privacy standard that tackles the real issue, such as:
1. A corporation, organization or government may not invade the privacy of a human being. It may only happen with explicit permission, requiring full transparency of the purpose behind the data extraction. The individual has to understand the real use of his or her data.
2. A corporation, organization or government must give up the ownership of that data. It is the individual who owns it. It can’t be stored nor used in the future. It may only be used in the future for other purposes, except where such usage would conflict with the first law.
3. A corporation, organization or government may have permission to invade an individual’s privacy and make use of his or her data, as long as such permission does not conflict with the first or second laws.
We need to change the conversation and bring the problem to the table. As they say, you can’t appreciate the solution until you appreciate the problem. We are responsible of what we make with our future. People have to be aware of the problem. Then, and only then, we can apply political pressure — otherwise the debate won’t even be on the table.
Let’s do this right. Spread the word. Try to get people to watch out for their privacy. If not us, who? If not now, when?
I look forward to your feedback—contact me at Schumacher@eitsc.com.