deanb Posted March 14, 2011 Report Share Posted March 14, 2011 So this is a movement/concept you may or may not have heard of. The bare bones is this idea that you should be allowed to just say "I don't want my information on the net". That time when you were an avid wow player, maybe you don't want that to be dug up any more, or you want your info wiped off facebook. It's both a reset button for your digital persona and a crude emulation of human memory. e.g your sister probably forgets that time when you put glue in her hair, but the internet remembers forever. That time you got wasted, stole a few shopping trolleys and put it up on facebook and twitpic. And then it maybe passed on a bit through other folks networks, etc. That stupid teenage stunt will potentially be with you till you die. It's something the EU has played with a bit in maybe adding it to upcoming privacy regulations, the problem is what do you add in specifically and the various implications as well as the practically of enforcement. You can read up a bit on the various implications here http://peterfleischer.blogspot.com/2011/03/foggy-thinking-about-right-to-oblivion.html and here http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?section_id=1047&doc_id=204757& Personally I think it's an interesting topic, not yet decided on my thoughts on the matter though. I can see how daunting the technical implications could be, but I can also see issues in 10-20 years down the line where all the silly things you did now are just a google search away, saved for posterity. Of course one solution would be to not do stupid things online, but that's easier said than done. And also personas are recyclable, you could potentially wipe the slate clean and move on to a new identity. Though harder with facebook and the like, but easier on places like here where you just go for a new name. Thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted March 14, 2011 Report Share Posted March 14, 2011 I'm in the "don't do stupid things on the internet" camp. I think that this is something that will largely only be an issue right now, in the early days of this total connectedness. Once people understand that you're not anonymous on Facebook and the things you do online actually have real consequences society will adapt. It's just the transition period that's turbulent, as are all transition periods. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted March 15, 2011 Report Share Posted March 15, 2011 Personally I think it's an interesting topic, not yet decided on my thoughts on the matter though. I can see how daunting the technical implications could be, but I can also see issues in 10-20 years down the line where all the silly things you did now are just a google search away, saved for posterity The thing is though... in 10-20 years why aren't you just going to laugh at it like any other stupid thing you've done? I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to think of extreme cases (and the same could be said about good things you've done) but in my eyes the past is the past. Whether or not it's stored in a database for someone to bring up isn't a big deal to me. It's not different than someone remembering that it happened. Plus, if someone was specifically looking for something, that means that they're going in with an idea of what that vague memory might be. Just think about all of the embarrassing stuff your parents could probably say that you did. They're the only ones who would bring it up, and putting it into internet terms, means they would be the only ones searching in the first place. Of course, if you did do something serious, and it still hasn't been dealt with in a decade or two... well I don't think the internet is going to change your situation to begin with. That would be a more immediate effect (with your job/family/friends/etc.) Long term effects just don't seem to be there in my mind. At least, not anything different than how this works with people to begin with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted March 15, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 15, 2011 Well yes of course folks can and will remember things many years down the line, employees and random folks you met on the net can't crack open their skull and fish through their knowledge of you. And yeah it's not necessarily silly things, but there could be more serious stuff. Take for instance the stuff in the japan-pearl harbour thread. You could grow up and change your mind on the whole matter, what you said is still potentially saved forever (even if you remove your facebook comment the images and copy pastes and lamebooks etc will have a fair chunk on their own servers.) and that's not really stuff you might want to catch up with you in the future when applying for a job at some Japanese megacorp. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R__ Posted March 15, 2011 Report Share Posted March 15, 2011 I'm in the "don't do stupid things on the internet" camp. I think that this is something that will largely only be an issue right now, in the early days of this total connectedness. Once people understand that you're not anonymous on Facebook and the things you do online actually have real consequences society will adapt. It's just the transition period that's turbulent, as are all transition periods. I'm pretty much in agreement. Just don't be a dumbass online. And if you do want to be a dumbass, do it in a way that can't be linked back to your real identity. Big Brother is watching you. Don't think this trend will decrease... it will only increase. Just wait until your iPhone takes fingerprints that are accessible to law enforcement agencies at the press of a button(a button powered by a very complex SQL query). People think I'm paranoid because I don't post pictures or details of my life on Facebook. People call me weird. We'll see who comes out on top when their inevitable divorce happens, and their entire Facebook history is brought into the courtroom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted March 15, 2011 Report Share Posted March 15, 2011 Well yes of course folks can and will remember things many years down the line, employees and random folks you met on the net can't crack open their skull and fish through their knowledge of you. And yeah it's not necessarily silly things, but there could be more serious stuff. Take for instance the stuff in the japan-pearl harbour thread. You could grow up and change your mind on the whole matter, what you said is still potentially saved forever (even if you remove your facebook comment the images and copy pastes and lamebooks etc will have a fair chunk on their own servers.) and that's not really stuff you might want to catch up with you in the future when applying for a job at some Japanese megacorp. What makes you think this corporation is going to dig 20 years back into your facebook updates to find out about you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr W Phallus Posted March 15, 2011 Report Share Posted March 15, 2011 What makes you think this corporation is going to dig 20 years back into your facebook updates to find out about you? It is common practice for companies to check your Facebook account nowadays, some companies reduce their applicants by about 50% on Facebook alone. I don't think it's really fair that a drunken night out as a student or whatever can come back to haunt you. To be fair though, just set your profile to completely private and it's not a problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted March 15, 2011 Report Share Posted March 15, 2011 What makes you think this corporation is going to dig 20 years back into your facebook updates to find out about you? It is common practice for companies to check your Facebook account nowadays, some companies reduce their applicants by about 50% on Facebook alone. I don't think it's really fair that a drunken night out as a student or whatever can come back to haunt you. To be fair though, just set your profile to completely private and it's not a problem. I know this. But we're not talking about a quick glance like many companies do, we're talking about wading through 2 decades of a person's internet history, which is more than a bit obscene. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted March 15, 2011 Report Share Posted March 15, 2011 There is one way to go about it though. Maintain a strict online persona and a real world one. However that does cause a schism in personality for some. The thing is, it's a bit futile to wipe out your whole history on the internet because you can wipe out all the things you've ever done personally. But can someone wipeout all instances of you on the internet? Not really possible. And we're talking about decades here. For instance someone could've posted something extremely unflattering about you and painted you in a bad light. Now that person is dead. Not everyone has their personal details removed after death. In fact once you die, it's like a frozen in time asset. There are no clear laws on what happens to someone's online identity once they're dead. So in this hypothetical, what's a company that will erase all your instances going to do when those associated with the dead person do not want anything changed w.r.t the dead person's profile. it's going to bring about a court case and we'll have new laws maybe. But there will a lot of unpleasantness. The problem is that we as humans work exactly like what we create sometimes and in this case the operating system. Most OSes are programmed to function as if there will never be a deadlock. Similarly we believe there will be no problem in what we plan out to do. Till we hit the snag. There have been several problems thanks to others posting info about you. Several high profile job losses, several security risks and what not. If you're one of those whose photos shouldn't come out you should tell people no photographs (this is what the security chiefs should have done in that MI6 case). If you believe that you shouldn't be tagged in photos and you don't want your photos online. Make a fuss. I do sometimes. I've always liked to disappear and you know what? It's not impossible to disappear despite having an active social life. You do have absolute control over your actions, only thing we don't have is control over someone else's. However this right to be forgotten thing isn't entirely good. What if someone dubious used that to get into politics. I mean one's political stance is also important. For instance the BBC political correspondent, Nick Robinson, is frequently said to be right-centred. It's because we are aware of his past as a head of the Young Conservatives (during Thatcher's period). Now if someone decides to erase that, probably few would see his bias. I mean he tries to be neutral at times I guess, but one's past in certain cases does define one's present. Maybe we should have a rule protecting the rights of children and those under 16 and that what they said could be removed. That's because what they can be attributed to a lack of maturity. But if someone 20+ says or does something stupid they should learn to live with the consequences of that. So long as they haven't killed anyone, the consequences won't be dire and even we as humans know that people do change. I will admit that when I hire someone for work I do look them up on the internet though. And if someone hires me for a job as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted March 15, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 15, 2011 What makes you think this corporation is going to dig 20 years back into your facebook updates to find out about you? It is common practice for companies to check your Facebook account nowadays, some companies reduce their applicants by about 50% on Facebook alone. I don't think it's really fair that a drunken night out as a student or whatever can come back to haunt you. To be fair though, just set your profile to completely private and it's not a problem. I know this. But we're not talking about a quick glance like many companies do, we're talking about wading through 2 decades of a person's internet history, which is more than a bit obscene. Who says they're going to be fishing through everything you did. Your name coming up on WoW forums, Stormfront, facebook, union websites, political party sites, etc etc will tell quite enough without having to go fishing too deep. It's partly why folks were so opposed to the RealID stuff. employers aren't meant to use this kind of info in whether they employ you, doesn't stop them doing it. And who knows what other services will pop up in the coming years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted March 15, 2011 Report Share Posted March 15, 2011 Just want to clarify that politician bit. While they have a right to be scrutinised, if their records have been erased by this and sufficient time has passed before they enter politics it might be impossible to gain clear info about their background. It can be done but it brings issues. Do we have a neutral reg body which in the western world brings in lobbying or do we leave it to the state which would bring another set if issues. I can't see a way for this to exist without bringing several new laws regarding privacy and it is likely that intellectual properties will also come to play in this. Errors attributed to iPhone at work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. GOH! Posted March 15, 2011 Report Share Posted March 15, 2011 I dunno. This "right" doesn't really seem like a fundamental right. I mean, it'd be essentially a right to unpublish a published work, which isn't a right in and of itself but something the creator of a work negotiates with its publisher. Politicians and job seekers will just have to deal with their past peccadilloes being online. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted March 15, 2011 Report Share Posted March 15, 2011 It depends. There is a growing voice for the Internet to be a basic human right. Mostly in EU nations with a credit economy. This could be very easily made into a corollary of that right. Which is why it's best to disregard this as a right. Remember copyright infringement and theft are different but the digital age treats them similarly despite it not being the same legally. Not yet anyway. Regardless people need to deal with consequences. This can be applicable only for removal of address and ph no which can infringe on privacy. The rest, frankly, deal with it. RealID has always been a pain, though it was meant for convenience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted March 15, 2011 Report Share Posted March 15, 2011 I'm in the "don't do stupid things on the internet" camp. Even if you don't use the Internet at all you could still be affected. All it takes is someone with a total disregard for your anonymity. Just look at Facebook and all of the people who post up photos from parties on there. There are people who will post pictures of friends or acquaintances that have passed out drunk, and then all of their Facebook Friends will "tag" the photos with names and identities. There are already a number of high profile cases where people have been fired from their jobs for pictures that appeared on Facebook -- and they weren't the ones that uploaded them. If someone tags you in a photo on Facebook though it notifies you and gives you the option to untag yourself. If you choose not to remove the tag that's your choice and any consequences of that are at least partially your fault. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted March 15, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 15, 2011 http://www.zdnet.com/blog/facebook/4chan-founder-to-facebook-ceo-you-8217re-doing-it-wrong/785 Kinda related. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted March 16, 2011 Report Share Posted March 16, 2011 As I pointed out, there are people who have been fired for pictures that were taken at parties and posted on Facebook without their knowledge. Source? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted March 16, 2011 Report Share Posted March 16, 2011 The burden of proof is on you, not me. I skimmed a few articles (including one that had 14 different cases) and none of them were like what you mentioned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted March 16, 2011 Report Share Posted March 16, 2011 Just looked through the top 50 results and didn't see that article. This could just be due to location. Either way, it's one extreme case. I don't think that extremes should dictate the majority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted March 16, 2011 Report Share Posted March 16, 2011 (edited) As Mr. GOH! already pointed out, it would be difficult to create a "right" to have a public work unpublished when the rights protecting published works have existed for much longer. Our "right" to privacy itself is also a recent concept and still debated. However, that doesn't mean that it wouldn't be possible to pass legislation that is similar in spirit, or that there isn't a growing need to expand existing laws to give people more legal leverage when requesting to have material removed. It depends. In England or rather British courts we have the Data Protection Act from 1998. I think I'll need TN to back me on certain legal aspects of this. As a film-maker I can tell you that certain media may not be used in any purpose without the consent of the people present in that media. These laws have come under greater scrutiny thanks to CCTV. I'm not sure those outside the UK are aware of how many CCTVs actually exist within London. Anything and everything you do is mostly on some camera somewhere. There are blindspots of course, but people are worried about the whole police state rubbish when CCTV has actually helped capture more criminals than harass more victims. It's the city with the most CCTVs and I'm sure most Brits would vouch for me on that. The DPA states personal data to be: "data which relate to a living individual who can be identified from those data; or from those data and other information which is in the possession of, or is likely to come into the possession of, the data controller and includes any expression of opinion about the individual and any indication of the intentions of the data controller or any other person in respect of the individual”. Let me try to define personal data in the context of CCTV first. If the person operating/owning the CCTVs finds an image of you on camera and then can link it to you as a person or physical description then that data is personal data. However if you are a face in the crowd and cannot be identified definitely then it is not personal data. All personal data held by public authorities is under the DPA. Even if you are a private authority you cannot use this footage without the consent of the person in the footage. Hence there was a film released a few years ago that used CCTV footage but removed everyone's faces. So we do have laws existing that protect personal data. If the data is held by a private individual or company then it only applies if it is stored on a computer or on a relevant filing system (which practically covers most systems these days). Photos such as those on Facebook can also come under similar scrutiny. However there is a clause which makes Ethan quite right in this case. If you have chosen to opt out or in other words not given consent to your data being spread then it is technically illegal to use such data in a way that might cause harm to that person. In other words if you lost a job because an acquaintance has posted a picture of you which you did not consent to and you had explicitly opted out of sharing personal information on such sites then there's been a violation of your rights. When it comes to textual messages, the laws aren't as firm though there are clauses for sensitive personal data which include your religious and political beliefs, if you belong to a trade union, what gender you identify as, sexual life, etc. There are occasions where you have the right to access a person's personal data and of course the first is when they've given explicit consent, Where processing is necessary for the purposes of exercising or performing any legal right or obligation in connection with employment (For example, like in cases of workplace discrimination), cases where they need to find your records such as mental health or criminal record to make sure you pose no threat to others, when you're going for legal counsel because they need to protect your legal rights and see if anything you've done is in violation, ethnic monitoring and in case you're an invalid. I think we should realise that in this particular case there are different laws in different countries. And to be honest, that's why I said that if they do make having the internet a basic or fundamental right then we could very well have a corollary that does ultimately bring about more privacy rights on the internet inc right to be forgotten. few basic edits. Edited March 16, 2011 by WTF Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted March 16, 2011 Report Share Posted March 16, 2011 My problem with a lot of these examples is that they'd get people fired BEFORE the internet. Especially the one with the cops. I have no idea what goes on in your head that makes you think this is a common thing. Compare the number of FB accounts, the number of people on FB with jobs, and how many have been fired because of it (that wasn't something blatantly stupid like a status update about hating your boss.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted March 16, 2011 Report Share Posted March 16, 2011 What do you do, if you don't mind me asking? Given what you just said it seems like someone in your position would be ultra-sensitive to this subject. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted March 16, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2011 Kind of related: http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/noprivacyville/ More privacy than forgotten stuff. Basically just him airing thoughts, that I'd say have some decent grounding but maybe a few too many assumptions. I think if the opportunity existed to trade privacy for cheaper and easier living they'd do it. Folks already do, you just don't mention the word "privacy" and you're golden. People are equipping themselves with GPS locators in droves in the name of always on internet, GPS navigation and instant communication. And if you're up for telling folks when you're birthday is companies will fall over themselves to offer you tons of free shit on your special day. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R__ Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 People get fired over Facebook all the time, and it has happened to people I know personally. It's just part of modern day life. Why do you need "proof"? Because you want to throw doubt into the equation? I can't stand people like you. Prove the sky blue. Prove the grass is green. I won't believe you until you can show me a scholarly source, and Wikipedia doesn't count! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 Someone's being petty. All of my posts are getting minused. =D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R__ Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 Rofl. Sucks to be you. Maybe I'll add some more minuses for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.