---------------------------------------- | |
Tracking as Stalking | |
May 27th, 2018 | |
---------------------------------------- | |
Stalking - | |
"criminal activity consisting of the repeated following and | |
harassing of another person." | |
"a course of conduct directed at a specific person that involves | |
repeated (two or more occasions) visual or physical proximity, | |
nonconsensual communication, or verbal, written, or implied | |
threats, or a combination thereof, that would cause a reasonable | |
person fear." | |
There is an argument made by those practicing large-scale data | |
capture and aggregation of individuals that the data they collect | |
is public information, and therefore it is legal and justified. | |
Even if the information collected was indeed all public--and I do | |
not agree to that line of argument at all--then the question is | |
still not settled. The very act of repeated visual proximity | |
(which is transferrable to digital media via cyber-stalking | |
definitions) which could cause a "reasonable person fear" falls | |
clearly within the bounds of stalking. If it is a corporation | |
commiting these acts, then it is no less culpable than if it were | |
an individual. After all, corporations are people too, right? [0] | |
[0] Corporate personhood (Gopherpedia) | |
The act of data aggregation of an individual carries with it the | |
inherent threat of what is being done with that data. As more | |
revelations are brought to light informing the public of the | |
deeply unsettling targeting of individuals for political | |
manipulation, commercial activation, or social harassment, the | |
fear increases. What else could be done with that information? | |
Even if nothing is actually put into motion, the act of | |
collection, of monitoring, is in itself a form of digital stalking | |
that explicitly undermines the argument of "public information". | |
Anonymous collection of data into aggregate data sets that cannot | |
be retargeted or focused to communicate outbound with a specific | |
population or person is still problematic. If that data allows you | |
to segment or infer the actions of a type of person or group, | |
especially one that routinely faces subjugation or discrimination, | |
then the act of collection contributes to a justifiable fear of | |
persecution. It is stalking. | |
The counter argument to all of these points is that the underlying | |
economic power of the internet is governed and supplied by data | |
collection. It is a capitalist requirement that some sort of | |
economic incentive be present to promote the growth and stability | |
of the systems. Money talks, or so the argument goes. How can we | |
cut out advertising and still have nice things? Will everything | |
need to become a paid subscription? | |
Here's the thing: there is no inherent, inaliable rights to | |
Netflix. Facebook is not a universal, precious entity that | |
deserves the protection and preservation of all people. The only | |
thing that fits that category is the people themselves. If | |
protecting individuals and groups of people damages these systems, | |
then that is the path that should be followed. If those systems | |
can find an alternative, legal way to continue their operations | |
then kudos to them. There is no argument that should value the | |
continued operation of a social network over the safety of even | |
a single individual. | |
Money talks in capitalism, but capitalism cannot be allowed to run | |
unchecked. The morality of all people must pull on those reins and | |
keep careful watch. Systems of governance cannot become | |
subservient to the interests of economic forces over those of | |
moral obligation. Any systems of governance that allow this will | |
ultimately fail. First they will fail their people, and eventually | |
they will fail completely, often with dire consequences to both | |
those in power and those oppressed by it. | |
Data collection is a simple thing. It's easy to watch tracking | |
events fire and show up in pretty graphs. It's easy to use this to | |
optimize your experiences, improve them, make the user's day | |
a little easier. It's easy to look at the rosy garden that casual | |
analytics presents and see only the flowers. Just like | |
capitalism's promise of innovation through financial competition, | |
the premise is beautiful on the surface. Left unchecked it will | |
corrupt. That corruption will consolodate power and influence. | |
That power and influence will allocate more benefit to the few in | |
charge at the cost of the masses. The flowers are not worth it. |