[Air-l] ethics - aol data

Tue Aug 29 08:53:33 PDT 2006

Jeremy,

Some thoughts on your contribution:

Many in anthropology speak of the individual (the biological and
psychological self) and the social body (the body needed to live within a
particular society or cultural group). Some anthropologists, notably Turkle,
have looked at the metaphors arising from our "computational culture" to
talk about our bodies and the relationship we have with our computers.
Turkle has specifically referred to computers as our "second selves" and
suggested that computers (and allied tech) constitute a relatively new
extension to our body-selves. More broadly, there is an interesting set of
literature dealing, in one way or another, with the symbolic and
psycho-social relationship we have with our material culture. Regardless of
these ideas, computers are tools for the cognitive-emotive dimensions of the
human experience and, as such, can be viewed as an extension of the human
mind.

In truth, we encourage a dependency on computer-aided thought, memory and
communication. Our economy is predicated on computer-enable productivity.
Our advanced sciences would be hamstrung without computer processing,
storage and communication. All trends point to more, rather than less,
computer involvement in all dimensions human mental activity. But, more so
than any other kind of tool we use, the use of the computer-tool always has
the potential to leave a record of how the tool has been used AND the very
nature of the computer-tool means that the once-inscrutable contents of the
mind are encoded and stored in a remarkably transparent way.

Given your statement that any data outside the human mind is insecure (a
statement with which I heartily agree, btw) but juxtaposed against this
notion of the computer as an extension of the human mind and the dependency
that we encourage on computer-aided mental activity, where are we with the
issue of privacy? And not only does the computer represent an extension of
the human mind but it also exists as a portal to project the mind into
Internet space; perhaps one way of viewing social network environments for
example. Privacy, per se, may be a relatively new concept in the human story
- and is certainly not a cultural universal - but it is reflected in
numerous areas of our culture, from the Constitution to sayings such as "the
privacy of my own thoughts" and "keeping my own counsel". And, from another
point of view, the notion of public vs. non-public behavior does exist in
every culture.

I don't pretend to offer any answers or new/deep insights here in part
because I have only recently (for the past six months) seriously turned my
anthropological thoughts to the Internet. Let's just say that I'm adding
another quasi-paradox to my conception of the Internet and IT in general:
computer'n'network as extension of the mind, socio-culturally encouraged
dependency on same but without any expectation of security, control or
privacy. Interesting.

Jonathan Cornwell

P.S. I seriously doubt that anyone was woken up by the AOL story. The
ripples were surprisingly small with the revelation of AT&T and others
turning over phone records to the government and the numerous stories about
other domestic intelligence gathering activities.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-
> bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Jeremy Hunsinger
> Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 4:39 AM
> To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org
> Subject: Re: [Air-l] ethics - aol data
> 
> a few minor points that some will disagree with....
> 
> a. privacy is a fiction of modernity that arose fairly recently in
> history, but rhetorically and ideologically it has its uses.
> b. any data that is outside of the human mind is insecure and hard to
> keep secret, not less keep private.  the situation is worse when the
> data is mobile, or networked.
> c. most people in the developed world have already in some form or
> another by license or contract signed away whatever privacy that they
> had in their use of the internet.
> d. only those people with sufficient technical knowledge to go to
> extreme lengths to ensure their privacy and operate only with trusted
> colleagues really have any security, but they have no guarantees.
> 
> if you don't believe me, I have this presentation that i make showing
> most of the above points fairly thoroughly....  some people have
> called it 'scary', some have said it was 'enlightening'...  i'm happy
> to give this presentation... granted it says nothing new..., but it
> says a basic truth...
> 
> e. you should not operate under the assumption of privacy, anonymity,
> or security when using the internet.
> 
> f. given all that, there are still best practices for data privacy
> and security.
> 
> my thought is that aol might have actually woke some people up....
> that is a good thing.
> 
> 
> jeremy hunsinger
> Assistant Professor
> Pratt Institute
> www.cddc.vt.edu
> wiki.tmttlt.com
> www.tmttlt.com
> 
> ()  ascii ribbon campaign - against html mail
> /\                        - against microsoft attachments
> http://www.stswiki.org/  sts wiki
> http://cfp.learning-inquiry.info/  Learning Inquiry-the journal
> http://transdisciplinarystudies.tmttlt.com/  Transdisciplinary
> Studies:the book series
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The air-l at listserv.aoir.org mailing list
> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org
> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at:
> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
> 
> Join the Association of Internet Researchers:
> http://www.aoir.org/