Professional Documents
Culture Documents
"Suppose I had a good friend here in the Bureau," Mallory said. "Someone who admired me for my generous ways." Tobias looked reluctant and a bit coy. "It ain't a simple matter, sir. Every spinning-run is registered, and each request must have a sponsor. What we did today is done in Mr. Wakeeld's name, so there'll be no trouble in that. But your friend would have to forge some sponsor's name, and run the risk of that imposture. It is fraud, sir. An Engine-fraud, like credittheft or stock-fraud, and punished just the same, when it's found out." "Very enlightening," Mallory said. "I've found that one always prots by talking to a technical man who truly knows his business. Let me give you my card." (From the book, The Difference Engine by William Gibson and Bruce Sterling) We understand the many means by which our daily activities are accessed and used for specic purposes via transactional databases. We are also aware how databases from credit cards track our activities and movements and how magazine subscription listings betray our wants and desires. What we overlook, however, is how our image -- our physical appearance -- is accessed and employed without our consent or knowledge. Image processing, combined with routine databasing and commercially advanced tracking devices, add a new dimension to the erosion of our privacy. The routine access of personal information
combined with the physical monitoring of movements creates a growing, dangerous threat to personal privacy.
(National Crime Information Computer) is enabled, allowing direct linkup with any known federal or state suspect list within a matter of minutes. Imaging systems are becoming more prevalent outside of law enforcement. ATMs (Automatic Teller Machines) and surveillance cameras in convenience stores are another form of imaging documentation. Although a far cry from the imaging technology used in law enforcement, the potential is still present. For example, in the Pepsi/ hypodermic needle scare of 1993, the culprit was captured on a video camera in a Colorado convenience store. The public hears this and breathes a sigh of relief, knowing that yet another evil perpetrator has been captured. Note, however, that the capture was made after an intensive search through millions of video images taken from thousands of convenience stores nationwide. Out of all those thousands of convenience stores and from those million or so video shots, the single incriminating video still-shot of the crime was found. Based upon the single freeze-frame image, the perpetrator was caught and prosecuted. The wonder of modern technology is renewed when one appreciates the amount of time and human resources such actions would have taken but ve years ago. As video cameras are often used to monitor employees (casinos, highsecurity locales such as computer chip factories or other such industries), surveillance cameras are increasingly employed as a panacea for dealing with crime. Recent federal grant awards illustrate a growing trend of public housing authorities using video cameras to monitor and prevent illegal activities. DEA (Drug Enforcement Agency), FBI or the ATF (Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms) account for a number of video cameras within high-crime locales, with criminal activity dramatically evaporating for fear of being captured on record. Local police agencies are not loath to spread rumors and gossip regarding potential locales as a means to further deter illegal activity -- often when no such cameras or agencies are actually intended or involved.
(i.e., Internet service providing Web TV) and may very well serve for the next wave of data access. What is disturbing about this development is the ability of cable companies to conduct real-time monitoring of viewer's preference in TV entertainment and information access, offering simultaneous send/ receive signals while the viewer is watching their shows. A detailed record of what, when and how long a viewer watched any particular show at any given moment is enhanced through new cable television technology. If the average consumer were aware of this fact prior to purchase, would so many readily accept? The difculty lies in the average lay person understanding the power and extent of the technologies arrayed against the common person; it is this knowledge gap which makes resolving the issues surrounding the protection of privacy a formidable challenge. Many cannot readily appreciate the subtleties surrounding esoteric cable television services or imaging/monitoring technologies. As information professionals, we can share the vitality of an Internet search engine or personal communication system for common household usage while seeking out protection against privacy abuse. The question remains: where do we draw the line between the sublime and the extreme?
Education and awareness on the part of those who know and understand the reality of their surroundings remains the key to ensuring privacy. Proprietary information will remain such, but the key to economic success will be that of creative dissemination of the uses of proprietary data and/or developments. If the general public is aggressively enlightened in the ways and means of information technology, then it follows that perhaps we can expect the general population to be more discriminating when it comes to privacy protection. Just as we speak of a green consumer culture, so too we might encourage the beginning of a privacy culture. True privacy could be an emerging marketing approach given the right impetus. Effective legislation must come into play if we are to prevent further erosion of privacy. Perhaps we should consider employing European laws as models for the control of personal information and the protection of privacy. Database access or use of one's name or other personal information could be subject to the individuals' prior approval and/or payment -- similar to royalties -- with violations subject to substantial monetary penalties. The logic is inescapable: if private/public entities gain a prot from the sale and/or use of our personal information, then we should receive royalties, if we choose to participate. Those who seek not to participate in the sale and dissemination of their information should be permitted, under strict legislation, to opt out with strengthened privacy guarantees. The time has come to reach out and enlighten legislators about the issues surrounding privacy. Some cultures hold that taking pictures of individuals and/or places robs the soul or essence of the place or person; arguably, this is now taking place. The act of taking pictures -- regardless of public safety or security -- constitutes an act of capturing our image without our permission. Similarly, when information is accessed -- habits, purchases, proles -could it not be argued that this is the theft of our truest proprietary data -- our identities?
In the coming century, our identities will be how we appear on innumerable databases; our visage reected in the hidden cameras and how we stand within society's walls dened in the roll calls of databases. The time is right, therefore, to educate both the public and legislators about the relationship between ourselves and the tools which gather information about us and our fellows. Given the prevalence of modern technology, it is time to recognize that our tools are but an extension of ourselves, the surveillance cameras reecting back our images. How we view ourselves ultimately determines how we view and shape our future. How better than to smile into the camera with a condent cheer? William E. Lutz is a professional consultant involved with matters pertaining to security, privacy as well a records management. More about his work can be found via his LinkedIn prole of http:// www.linkedin.com/in/williamelutz as well as via his website of http:// www.welassociates.co.