Category: GDPR

For those who wonder why I left Facebook

Apple have started to push developers to provide “health labels” for their applications. There are many concerns around this, including whether Apple will document their applications as transparently.

However, the first updates about some messaging applications have shown up some very stark differences about who collects what information.

App privacy labels show stark contrasts among messaging apps
A link to the 9to5Mac article explaining the labels

The smallest label is for Signal – which effectively stores nothing! This is why many groups who want or need privacy are using Signal to handle communications.

The largest, by contrast and by a VERY LONG way is Facebook Messenger. In effect, it would seem to collect any and all data that it can. WhatsApp, owned by Facebook, is a much smaller list, so would suggest that Facebook Messenger doesn’t need that huge amount of data. Given the history of Facebook with Cambridge Analytica, the collection of so much data doesn’t paint the picture of an organisation concerned with data privacy. Remember the more information that is collected the more it could leak or be used for purposes other than those we would like.

This is why GDPR asked data collectors to focus on why they collect data and to only collect the minimum they require.

For Facebook to need so much data suggests what we all really know, which is that they are wanting to know as much as they can about any and all of us.

I’m an avid science-fiction fan and adore Isaac Asimov’s Foundation series. These are based on the concept of psychohistory, which attempts to determine what humankind will do using a theory – psychohistory – to predict what mass groups will do in the future.

What I see is Facebook trying to emulate that concept. What is a challenge is that psychohistory was a fictional construct. I’m not sure Facebook got the memo that it is fictional and believe they can predict what the masses will do – or worse – that they can use the materials they have gathered to influence. Now that latter aspect is what has many concerned about the long term aims of Facebook, and is what drives me to minimise what I do and how I interact with anything to do with Facebook.

I have no doubt our personal data is needed for some companies to deliver what they do, Facebook doesn’t need mine.

Nor do I trust Facebook to do the right thing with my data if they have it.

I’m glad I’m not the only one…

Privacy, and security, are important. Unfortunately the vast majority of people seem oblivious and continue to use Facebook, Google and other tools which, to all intents and purposes, work hard to ignore your privacy.

I found this article refreshing reading, to know others care and have at least started to explain to others the alternatives which can maintain their privacy.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50460712

Don’t be someone who falls foul of the next Cambridge Analytica.

Recognising your data self

(Yes, I know the title is a direct reference to “that” advert with Marcus Brigstocke).

This BBC article is an interesting read.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-48434175#

It should spark people to rethink what and where they share. If you submitted a subject access request you may be equally stunned to see what companies know – and surmise – about you.

And as shown, not all the guesses are accurate, perhaps that’s also driving this “fake” world we now seem to inhabit.

GDPR – are you ready?

GDPR is coming, the steamroller is not stopping and that is a great analogy for how it feels for some, I would say.

Its a huge change, a seismic shift in focusing on individual privacy to address the technology changes that have happened in the 20 years or so since the last iteration of the legislation.

And its no surprise that MPs and others are surprised by it or flummoxed as to what to do. There is a lot to consider and the larger the business and scope of that business, the more things to be considered or managed.

As an individual, however, its a great time. Concerned about recurrences of Cambridge Analytica or similar data slurping and sharing should disappear because if they can be fined €20m or 4% of turnover, whichever is the greater figure, if found in breach, that’s a huge incentive to work correctly.

So, on one side, as an employee, its a lot to consider and act on, as an individual, I think its brilliant.

Make sure your employer, whoever that may be, is prepared and ready to address privacy properly.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-44128539

Has social media reached a key inflexion point?

This is a very interesting read.

I’ve seen more folk have chosen to leave Facebook, but equally that it’s not a major negative spiral effect. Many are staying because of peer pressure, for example, parents needing to stay in touch with each other and no other equal or better competitor.

However, I believe many would agree that they’re taking slightly more care over their online privacy after the various misuses of personal data that have happened.

I found the sub commentary about the young using data apps and increasing wealth gaps very intriguing, and believable.

That sort of analysis is most interesting because we’re not going to give up being online, using mobile devices or wanting to be social. They’re all either essentials of our lives now.

We will equally see significantly more focus on security, privacy and the individual’s rights in coming years.

Social media needs to grow up much more to regain a lot of lost trust, both from its users and those who fund it.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/social-media-facebook-mark-zuckerberg-google-data-privacy-a8315986.html

If you’re on Facebook and in the EU, you may want to think about what to do

Facebook seems to be trying to avoid the GDPR legislation which comes in to effect on 25th May 2018.

At least that’s how I understand it from this BBC report: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-43822184

GDPR is the update to some 20 year old legislation drafted before Facebook, Twitter and many, many technological advancements which all go to impact our individual privacy.

Its wide ranging, gives a lot of control back to the individual and really should become a global item if not becoming enshrined as a human right.

By attempting to side step that process, I think Facebook only shows its colours even more clearly than it has ever done before.

Think on as to whether you feel your privacy is safe in their hands.

Privacy and celebrity – what’s the right balance?

GDPR will become active on 25th May 2018 and affords individuals various rights against organisations with respect to their data, which is long overdue. The last legislation that covered such items in the EU, was 20 years ago and technology, let alone society has changed a lot in that time.

Then we get to the rights of celebrities, I’m not going to delve in to whether someone is or is not a celebrity, lets assume all such named as celebrities are, at least for this purpose.

Celebrities know that they will be a focus for the public, and by extension various media who are either generally addressing news, or are looking for the celebrity exclusive of who has broken up with whom or what the latest fashions will be.

Equally some celebrities guard their and their families privacy and we rarely see or hear of them because of the care they take.

So the issue of when the BBC somehow gained knowledge of a proposed raid on Cliff Richard, Cliff is rightly upset about that and how the BBC covered it.

My personal view is that they should not have been tipped off, in preference to any other news organisation, but that when in the know of the details, they should and could carry out an investigation or follow up, within current legal boundaries, as it is in the public interest. That is, both the interest we have in celebrity, but equally about a possible law breaker, especially given the allegations that were being levelled at him.

As the article says, it could have wide ranging implications, and I think we should all follow it because of its links to our own personal privacy as much as that of celebrities.

Cliff Richard case ‘likely to have massive implications’

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43731668