As I write this, Amazon is announcing its purchase of iRobot, adding its room-mapping robotic vacuum technology to the company’s existing home surveillance suite, the Ring doorbell and prototype aerial drone. This is in addition to Amazon already knowing what you order online, what websites you visit, what foods you eat and, soon, every last scrap of personal medical data you possess. But hey, free two-day shipping, amirite?
The trend of our gadgets and infrastructure constantly, often invasively, monitoring their users shows little sign of slowing — not when there’s so much money to be made. Of course it hasn’t been all bad for humanity, what with AI’s help in advancing medical, communications and logistics tech in recent years. In his new book, Machines Behaving Badly: The Morality of AI, Scientia Professor of Artificial Intelligence at the University of New South Wales, Dr. Toby Walsh, explores the duality of potential that artificial intelligence/machine learning systems offer and, in the excerpt below, how to claw back a bit of your privacy from an industry built for omniscience.
Excerpted from Machines Behaving Badly: The Morality of AI by Toby Walsh. Published by La Trobe University Press. Copyright © 2022 by Toby Walsh. All rights reserved.
The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that the total entropy of a system – the amount of disorder – only ever increases. In other words, the amount of order only ever decreases. Privacy is similar to entropy. Privacy is only ever decreasing. Privacy is not something you can take back. I cannot take back from you the knowledge that I sing Abba songs badly in the shower. Just as you can’t take back from me the fact that I found out about how you vote.
There are different forms of privacy. There’s our digital online privacy, all the information about our lives in cyberspace. You might think our digital privacy is already lost. We have given too much of it to companies like Facebook and Google. Then there’s our analogue offline privacy, all the information about our lives in the physical world. Is there hope that we’ll keep hold of our analogue privacy?
The problem is that we are connecting ourselves, our homes and our workplaces to lots of internet-enabled devices: smartwatches, smart light bulbs, toasters, fridges, weighing scales, running machines, doorbells and front door locks. And all these devices are interconnected, carefully recording everything we do. Our location. Our heartbeat. Our blood pressure. Our weight. The smile or frown on our face. Our food intake. Our visits to the toilet. Our workouts.
These devices will monitor us 24/7, and companies like Google and Amazon will collate all this information. Why do you think Google bought both Nest and Fitbit recently? And why do you think Amazon acquired two smart home companies, Ring and Blink Home, and built their own smartwatch? They’re in an arms race to know us better.
The benefits to the companies our obvious. The more they know about us, the more they can target us with adverts and products. There’s one of Amazon’s famous ‘flywheels’ in this. Many of the products they will sell us will collect more data on us. And that data will help target us to make more purchases.
The benefits to us are also obvious. All this health data can help make us live healthier. And our longer lives will be easier, as lights switch on when we enter a room, and thermostats move automatically to our preferred temperature. The better these companies know us, the better their recommendations will be. They’ll recommend only movies we want to watch, songs we want to listen to and products we want to buy.
But there are also many potential pitfalls. What if your health insurance premiums increase every time you miss a gym class? Or your fridge orders too much comfort food? Or your employer sacks you because your smartwatch reveals you took too many toilet breaks?
With our digital selves, we can pretend to be someone that we are not. We can lie about our preferences. We can connect anonymously with VPNs and fake email accounts. But it is much harder to lie about your analogue self. We have little control over how fast our heart beats or how widely the pupils of our eyes dilate.
We’ve already seen political parties manipulate how we vote based on our digital footprint. What more could they do if they really understood how we respond physically to their messages? Imagine a political party that could access everyone’s heartbeat and blood pressure. Even George Orwell didn’t go that far.
Worse still, we are giving this analogue data to private companies that are not very good at sharing their profits with us. When you send your saliva off to 23AndMe for genetic testing, you are giving them access to the core of who you are, your DNA. If 23AndMe happens to use your DNA to develop a cure for a rare genetic disease that you possess, you will probably have to pay for that cure. The 23AndMe terms and conditions make this very clear:
You understand that by providing any sample, having your Genetic Information processed, accessing your Genetic Information, or providing Self-Reported Information, you acquire no rights in any research or commercial products that may be developed by 23andMe or its collaborating partners. You specifically understand that you will not receive compensation for any research or commercial products that include or result from your Genetic Information or Self-Reported Information.
How, then, might we put safeguards in place to preserve our privacy in an AI-enabled world? I have a couple of simple fixes. Some regulatory and could be implemented today. Others are technological and are something for the future, when we have AI that is smarter and more capable of defending our privacy.
The technology companies all have long terms of service and privacy policies. If you have lots of spare time, you can read them. Researchers at Carnegie Mellon University calculated that the average internet user would have to spend 76 work days each year just to read all the things that they have agreed to online. But what then? If you don’t like what you read, what choices do you have?
All you can do today, it seems, is log off and not use their service. You can’t demand greater privacy than the technology companies are willing to provide. If you don’t like Gmail reading your emails, you can’t use Gmail. Worse than that, you’d better not email anyone with a Gmail account, as Google will read any emails that go through the Gmail system.
So here’s a simple alternative. All digital services must provide four changeable levels of privacy.
Level 1: They keep no information about you beyond your username, email and password.
Level 2: They keep information on you to provide you with a better service, but they do not share this information with anyone.
Level 3: They keep information on you that they may share with sister companies.
Level 4: They consider the information that they collect on you as public.
And you can change the level of privacy with one click from the settings page. And any changes are retrospective, so if you select Level 1 privacy, the company must delete all information they currently have on you, beyond your username, email and password. In addition, there’s a requirement that all data beyond Level 1 privacy is deleted after three years unless you opt in explicitly for it to be kept. Think of this as a digital right to be forgotten.
I grew up in the 1970s and 1980s. My many youthful transgressions have, thankfully, been lost in the mists of time. They will not haunt me when I apply for a new job or run for political office. I fear, however, for young people today, whose every post on social media is archived and waiting to be printed off by some prospective employer or political opponent. This is one reason why we need a digital right to be forgotten.
More friction may help. Ironically, the internet was invented to remove frictions – in particular, to make it easier to share data and communicate more quickly and effortlessly. I’m starting to think, however, that this lack of friction is the cause of many problems. Our physical highways have speed and other restrictions. Perhaps the internet highway needs a few more limitations too?
One such problem is described in a famous cartoon: ‘On the internet, no one knows you’re a dog.’ If we introduced instead a friction by insisting on identity checks, then certain issues around anonymity and trust might go away. Similarly, resharing restrictions on social media might help prevent the distribution of fake news. And profanity filters might help prevent posting content that inflames.
On the other side, other parts of the internet might benefit from fewer frictions. Why is it that Facebook can get away with behaving badly with our data? One of the problems here is there’s no real alternative. If you’ve had enough of Facebook’s bad behaviour and log off – as I did some years back – then it is you who will suffer most. You can’t take all your data, your social network, your posts, your photos to some rival social media service. There is no real competition. Facebook is a walled garden, holding onto your data and setting the rules. We need to open that data up and thereby permit true competition.
For far too long the tech industry has been given too many freedoms. Monopolies are starting to form. Bad behaviours are becoming the norm. Many internet businesses are poorly aligned with the public good.
Any new digital regulation is probably best implemented at the level of nation-states or close-knit trading blocks. In the current climate of nationalism, bodies such as the United Nations and the World Trade Organization are unlikely to reach useful consensus. The common values shared by members of such large transnational bodies are too weak to offer much protection to the consumer.
The European Union has led the way in regulating the tech sector. The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), and the upcoming Digital Service Act (DSA) and Digital Market Act (DMA) are good examples of Europe’s leadership in this space. A few nation-states have also started to pick up their game. The United Kingdom introduced a Google tax in 2015 to try to make tech companies pay a fair share of tax. And shortly after the terrible shootings in Christchurch, New Zealand, in 2019, the Australian government introduced legislation to fine companies up to 10 per cent of their annual revenue if they fail to take down abhorrent violent material quickly enough. Unsurprisingly, fining tech companies a significant fraction of their global annual revenue appears to get their attention.
It is easy to dismiss laws in Australia as somewhat irrelevant to multinational companies like Google. If they’re too irritating, they can just pull out of the Australian market. Google’s accountants will hardly notice the blip in their worldwide revenue. But national laws often set precedents that get applied elsewhere. Australia followed up with its own Google tax just six months after the United Kingdom. California introduced its own version of the GDPR, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), just a month after the regulation came into effect in Europe. Such knock-on effects are probably the real reason that Google has argued so vocally against Australia’s new Media Bargaining Code. They greatly fear the precedent it will set.
That leaves me with a technological fix. At some point in the future, all our devices will contain AI agents helping to connect us that can also protect our privacy. AI will move from the centre to the edge, away from the cloud and onto our devices. These AI agents will monitor the data entering and leaving our devices. They will do their best to ensure that data about us that we don’t want shared isn’t.
We are perhaps at the technological low point today. To do anything interesting, we need to send data up into the cloud, to tap into the vast computational resources that can be found there. Siri, for instance, doesn’t run on your iPhone but on Apple’s vast servers. And once your data leaves your possession, you might as well consider it public. But we can look forward to a future where AI is small enough and smart enough to run on your device itself, and your data never has to be sent anywhere.
This is the sort of AI-enabled future where technology and regulation will not simply help preserve our privacy, but even enhance it. Technical fixes can only take us so far. It is abundantly clear that we also need more regulation. For far too long the tech industry has been given too many freedoms. Monopolies are starting to form. Bad behaviours are becoming the norm. Many internet businesses are poorly aligned with the public good.
Digital regulation is probably best implemented at the level of nation-states or close-knit trading blocks. In the current climate of nationalism, bodies such as the United Nations and the World Trade Organization are unlikely to reach useful consensus. The common values shared by members of such large transnational bodies are too weak to offer much protection to the consumer.
The European Union has led the way in regulating the tech sector. The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), and the upcoming Digital Service Act (DSA) and Digital Market Act (DMA) are good examples of Europe’s leadership in this space. A few nation-states have also started to pick up their game. The United Kingdom introduced a Google tax in 2015 to try to make tech companies pay a fair share of tax. And shortly after the terrible shootings in Christchurch, New Zealand, in 2019, the Australian government introduced legislation to fine companies up to 10 per cent of their annual revenue if they fail to take down abhorrent violent material quickly enough. Unsurprisingly, fining tech companies a significant fraction of their global annual revenue appears to get their attention.
It is easy to dismiss laws in Australia as somewhat irrelevant to multinational companies like Google. If they’re too irritating, they can just pull out of the Australian market. Google’s accountants will hardly notice the blip in their worldwide revenue. But national laws often set precedents that get applied elsewhere. Australia followed up with its own Google tax just six months after the United Kingdom. California introduced its own version of the GDPR, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), just a month after the regulation came into effect in Europe. Such knock-on effects are probably the real reason that Google has argued so vocally against Australia’s new Media Bargaining Code. They greatly fear the precedent it will set.
Apple is urging users to update devices due to a possible security flaw.
Legal experts weigh in on the ongoing Starbuck unionization saga.
(Reuters) -A defense attorney on Monday implored a Florida jury to spare the life of Nikolas Cruz, who killed 17 people in a 2018 high school mass shooting in the city of Parkland, citing brain damage linked to fetal drug and alcohol exposure as reason not to impose the death penalty. Cruz, 23, pleaded guilty last October to committing premeditated murder at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, about 30 miles (50 km) north of Fort Lauderdale, in one of the deadliest school shootings in U.S. history. Cruz killed 14 students and three staff members.
École Whitehorse Elementary School is celebrating four decades of its French Immersion program with a new art project. The mural, which is 20-feet high and 16-feet wide, was installed Friday on the front wall of the school facing 4th Ave. Nathalie Parenteau, a Yukon and northern artist, is the painter behind the mural. She said she consulted 275 elementary school students to illustrate what it means to be part of the school's French immersion program. "The design was inspired a lot from what the
BERLIN (AP) — Several substances seem to have contributed to the massive fish die-off in the Oder River that forms much of Germany's border with Poland, a German official said Monday. Numerous theories have been floated about the cause of the environmental disaster, but so far none have been conclusive, a spokesman for Germany's Environment Ministry said. He rejected suggestions from a senior Polish official that Germany was spreading “fake news” about pesticides being behind the environmental d
Premiers who gathered Monday in Moncton, N.B. for a summit on health care called for significant changes to the delivery of services in their provinces and hinted at the possibility of offering more services through the private sector. "The status quo is not working, folks," Ontario Premier Doug Ford told a news conference following the meeting. "We need to be creative, we need to come up with ideas from the [health care] sector." Ford met with premiers Blaine Higgs of New Brunswick, Tim Houston
The request to the Food and Drug Administration was for a so-called bivalent vaccine containing the dominant BA.4/BA.5 variants of the virus along with the original coronavirus strain. Pfizer said it was ready to deliver doses for September under a $3.2 billion deal in place with the U.S. government for 105 million doses, including the Omicron-tailored shots. "Having rapidly scaled up production, we are positioned to immediately begin distribution of the bivalent Omicron BA.4/BA.5 boosters, if authorized," Pfizer Chief Executive Albert Bourla said in a statement.
BANGKOK (AP) — Thailand’s Constitutional Court on Monday received a petition from opposition lawmakers seeking a ruling on whether Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha has reached the legal limit on how long he can remain in office. The petition, signed by 171 members of the House of Representatives, asks the nine-member court to rule on an article in the constitution limiting prime ministers to eight years in office. The court is widely expected to announce on Wednesday whether it will rule on the
Gary Busey charged with sex offenses at Monster-Mania Con
NAIROBI, Kenya (AP) — Kenya’s losing presidential candidate Raila Odinga has filed a Supreme Court challenge to last week’s election result, asserting that the process was marked by criminal subversion and seeking that the outcome be nullified and a new vote be ordered. Odinga arrived to cheers Monday and helped to hoist boxes of material for the petition into place, starting the 14-day period in which the court must rule. At least one other petition was filed by human rights figures. Deputy Pre
Dozens of people in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside have been rendered homeless after a fire damaged multiple buildings, two of which were residential. Fire Chief Karen Fry told CBC News that crews were called to a shed fire at Powell Street and Princess Avenue around 3:30 a.m. PT Monday. When first responders arrived, they determined it was a full structure fire. Assistant Fire Chief Pierre Morin says the cause of the fire is an apparent explosion. The cause of that explosion is not known but it
Authorities believe a body found in a Northern California reservoir is that of 16-year-old Kiely Rodni, who went missing after attending a large party at a Sierra Nevada campground two weeks ago. (Aug. 23)
The History Channel's series Alone is back for a second time in Labrador. Season 9 of the series, which drops survivalists off in a remote location to see who can last the longest, was set in Labrador and aired earlier this summer. After 78 days, Juan Pablo Quiñonez won the $500,000 prize. Now the show is back with an eight-week spinoff, Alone: Frozen, in which six former contestants return for another chance to win $500,000. But for this series, said executive producer Ryan Pender, there's a tw
In years to come, if Newcastle is contending for Premier League and Champions League titles as widely expected, the Saudi-funded team might look back on this game as the one when it truly arrived as a force in soccer. Few opponents have given Manchester City the kind of battering Newcastle dished out in the first half of a rip-roaring 3-3 draw on Sunday. And when Kieran Trippier curled a stunning free kick into the top corner to put a rampant Newcastle 3-1 ahead in the 54th minute, it looked as
As a researcher focussed on African, Afro-Caribbean and Black families’ schooling experiences, I appeal to school staff to understand the importance of the school-family-community partnership.
An employee of a small office relocation company died after suffering a fall at Ottawa's Trail Road Landfill on Saturday. Ontario's Ministry of Labour is investigating the death at the city's public dump, located south of Barrhaven, as a workplace incident. The man who died was an employee of NATTIQ Inc., a small office relocation and consulting company headquartered in Ottawa. It has been a difficult two days for the company's staff members, according to Robert Stanton, NATTIQ's executive vice-
The daughter of a Russian political philosopher often referred to as 'Putin's brain' was killed in a car bomb explosion over the weekend. Though Ukraine says it wasn’t responsible, there are concerns the incident could inflame violence in the region.
Ukraine has banned mass public gatherings for the next few days ahead of the country's Independence Day on Wednesday. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy warns that Russia could try 'something particularly ugly' this week.
The Christian Democrat leader Wopke Hoekstra told Dutch newspaper AD that the government's nitrogen reduction targets are not "sacred", causing a cabinet rift.View on euronews
The United States on Monday rebuffed Ukraine's demand for a blanket visa ban on Russians, saying Washington would not want to close off pathways to refuge for Russia's dissidents and others who are vulnerable to human rights abuses. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy had first urged the visa ban in an interview earlier this month with the Washington Post, saying Russians should "live in their own world until they change their philosophy."