iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Don Tapscott

GET UPDATES FROM Don Tapscott
 

Living Out Loud -- Should We All Be More "Open?": The Upside of Sharing (Part 1 of 7)

Posted: 05/21/2012 8:55 am

The ubiquity of digital gadgets and sensors, the pervasiveness of networks and the benefits of sharing very personal information through social media have led some to argue that privacy as a social norm is changing and becoming an outmoded concept. In a seven-part series Don Tapscott questions this view arguing that we each need a personal privacy strategy. This post is Part One of that series.

Since I co-authored a book on Privacy and the Internet 15 years ago I've been writing about how to manage the various threats to the security and control of our personal information. But today I find myself in a completely unexpected discussion. A growing number of people argue that the notion of having a private life in which we carefully restrict what information we share with others may not be a good idea. This view goes beyond the famous aphorism of Scott McNealy, the erstwhile Sun Microsystems CEO who in 2000 stated "You have zero privacy anyway get over it." The new view holds that we should all be more forthcoming in sharing intimate, personal information with others, and that this would benefit us individually and society as a whole.

This is not a fringe movement. The proponents of this view are some of the smartest and most influential thinkers and practitioners of the digital revolution.

Jeff Jarvis, in a thoughtful book Public Parts, makes the case for sharing and he practices what he preaches. We learn about everything from details of his personal income to his prostate surgery and malfunctioning penis. He argues that because privacy has its advocates, so should "publicness." "I'm a public man" says Jarvis. "My life is an open book." And he provides elaborate evidence on why this has been enormously positive effect on his life, arguing that if everyone where more like him the world would be a better place. He concludes that while sharing should be a personal choice, privacy regulation should be avoided because it's more likely to prematurely undermine the benefits of sharing than to prevent the dangers.

Facebook is the leading social media that promotes information sharing, and part of the company's mission is to "make the world more open." In the book The Facebook Effect, David Kirkpatrick explains that Facebook executives think transparency is not just an opportunity for companies and other institutions to disclose pertinent information. They believe it's an opportunity for individuals to do so as well.

The Facebook founders believe that "more visibility makes us better people. Some claim, for example, that because of Facebook, young people today have a harder time cheating on their boyfriends or girlfriends. They also say that more transparency should make for a more tolerant society in which people eventually accept that everybody sometimes does bad or embarrassing things." Some at Facebook refer to this as Radical Transparency -- a term initially used to talk about institutions, and now being adapted to individuals. In other words, everyone should have just one identity, whether at their workplace or in their personal life.

Other influential thought leaders like Tim O'Reiley (he coined the term Web 2.0) or Steward Brand (author of the Whole Earth Catalogue) defend an individual's right to privacy. But they argue that the benefits of sharing personal information are becoming so beneficial to each of us and so widespread that we need to shift the discussion from what to share, to how to ensure the information we share is used appropriately. Says Brand "I'd be totally happy if my personal DNA mapping was published." Entrepreneur and venture capitalist Esther Dyson is an investor in the personal genetics startup 23andMe. She has made her personal genome public.

Stanford Professor Andreas Weigend, who was former Chief Scientist at Amazon.com, says that "the notion of privacy began with the creation of cities, and it's pretty much ended with Facebook." He says "our social norms are changing."

It may very well be that our fundamental ideas about identity and privacy, the strategies that we have collectively pursued, and the technologies that we have adopted, must change and adapt in a rapidly evolving world of connectivity, networking, participation, sharing, and collaboration. But this will take a long time and in the meantime there are many challenges and even dangers.

To be sure, the digital technologies in general and social media in particular are providing new benefits to sharing personal information, and not just from getting more birthday wishes. There is a real upside to participating in communities, seeing photos, hearing stories or knowing the location of friends and family. Sharing also helps companies deliver personalized products and services. It can improve advertising, as we are targeted for products and services that correspond to our interests. If you live in an apartment block you won't see ads on Google or Facebook for lawn mowers.

When we reveal personal information we can help society too. Every time a gay person comes out, or someone with depression opens up about their condition they break down stigma and prejudice. Fully 20 percent of all patents with the fatal disease ALS share intimate information about their treatments and conditions on the network PatientsLikeMe.com. And tens of thousands of others with rare diseases who use that web site report that sharing has helped them better manage their illness.

But it is important to understand the extraordinary volumes of data being generated and how this will increase exponentially in the near future. In the course of a day, we currently generate the same amount of data as had been captured since the beginning of history up to the year 2003. Much of this is information attached to individuals. Our digital footprints and shadows are being gathered together, bit by bit, megabyte by megabyte, terabyte by terabyte, into personas and profiles and avatars - virtual representations of us, in thousands of locations.

But this availability of personal information isn't just something that is being done to the public, it is also being done by the public. Many of us are willing accomplices in dissolving our own privacy rights, in exchange for new services, conveniences, and efficiencies. Before Facebook arrived, few would have predicted that hundreds of millions of people would voluntarily log on to the Internet and record detailed almost minute-by-minute data about themselves, their activities, their likes and dislikes, and so on. The degree of detail that a platform like Facebook gathers and will be able to gather about each of us is mind boggling.

Tomorrow's smartphones (or other personal appliances like sunglasses with a internal screen) will have a persistent connection to the Internet and record non-stop video and audio of everything going on around us. This might strike some people as bizarre. They wonder: "What could I do throughout the day that's so important that I would actually want to record it?" It's not unlike a question many people posed a couple of decades ago: "What's so important that I would need to carry a phone everywhere so people could reach me?" Today most people view their cell phones as essential survival gear.

Soon a manager could ask her personal recorder to retrieve the last five minutes of yesterday's meeting with a colleague when they agreed on action items. She'll transmit the video clip to her subordinates so they know what to do. Business people will archive meetings with associates or suppliers, so that if a dispute arises they can go back and prove they're right. Of course, since everybody knows everybody has a recording of the conversation, the dispute is less likely to arise in the first place.

Add to this the emerging "augmented reality" tools where you point your mobile device at the street and it gives you real-time information about the world around you. For augmented reality to work the device must know precisely where you are and have a detailed understanding of what interests you. If you can annotate the physical world a plethora of new capabilities open up. For example when walking down the street and through the screen inside your sunglasses perhaps you can see the names and profiles of people you're meeting.

Lest you think managing all this data would be a nightmare, companies are already working to help ease the burden. Microsoft has a research program underway called MyLifeBits. The program digitizes, catalogues and retrieves every conceivable scrap of information about your own life that you could want, such as photos, rock concert tickets and wedding invitations. It acts as a surrogate memory.

Google has a similar idea. Having tamed the Internet, the company sees the management and retrieval of the massive amounts of data each person will soon generate as an enormous business opportunity. Their software will run in the background on our recorders, automatically archiving the constant flow of video and audio. You simply ask for an image of the person who sat beside you at a dinner party a year ago and it will appear. Or you could ask for the sweater you saw in a store last week, or where you parked the car. Just like cell phones, we will soon wonder how we ever got along without our smartphone digital assistants.

Consider the implications of Apple's soon to be improved product SIRI. You digital assistant knows more than what you're searching or surfing. It knows and collects detailed information about your behavior, questions, intents and issues you face in daily life.

Surely this world of wonderful new capability raises some deep concerns about a dark side.

Next up: "To Share or Not to Share?"

Don Tapscott is the author of 14 books about technology in business and society, most recently with Anthony D. Williams "Macrowikinomics." He discusses these ideas on twitter @dtapscott.

 

Follow Don Tapscott on Twitter: www.twitter.com/dtapscott

FOLLOW TECH
The ubiquity of digital gadgets and sensors, the pervasiveness of networks and the benefits of sharing very personal information through social media have led some to argue that privacy as a social no...
The ubiquity of digital gadgets and sensors, the pervasiveness of networks and the benefits of sharing very personal information through social media have led some to argue that privacy as a social no...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 17
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lhoffman5
72 yr old,Eisenhower Rep. Retired history Teacher
09:33 PM on 05/22/2012
I adore technology, I am not qualified to be a certified nerd, but I am not electronically illiterate either! I did manage to build two (laughing at old man not allowed) 486 and two more after that computers, and tadah they worked. Now we have the desktop, 2 net books, 2 Kindle Fires, one cell phone and my Blackberry Torch, all sync'd and all working fine. Yes I do have a Facebook Account, I use it sparingly. My profile is very limited, and information I release is with great care. Maybe it is my age, but I can NOT understand the desire of the young people to put their entire lives into bytes and think it bares on reality. A: everything and anything put on here is fair game for someone to steal, and to use against you! Please, we all know it happens and more than likely know someone it happened to!
So far is the last year, my bank account was hacked into, my American express card was hit twice thankfully all those times the fraud departments of the companies caught it and we stopped it before it did any damage. My A T and T account was actually stolen, it was only caught because there is more than one phone on the account and one of the other lines was informed about my new phone and account settings also stopped, ladies, gentlemen, and children of all ages, the computer is fun. it is not life!
photo
KarmaPatrol
Riverboat Gambler, satellite whisperer. Independe
11:06 AM on 05/22/2012
If one is good with employers and other malcontents looking into their stuff, sure. I'd say just sanitize a profile but then you may not have control over what others say. Plus if your profile is sanitized, what's the point?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mjredder
09:53 AM on 05/22/2012
"Social networking" remains nothing more than a new outlet for the same old narcissists and anxiety-ridden people to interact with each other. When I finally acknowledged that Facebook was an advertising platform and not some great social community, that was the last straw for me and I shut mine down forever.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robert Lovelace
Texan against Cruz, Perry, Gohmert, ...
07:50 PM on 05/23/2012
There's a typo in your comment. It is spelled "Social notworking".
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:54 PM on 05/21/2012
That works well if you are the powerholders in society; the rest of us, not so well. We live in a society in which people are openly speaking about rounding up various types of people -immigrants, gays -- and putting them into concentration camps and or exterminating them. Faculty of religious colleges are being asked to sign "lifestyle oaths". Insurance companies are now considering pregnancy a "pre-existing condition", and public figures like Elizabeth Warren are having to prove their DNA. Somehow I do not think that those of us with less advantages would do very well in an open information society
08:46 PM on 05/21/2012
Sorry you lost me there:

This is not a fringe movement. The proponents of this view are some of the smartest and most influential thinkers and practitioners of the digital revolution.

Smartest, no way. In this hyper PC nonsense world where everybody is offended all the time.
WishfulThinkingRulesAll
Your micro-bio is empty
06:50 PM on 05/21/2012
The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution, you know that important one that keeps the government from searching us and our vehicles and homes without sufficient cause and/or a warrant... a big part of the Amendment is about the "expectation of privacy." Meaning that if an average, reasonable person doesn't really have an expectation of privacy in _____ the government has a much easier time snooping on us or searching us.


I really don't have anything to hide, but I also don't want my business out there known to everyone... although at the rate 'society' is going, privacy protections are going out the window...
photo
med1067
What goes around, comes around.
04:41 PM on 05/21/2012
No one's life should be an open book. What ever happened to modesty or humility? These "programs" are used to track you and market to you by corporations and the government. No one gives a rat's behind what you are doing every single minute of the day. Wake up people! You are being duped.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Don Tapscott
(Co) Author 14 books most recently Macrowikinomics
03:23 PM on 05/21/2012
Thanks for the comments. Please remember that this is Part 1 of a 7 Part series. The next 6 parts explore the problems for each of us of Living Out Loud.
01:30 PM on 05/21/2012
They are the profiteers of information pollution.

Their advocacy is no different than a COAL CEO arguing the encessity of smokestack pollution.

It's simply a matter of their business model. And that they don't have one if they can't commoditize our information as we don't value their services enough to pay them monthly.
12:14 PM on 05/21/2012
In this Brave New Utopian World (which some might characterize as dystopian) wherein everyone shares everything, I assume the FBI will give me access to the files they keep on me, there will be no criminals scouring public profiles to see who is on vacation, nor will insurance companies deny coverage to those who have unwittingly shared their medical history.

This wonderful world will be brought to you by the two trusted guardians of the internet: Google & Facebook...whose altruistic motives are driven NOT by profit but by their desire to benefit mankind.

I am ecstatic about the prospects this wonderful future holds for us, ESPECIALLY now that advertisements will be targeted specifically to my buying tastes and "discreetly displayed" via augmented reality on my google glasses!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:12 PM on 05/21/2012
Openess is a good thing as long as you have the correct information and people aren't allowed to make up hurtful things about you that are untrue and slanderous. There are many mean people on Huffpost, probably working for the GOP that slander and this shouldn't be allowed. Furthermore the government needs to pass laws that clamp down on identity fraud. There are perhaps 25 occurrences of my real name on the internet. Does that mean that my social security number has been breached? Who is minding the store? Shouldn't we know who people really are?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
stepfordhusband
10:55 AM on 05/21/2012
What a load of bunk. The more companies know about an individual the more they will hound them relentlessly. I never give out my cell phone number to any website or company. I use cash as much as possible and would never, never make my medical or health public knowledge. It is so easy for just about anyone to unfortunately find out way to much already about strangers think what professional identity thieves can do with that info?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
smeeeee
Now take your nice red pill
10:32 AM on 05/21/2012
It's just so 1984.
10:11 AM on 05/21/2012
I've thought about "radical transparency" myself. But it only works in a world with no enemies, opponents, or people who might want to take any action that would do you damage, like fire you, for example. It's very easy to say "my life is an open book" if you have no controversial opinions / tastes, or are independently wealthy, or at least have tenure or an employment contract, or don't have to worry about how your kid will have health insurance if you get fired. But otherwise? That's why I'm not on Facebook. At least not under my own name. "Skua" isn't my real name either.
09:35 AM on 05/21/2012
I just googled "Jeff Jarvis social security number." No luck, it ain't available. What a liar.
botazefa
Sounds like Bodhisattva
12:52 PM on 05/21/2012
Indeed.