While extremes resonate, they may not be practical.
Take “privacy first.”
Our intuition tells us that a lack of privacy is bad, so companies give us what we want. Privacy.
The privacy first extreme is exemplified by World, formerly WorldCoin. World can theoretically build a database of the irises of millions of people…but by design it does not know who any of them are. Am I eligible to vote in California? No idea.
Another extreme is exemplified by how we respond to ad-related queries. Our responses are understandable.
- When I see an ad that reads, “John, MBAs in Ontario, California are drinking this smoothie,” I wonder what else “they” know about me. (And yes, they know my age.)
- So I go to the extreme and decide that I don’t want “them” to know anything about me.
- Seems like a good idea until I start seeing ads for pink miniskirts…and the ads are in Chinese.
- I prepare to complain and ask why I’m seeing these ads, but then I remember that by design, the advertisers don’t know me from Adam…or, apparently, Eve.
So the privacy debate is not Boolean but is more nuanced.
- What types of personally identifiable information or protected health information will a system store?
- Who can access it?
- What happens when (not if) the system is breached?
Bredemarket 