Question Technology

Google's Privacy Primers

From the Official Google Blog today:

In order to give you the best possible information about the privacy settings for our products, we asked the engineers and product managers who actually designed them to explain how they work in a series of new videos we released today on our YouTube Privacy Channel. These videos feature Googlers sharing privacy tips, like how to use Google Chat’s “Off the Record” feature, how to limit the number of people who can view your Picasa photos, how to unlist your phone number from Google search results, and how to make the details of your Google Calendar entries private.

Just as we’re dedicated to innovation when it comes to making better, more useful products, we’re also committed to finding new ways to educate you about how to control what information you share when using our products, and with whom. This series, along with the other videos on our YouTube Privacy Channel, are part of this awareness-raising effort. So watch the videos (including our very own blooper reel) and tell us what you think.

Link: New privacy tips series.

Hey Google, if you need to give instructions on how to opt out then you're making it too hard to opt out.  If instructions are needed, then make them findable from the Google front page instead of dumping them on some YouTube page nobody's ever heard of, or will ever remember.

Update: According to Lifehacker there has been a petition kicking around since October 2006 for a Google Data Privacy Manager.  So far it has collected a whopping 195 signatures.  Yikes.  Perhaps hosting an anti-Google petition on a Google service (Google Pages) is a bad idea.

Nick Carr and others on 23andMe

From the Guardian last week:

Google's involvement suggests that 23andMe probably has larger ambitions than just providing individuals with gene maps. As its online store of genetic information grows and as customers add personal information, the company could end up with a database of extraordinary value to pharmaceutical firms, medical researchers and insurance companies.

Sorted and analysed with Google's sophisticated data-crunching tools, the database could disclose hidden connections between genes, aptitudes and diseases. In a privacy statement on its site, the company acknowledges that it plans to grant outside groups access to its database, allowing them to search, "without knowing the identities of the individuals involved", for correlations between genetic variations and health conditions. That could well turn into a major business.

The company also says that it will give users "the ability to connect with other 23andMe customers through sharing features". 23andMe could evolve into a social network, a biotech version of MySpace or Facebook where people make connections not with friends but with people who share similar genetic traits. This, too, could provide the basis for a lucrative business. Given that 23andMe tracks its customers' movements with cookies, it may not be long before we see genetically targeted advertising.

Link: Google gives new gene mapping service a bit of spit and polish.

See also earlier articles by David Ewing Duncan in Portfolio: Welcome to the future and David Hamilton in VentureBeat: Will 23andMe and Navigenics lock up your genome and charge you for the key? (via Biopolitical Times)

The Googlization of Everything

Siva Vaidhyanathan has launched a new blog to go with his "book in progress," The Googlization of Everything: How One Company is Disrupting Culture, Commerce, and Community -- and Why We Should Worry.

From his introductory post:

Hi. Welcome to my new book. Well, it’s not a book yet. In fact, it will not be a real book for a long time.

As you can tell from the title of this blog, the book will be about Google and all they ways that Google is shaking up the world. Google is a transformative and revolutionary company. I hesitate to use terms like that. We live in an era of hyperbole. So I try my best to discount claims of historical transformation or communicative revolutions.

But in the case of Google, I am confident it is both.

Now, I am approaching this book as both a fan and a critic. I am in awe of all that Google has done and all it hopes to do. I am also wary of its ambition and power.

As I use this site to compose the manuscript (an archaic word that I love too much to discard) for the book The Googlization of Everything, I hope to do so with your help.

This is the latest in a series of “open book” experiments hosted and guided by The Institute for the Future of the Book.

Link: Hi. Welcome to my book.

(Via Michael Zimmer.)

MySpace for Your Genome

Jesse Reynolds of the excellent Center for Genetics and Society had a good article last week on AlterNet about the risks of putting your genome data online, something the Google- and Genetech-funded startup 23andMe wants you to do.  An excerpt:

Eminent technology investor and pundit Esther Dyson isn't worried about privacy policies, her personal records being hacked, or these companies cooperating with the National Security Agency. In fact, she wants you to turn over not just your medical records, but your personal genetic sequence as well.

In a recent interview on Charlie Rose, Dyson explained that she's among ten people about to put their health histories and genetic sequences on the internet for public viewing. She optimistically predicts that lots of us will soon entrust such information to online companies, albeit in private accounts.

Although Dyson acknowledged some of the troubling questions this prospect raises, she quickly dismissed them: "Like it or not, it's gonna happen."

Her rhetorical dodge is unfortunate. The convergence of biotechnology, the web, and big business is, in fact, quite alarming.

Here's the scenario: After signing up online, you receive a kit in the mail. In your home, you provide a saliva sample in the supplied cup and ship it off to a lab. For a few hundred dollars, much of your genome is sequenced, and the company places it on a website. It's then linked to your complete medical history, also online.

At this point, the company says, you can learn about your predispositions to diseases, conditions for which you carry a recessive gene, and genealogical information. The website offers medical advice, along with advertisements for potentially useful products and services. You can even communicate with people with similar genetic characteristics, making "friends" and forming "groups."

That seems to be the plan of a Silicon Valley start-up, 23andMe, named for the 23 pairs of chromosomes that hold your genome. Google, Genentech, and venture capital firms have invested at least $10 million in 23andMe. Its founder recently married one of Google's founders. Ms. Dyson is also an investor and board member -- something that didn't come up during her interview.

Link: Google wants to track your medical history -- and your genome

ACLU's New Surveillance Society Clock

This may be old news, but the ACLU recently launched a Surveillance Society Clock "to symbolize just how close we are to a 'midnight' of a genuine surveillance society."

It doesn't quite trip off the tongue like Doomsday Clock, and I'm not sure a digital display is an effective visualization, but anyway... it's an important issue.

Link: ACLU Surveillance Society Clock,
via Michael Zimmer.

Siva Vaidhyanathan on The Googlization of Everything

That's apparently the title of forthcoming book by Siva Vaidhyanathan, and also of a recent talk.  Here are some notes by Michael at Masters of Media:

Siva’s starting point is that Google is part of our lives, and we talk about in a way that resembles the way we would talk about the Divine. Ultimately, we say, “It is a force for good.” As per the Book of Sergey and Larry, “Don’t be evil”. And in Siva’s words, the path to heaven seems lined by small, personalized advertisements. In the world of Google, moral problems are merely unsolved technological ones. But Google - the search engine - is a black box, and perhaps this is why we mere mortals must become believers.

Google has divine aims, too. Universal access to all of the world’s information? Sergey says, “It would be like the Mind of God”. (Read on and discuss below..)

New Network TheorySiva goes on to discuss the theology of the network via the theology of Google. His interests are broad, from the way the world looks through Google’s eyes, to the political and legal implications of the various precedents Google is (or will be) setting. The issues are multifarious - from the purchase of Double Click to the Viacom-Youtube lawsuit - and the of much speculation throughout the business, legal and politcal spheres.

All the while, Siva says, Google must keep its image - its halo - and so far it has.. Google demands loyalty. In return it offers the illusion of democracy, precision and objectivity.

Link: SIVACRACY.NET: Nieuw Network Theory in Amsterdam,
via Infothought.

TSA Joins the YouTube Generation

In response to a customer's complaint on a blog, the Transportation Security Administration has posted security camera video on the web.  From the AP:

The Transportation Security Administration is denying allegations that an airport screener seized a toddler's sippy cup and mistreated his mother, taking the unusual step of posting security camera footage on its Web site.

The TSA said in a statement that the incident and the videotape demonstrate that its "officers display professionalism and concern for all passengers."

At issue is whether Monica Emmerson, a former Secret Service officer, was improperly detained June 11 after she spilled water out of her child's sippy cup at Washington's Reagan National Airport.

TSA has banned most fluids at airport security checkpoints for nearly a year because of concern about possible liquid explosives.

Link: TSA Counters Sippy Cup Allegation (SFGate/AP)

The TSA posted the video on a page called MythBusters.  Here's the original story at the "crowd powered media" site NowPublic: Nightmare at Reagan National Airport.  Mark Frauenfelder at BoingBoing has a play-by-play of the video.

So is the TSA being run by teenagers now?  Is this really a professional way to respond to a passenger's concern, by shaming the person in public on the web?  Whether the woman's story is accurate (and there's good reason to think it's not) I still find the TSA's methods here disturbing and unprofessional, as are some of the comments by the "citizen journalists" at NowPublic.

The fact that TSA will post security videos on a whim doesn't give much confidence about the privacy of images from those new X-ray backscatter people scanners.  Perhaps soon the TSA will also be posting disputed X-rays on the web to shame passengers who lie or make too much fuss.

Lauren Weinstein Calls For Google Ombudsman

In the wake of Privacy International's controversial report that ranked Google lowest on internet privacy (reported lots of places: Google news search), privacy advocate Lauren Weinstein proposes that Google create an ombudsman position to communicate better with the public on this issue.  Excerpt from his blog:

The ombudsman would be a non-lawyer who would be assigned full-time to act as an easily approachable and highly available front-line interface between the public and Google operational/R&D teams. This individual would be the primary initial contact for most queries from individuals and organizations who have specific problems related to Google content, privacy, or a range of other related policy matters. This technically knowledgeable individual would be well-versed regarding the relevant issues and ideally already possess a high degree of trust within the larger Internet community.

Such an ombudsman, by fostering open lines of communications, could immediately interact with members of the public and push relevant matters quickly up the chain of command inside Google for action as appropriate.

Link: Urgent call for a Google-at-large public ombudsman.

It's a great idea.  Google may be correct to feel unfairly singled out by Privacy International (see Matt Cutts), but as the leader in this space they shouldn't be surprised.  Instead of being defensive they should use the luxury of their position and resources to innovate on the privacy issue and set a higher standard, just as they did with search.

Update: Last night Google's Global Privacy Counsel Peter Fleischer announced a change to Google's data retention policy in response to EU concerns: instead of their current plan to "anonymize our server logs after 18 to 24 months" they'll now do it after 18 months.  Link: Official Google Blog: How Long Should Google Remember Searches?  I don't know enough about this issue to say whether this really means anything.

Video of Andrew Keen Talk

Cult of the Amateur author Andrew Keen speaking at Google: video at YouTube.  I watched this earlier and was quite impressed.  He makes some good anti-Web 2.0 arguments and comes across as more reasonable than might have been expected from early buzz about the book.

Google Street-Level Photos and Privacy

It's generating lots of talk:

• New York Times: Google Zooms In Too Close for Some.
• NYT The Lede blog: Scenes Through the Eyes of Google.
• Lauren Weinstein: Thoughts on Google Maps Street Level Photos and Privacy.
• Michael Zimmer: Google's "Street View" and Privacy in Public.
• A collection of interesting sightings at Wired: Request for urban street sightings,
• and at BoingBoing: Google maps is spying on my cat.

As someone who has done image processing research I'm a bit surprised that they didn't run the images through some code to automatically detect and blur license plates, faces and maybe other things.  That's a challenging problem but not outside the realm of possibility (call me, Google). :)

On Google and privacy generally, see also Ann Bartow: The Google Threat.

One more: Farhad Manjoo has a pretty good recap at his all-new Machinist blog at Salon: Google is watching you (but so is everyone else).

Google Decider (Beta)

Eric Schmidt discusses Google's future:

Asked how Google might look in five years’ time, Mr Schmidt said: “We are very early in the total information we have within Google. The algorithms will get better and we will get better at personalisation.

“The goal is to enable Google users to be able to ask the question such as ‘What shall I do tomorrow?’ and ‘What job shall I take?’ ”

[...]

Mr Schmidt told journalists in London: “We cannot even answer the most basic questions because we don’t know enough about you. That is the most important aspect of Google’s expansion.”

Link: Google's goal: To organize your daily life (Financial Times),

via Rough Type.

I look forward to offloading all my big decisions onto Google.

Libraries vs. Bookstores vs. Google

Some interesting discussion on the different missions of libraries and bookstores: first by Tracy Nectoux at Library Juice, then Michael Zimmer adds Google Book Search into the mix at his blog. 

Today's News Brought To You By Buggy Software

It seems like every other story in today's news is about software bugs (all links are to the San Francisco Chronicle):

Drivers have been complaining since March that they're blinded by the glare from a new electronic billboard near the Bay Bridge in Oakland.  This is the same notoriously unsafe stretch of road where a tanker truck overturned recently and caused the freeway to collapse.  Because of buggy software the sign is running at daytime brightness levels both day and night, rather than dimming automatically at dusk.  It's unclear from what I've read whether the sign will actually be shut off and fixed; it sounds like Caltrans doesn't know what it's doing, and the Oakland schools that are promised advertising revenue from the sign are more concerned about losing money if the sign is shut off.  Links: Billboard at toll plaza too bright, drivers complain and Editorial: Warning -- Politicians at work.

Streetcars were delayed once again in San Francisco during rush hour because of a "software glitch."  The upside, we're told, is that this particular glitch, unlike all the previous ones, "happens infrequently."  I guess fixing the bug so it never happens is out of the question?  Link: Muni metro falls down on the job again.

Ike Turner was arrested Tuesday night because of a warrant from 1989 that erroneously popped up again on a police computer.  Lucky for them Turner seems oblivious: he's not mad and said, "They could have been right."  Link: Turner 'drug charge' a computer error.

San Francisco's voting machines have unspecified software "anomalies" and so ballots will probably have to be counted by hand in the upcoming local election.  Link: S.F. may have to count November ballots by hand.

And one story not about bugs, at least not yet: Latest technology will enable speedier purchases!  Throw out your cash and credit cards because "smart cards embedded with computer chips will take the place of the magnetic stripe, and keychain fobs, chips in cell phones and even biometrics linked to people's fingerprints could take the place of cash and credit."  Finally someone solves that horrible problem of not being able to spend money fast enough.

Rating Library Books

I love the San Francisco Public Library, but I'm not so crazy about Library/Web 2.0 gimmicks. They recently added a "rate this book" feature to their online catalog, which I think is just silly, not to mention worrisome privacy-wise:

 

"Library 2.0" has been much discussed by librarians.  See for example, Rory Litwin: The Central Problem of Library 2.0: Privacy, and Steve Lawson: A Library 2.0 skeptic's reading list.

Library Juice Concentrate

Library Juice Concentrate by Rory Litwin collects a number of articles from the progressive-left librarian e-zine (and now blog) Library Juice.  The intended audience is primarily library/information scientists and others interested in library philosophy and politics, but there's much here to stimulate others interested in how technology is changing the way we record and access human knowledge.

The essays touch on diverse topics including privacy, intellectual freedom, the value of traditional librarianship, the rebranding of librarianship as information science, and  Google's project to scan and monetize library holdings.  There's a good variety of tone, ranging from heady philosophy to light-hearted quotes and limericks.

Library Juice Press is a new publisher whose other books include Library Daylight, a collection of readings on library history and controversy, and Barbarians at the Gates of the Public Library: How Postmodern Consumer Capitalism Threatens Democracy, Civil Education and the Public Good by Ed D'Angelo.