Proposed TikTok Ban is a Symptom of the Need for Strong Privacy Laws
The news has been abuzz for the last few days about the US federal government banning TikTok in the country unless its Chinese owner, ByteDance, sells the company. Federal lawmakers contend that TikTok is beholden to the Chinese government and that ByteDance would be compelled to share TikTok data on Americans if asked, constituting a national security threat.
The base allegation here is that the Chinese government could gain significant amounts of data on American citizens via TikTok. ByteDance, for its part, claims it would never share the data it collects with the Chinese government. Regardless of the concern about national security with TikTok specifically, there are so many ways to collect data and so many sources of that data both domestic and foreign to the US that is getting little or no attention. Data brokers buy and sell data behind the scenes. These companies are often unknown to the public, as well as the extent of the data collected and who it sold to.
At the heart of all of this is privacy. The internet today is built on data collection, first for advertising and later for other purposes. However, nearly all this data is being gathered largely unknown to the public, buried in tens or hundreds of pages of disclosure in a site’s terms of service (ToS). There are two main defenses of this practice:
1. Of course, data collection is disclosed! It’s on the end user to read and understand the ToS.
2. Advertisers and companies *must* have this data or they will all suffer, close services, and/or go out of business!
All of this, of course, is poppycock. The idea that the same public that needs to be specifically told not to eat silica drying packets is the one being asked to read ToS written in High Legalese. Secondly, anytime the business community is asked to do something that might make its operations even a penny less profitable, claims of economic apocalypse follow. The 40-hour work week, vacation, sick leave, or raises in the minimum wage are all met with the same handwringing hysteria by the business community. These complaints will also be laced with veiled threats and warnings that the services they offer in exchange for free access and ability to sell data will end and the economy will crash.
We are moving into the age of AI, and all that data is available to the government, to corporations, or anyone who has the money to buy it. That data will be used in ways that are not beneficial to the public. Already insurance companies have deals with car companies to gather driver and driving data directly from the car. Sure, customers can opt out. But it is sold as beneficial to the customer so they can track their own safety performance. But it’s for insurance companies to raise rates and manage their risk better. Better data means better profits. It will be sold to the public with the argument it makes things safer or as saving customers money. Because for-profit companies beholden to Wall Street results and shareholders will of course lower their rates for others. If you believe that, here is a brochure for a bridge being sold in Brooklyn. Privacy matters and the public needs to wake up to it before a combination of data collection and AI takes a dystopian turn we cannot back away from.
On a lighter subject, reports by Reuters say that Google’s new Bay View building featuring elegant and innovative swooping tent-like roof covered in solar panels, has an unexpected problem. The shape of the roof apparently either absorbs Wi-Fi signals or reflects them in ways that degrade the network, giving employees a difficult time maintaining a steady connection. Google hasn’t commented on this, but it does show one thing: The law of unintended consequences is always at work. Everybody, including giant multinational internet companies run by very smart people, are subject to it. Keep that in mind when thinking about data privacy…and use it to give yourself a break too.