Private vs. Public @ mesh08
- Are society's notions about privacy changing? Does anyone even care about privacy any more? Once you provide your information, does it belong to you or to Them? Younger Web users seem perfectly comfortable disclosing even intimate personal details to people they meet online. But some are concerned about what seems like excessive disclosure, and also wonder what happens to your data once social media sites get hold of it. Come and discuss these issues and more with Internet researcher Nancy Baym of the University of Kansas, philosophy professor and author Mark Kingwell and Ken Anderson, assistant privacy commissioner for Ontario, in a panel moderated by Rachel Sklar.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:11:03 PM
- Getting under way....by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:20:08 PM
- Moderator = Rachel Sklar from Huffington Postby Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:20:35 PM
by MDM at 5/21/2008 8:23:04 PM- Why is this an important issue?by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:23:26 PM
- Mark: History of this issue is 400 years long. What does it mean to be an individual? This has been a constant issue for 400 years, and not going away as a concern. Everyone has a FB horror story that has ruined their lives; we are playing catchup to technological speed.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:24:08 PM
- by MDM at 5/21/2008 8:24:52 PM
- Nancy: Telephone = ppl were afraid of ppl being able to look into your house and see you watching around. Perceptions online not actually the way it is. They forget about Google Index, lurkers, etc. In reality, what they are doing (in forums, etc) is publicly available.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:26:04 PM
- Ken: Ppl coming into his office complaining about gov't using info in a way they didn't think it would be. e.g. a nurse around here took a pic of him/herself with dying patients, and posted them on a blog. Now that those patients are dead, the Privacy office is trying to deal with whether to notify families, how hospital should react.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:26:47 PM
- Moderator: Should it be moderated by common sense?by MDM at 5/21/2008 8:28:44 PM
- Ken:
That was bad judgement, not maliciousby Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:28:57 PM - Nancy: Malicious use must be going on out there.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:29:16 PM
- Mark: Relying on common sense is the worse possible idea.by MDM at 5/21/2008 8:29:47 PM
- Moderator: Who regulates then and how much?by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:29:48 PM
- Mark: Traditionally, it was the gov't because we're dealing with the public sphere. Traditional model: was a literal public space. Do little of that now. Social networks = if they are a genuine public space, then there needs to be regulation there.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:30:03 PM
- Ken: Example: City councilor was being impersonated on FB, defaming others. They worked with FB to take it down. They were protecting the public.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:32:16 PM
- Moderator: What right do you have to your face, your name in the public space?by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:32:48 PM
- Moderator:
Brandon Manitoba where the kid put up a page of his teacher. What right does the student have.by MDM at 5/21/2008 8:33:01 PM - Mark: Example: Someone was using my name in a Google Group. Regulation is appropriate (due to misrepresentation), but *how* do we regulate that?by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:33:21 PM
- Moderator: Example of Julia Alison: self-made internet celeb. Someone systematically reblogged her content. What right is there to reblog someone's information?by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:34:24 PM
- by MDM at 5/21/2008 8:35:00 PM
- Nancy: After talking with a musician, is it okay for me to repost our conversation in a msg board? The lines are really blurry.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:36:53 PM
- by MDM at 5/21/2008 8:36:56 PM
- Mark: Anyone involved online must realize they don't have an innate privacy. To be private, has to be an active task. When make decision to make a FB page, you are giving away some privacy.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:37:35 PM
- Moderator: How much control can you have?by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:39:22 PM
- Nancy: You don't have control. They will say what they want to say. You have to make a best effort to get your narrative out there to combat that. If you put enough of yourself out there so that ppl know who you are, ppl are more likely to spot the error if someone is impersonating you.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:39:48 PM
- Moderator: What's on an off the record anymore? e.g. Obama private fundraiser scandal. Tension between old rules and new rules of citizen journalism. I was at a SNL after party, can I talk about it on-line?
@Ken: Any turning point stories lately in Canada?by MDM at 5/21/2008 8:41:48 PM - Ken: at a recent event, someone brought up the point that online is more private. Ppl are more discrete e.g. in a small town, they know a lot about ppl but they don't put that all online. Online, a lot of ppl just read and don't post back.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:44:19 PM
- Nancy: Anonymous comments = leads to stupid discourse on one side, but gives some ppl the ability to say things anonymously that do benefit the public sphereby Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:45:09 PM
- Mark: Anonymous ballots, the technological precursure to all this.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:45:48 PM
- Question: Should we approach privacy as we approach copyright with the idea of a creative commons? Make a declaration when we want to preserve our privacy.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:48:29 PM
- Nancy: Wouldn't we be divulging what we want to keep private?by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:48:50 PM
- Question: @Mark:In Gladwell throwdown, wasn't it automatically assumed you had given consent as a presenter? They were told media was there.by MDM at 5/21/2008 8:50:12 PM
- Mark: Didn't consent to bootleg YouTube video. He had only consented to the (big) media.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:50:53 PM
- /trying to find this infamous videoby Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:51:29 PM
- Question: RE: Surveillance cameras, only good for getting convictions, not for preventing crime?by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:52:23 PM
- Ken: TTC already using cameras, but proposing to add more cameras in diff places. There was a declaration that they were going to track ppl across cameras in realtime, not true. More about perceived safety, watching groups of ppl not inviduals. They put in greater privacy controls for TTC cameras than anywhere in the world. Faces will be encrypted. To decrypt, takes 2 ppl including an office of the police. Can't monitor ppl, pan on ppl.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:52:42 PM
- The Mark Kingwell video.by MDM at 5/21/2008 8:54:27 PM
- by MDM at 5/21/2008 8:54:28 PM
- Part 2.by MDM at 5/21/2008 8:55:13 PM
- by MDM at 5/21/2008 8:55:15 PM
- Question: In Ottawa, monitors cameras in parks to make sure ppl not in parks after 11pm. If they see ppl, they can contact them over loudsystem.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:56:42 PM
- Ken: Commissioner launched investigation today into this exact issue. Stay tuned for results.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:57:02 PM
- Question: Forget privacy because it's not possible anymore? The only way to protect your privacy online, is to put it there yourself? Should we give up?by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:58:57 PM
- Nancy: You can't prevent your identity going online. It's always socially dependent. It's a question of to what extend we can do damage control. Negative commentary against you might be true.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 8:59:14 PM
- Question: How to protect privacy for vulnerable ppl (like those with brain trauma)?by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 9:02:31 PM
- Nancy: Educate, educate, educate.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 9:03:24 PM
- Mark: Antidote to commercialization is democratization. Certain forms of privacy in corporate lockdown. We all have to be more politically active to deal with commercial interests that are a part of our society.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 9:03:42 PM
- Ken: Privacy is about ppl. Corporates have secrets, patents but not privacy. They also have issues about gov't, transparency, accountability.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 9:05:31 PM
- Question: Given new startup business model that target ads to ppl, what will it take to make privacy cool enough to get this generation (that give up their privacy) to adopt this technology and mindset?by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 9:07:44 PM
- Mark: Will just take them getting burned once.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 9:08:02 PM
- Nancy: Problematic that you can't join FB without giving your details to marketers. There isn't a social network that doesn't give your details to marketters.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 9:09:39 PM
- Mark: Analogue to real world problem: private-public space. MaRS lobby is a private space, and you didn't give concent.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 9:10:59 PM
- Ken: Privacy commission has chatted with FB. It's not a freeforall for information. FB: if we gave it all away, we would lose our business.by Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 9:12:46 PM
- END/applauseby Jonathan Keebler (Live) at 5/21/2008 9:13:10 PM
- Who's Blogging
-
Jonathan Keebler (Live)
MDM
- Translate
- Options
-
Comments
Turn viewer comments off and on.
Turn comments off
- Share
