(Via Wired) http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A89273-2001May28.html # # The Case Against Absolute Privacy # # By Scott McNealy Tuesday, May 29, 2001 # # Any company that doesn't properly safeguard people's personal # information will suffer the same fate as a bank that doesn't # safeguard people's money. It will go out of business. But privacy # is not always desirable -- and absolute privacy is a disaster # waiting to happen. # # Take medical records. If you're in an accident, do you want an # ambulance driver to be able to access your medical records online? # I think you do. Do you want everybody to? No. # # Properly administered, the online environment offers more privacy # protections, not fewer. Online, you can encrypt things and provide # conditional access. You can know where your files are and who's # looking at them through audit trails. Try that with a paper file. # # I know medical records are a hot button for a lot of people, # and I agree they need to be protected. But it would be a mistake # to lose sight of the real benefits of sharing information about # ourselves. One of the chief benefits, to use a more routine # example, is personalized service. In exchange for a little # information, you can get an online experience that's more in # tune with your interests and needs. I have agreed to let my car # company, for instance, track my every move through GPS satellites. # Some people might consider that an invasion of privacy, but I # find it comforting to know that, should my air bag deploy, they # know where I am and can send help. # # I'm convinced that we've barely scratched the surface on this # one. Someday soon you could find yourself in a strange city and # your Web-enabled wireless phone will be able to recommend a nearby # restaurant based on your fondness for French, Italian or Mexican # cuisine -- and then make your reservation for you. It could even # recommend a movie based on what you liked and didn't like in # the past -- and, by the way, it's playing three blocks away, # starts in half an hour and only a few tickets are left, so would # you like to purchase one now with your credit card? # # Those are just two examples of how specific needs will be met # in specific circumstances -- many more are possible. The point # is, for that level of service, most people would gladly reveal # their personal preferences, as long as they feel certain the # information won't be misused. On the Internet, even more than # in other areas of our lives, trust is the real currency. Squander # what you have and you'll find out how hard it can be to get more. # # So far the industry has done a pretty good job of regulating # itself. Most companies now post formal privacy policies on their # Web sites and allow visitors to have a say in how information # about them is used. # # That just makes good business sense, but I recognize that it # took some prodding from the watchdogs in the media. The media # could also start rewarding companies who have learned how to # offer both consumer protection and personalized service. Maybe # some enterprising magazine will start publishing an annual list # of the companies with the best policies and practices. The Privacy # 500, perhaps. # # The writer is chief executive of Sun Microsystems Inc. This is utter bullshit. Go to download StarOffice/Forte for Java/Java2 SDK/Solaris from sun.com and it tells you you can opt out of all contact, YET YOU ARE FORCED TO IDENTIFY YOURSELF (assuming you don't lie). What excuse is used for all the "REQUIRED" fields even when you don't want any contact? Why "REQUIRE" your phone number and email address, even for the Danish version? Scott McNealy's given reason: # This information is required to assure compliance with legal # and governmental restrictions on the distribution and exportation # of software. Oh, really? That means it's subject to being given to the government, which is not listed in their provacy policy. (http://www.sun.com/privacy) There's no MIT-PGP-like attempt to restrict downloads. Care to state the exact U.S. Gov regulations that require you to collect our phone numbers for each of those products, and the part (software) of the products that fit those regs? I say McNealy is lying. McNealy wrote: # On the Internet, even more than in other areas of our lives, # trust is the real currency. Squander what you have and you'll # find out how hard it can be to get more. McNealy is well known to have thrown in the privacy towel. This is strictly company propaganda. I'll email this to their privacy questions address. In which case I should add: excuse me for sounding out-of-sorts.
