The more we write and deposit on the internet the more that we give away elements of our personality. We’re leaving a trail that can be used for many purposes. Much of it not for our benefit.
Generally when yaddering on the internet my tendency is to assume that it matters little as much is invented, made up, real elements are obfuscated, and quite a lot of it is silly. My typical outlook is not to worry. Yet there are algorithms out there that can detect trends that identify real things about our existence, our lives, and can categorise and profile us based on inference. My, and our, attempts to conceal information from these tools are not so good. I’m not thinking about the web based nonsense that we're lured to such as “we have profiled you on the last 600+ words you have tweeted”. Insidious though those things are, not those. No not those but the much more complex data mining that takes place across multiple repositories, public and private - yes, private too, scramble the tin-foil hat, put on the black helicopter, staple on your waterproof pants. Under your keyboards and behind your capacitive touch screens you and your data are being thoroughly sniffed.
The purposes for this data sniffing may be narrow or wide. Identity theft, targeted advertising, for actuarial purposes, to identify subversives, to isolate and alienate, to stalk or rob, or even to impersonate us in public places. The last one isn’t paranoia, and it can’t only be me that makes an effort to affect Louie Spence style mannerisms to deter it can it?
How much of what a person says and deposits in the granite of the internet is close to their own reality. How much is it their extremes of lifestyle or perhaps only their desires. From the isolated hermit to the world of Mr Benn, which one might have moderated and damped down or talked up their experience for public consumption, either of them from a life possibly made up of fantastic episodes. How much of that data can be reassembled by the new order, the operators of the Byte-Juggler 2100 Geiger–Müller machine. Does that data represent you, is that data actually you, or are you more complex than that.*
How do we go about re-factoring this information to be more representative. Or is that impossible given our complexity. Instead maybe we should try something else. Perhaps we should make more of an effort to break these assumption machines - that’s what they are, no matter how complex their coding or how deep their database searches and their cross referencing, they’re making assumptions. How do we break them?
Maybe if we make up stuff we can break them, make up stuff all the time, wherever, whenever, whatever. Make it up to confuse and confound them and break the analysis that brings no benefit other than to shareholders and corporations. Breaking these devices might not give us back the random events that used to occur, the odd links, the weird joy of the internet, but it might make us less of a cog in a marketing machine, less vulnerable to being manipulated.
So with those efforts to break the assumption machine in mind, my life - as an international three-armed jewel thief, associate of Glaswegian surrealist cat burglars and situationist armed robbers, mentor to impressionable axe wielding teenagers (stringed and bladed), purveyor of luxury hair products based on my own lustrous locks, trader of gilts, direction giver for Ann Widdicombe, and trans-continental pharmaceutical supplier to the stars - my life could look stately and refined in comparison to the things that we could be describing.
Let’s start now. It’s for our own good.**
* I know, I know, that's a cheap, manipulative shot.
** And, I know, I know, the interpretation of this entire thing will have me labelled, folded, spindled, and mutilated, by some cock awful data mining repository anyway.
No comments:
Post a Comment