Try Googling 'Privacy'

I'd like to make it abundantly clear from the beginning that I have no problem with the UK government reading my emails. In fact, I'd like to extend the invitation to the US government too, partly because I don't have anything to hide - I'm sure most of my emails would be very boring, especially to the recipients, never mind some well meaning spooks attempting to spot any potential terrorists.  However the main reason I'm content for them to have this access is that I've understood that all emails route through GCHQ in the UK anyway and, by extension, anything that is gleaned from them that is pertinent to the US authorities is shared.

But notwithstanding my assumptions, I'm pretty relaxed about the whole thing.  Same goes for my Facebook posts, Twitter feeds and as for reading my blog - well we all can do with new readers in blogworld.  Let's face it, even spooks read ebooks.

However there is a lot of concern being voiced either side of the Atlantic about alleged access to the emails and social media of individuals including their Facebook and Google account information.  Some allegations are that the NSA has been given direct access to the servers of the largest internet companies including Google and Facebook.  The CEOs of both companies have issued highly similar statements - which has led some pundits to suggest that they have colluded with each other.  Or maybe they use the same spin doctors for PR?

The statements essentially stated that the companies had not joined any program that would give the US government - or any other government  - direct access to their servers.  Specifically they have said they hadn't heard of Operation Prism - which given it is an internal operation name isn't altogether unlikely.  Some might read this as being overly specific, for example the statement would technically be considered true if they had simply joined a program that gave the government indirect access.  I reckon it would need a legion of lawyers to split the exact difference between direct and indirect in this legal environment.  That could take a long time as the best IT industry lawyers are currently facing each other down for Apple and Samsung over their patent squabbles.

Just to add conspiracy to theory, Twitter have made a far less interpretive statement that suggests they had been invited to participate but had declined.  Maybe they use a different PR agency?  Anyway it would appear that Twitter do not allow access - possibly none of the companies named in the reports do either, it's just less obvious.  What isn't being denied is that this data is being accessed and used for security purposes.  There's a whole host of ethical debate that is about to erupt over this news story and a lot of it is going to become emotive, what with the war on terror and international crime.  The balance between personal privacy and global security is a strangely finely balanced one, it appears. 

For me, well as I said at the top of the post, I'm not concerned about my emails and Facebook posts being read by the likes of the NSA, although it would have been nice to have been asked.  I do  wonder over some of the blog posts - I do seem to stray into some areas that might send an automatic scanner to flag a warning now and then, but in the main, I'm cool about it. 

In fact, if the NSA want to add me as a Friend on Facebook and follow me on Twitter, then I'll readily accept them and follow back in a heartbeat  This blog accepts followers, too, apparently but I haven't a clue about how I do anything for them.  Maybe Google could ask the NSA, who apparently employ some smart cookies. I accept cookies too, so they could pop one or two of them in my PC as well if it helps.  But if they want to read my emails then they'll have to hack my password, just like everyone else, but that shouldn't be too hard, judging by recent attempts.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                          Visit my Book Website here

        Visit Project: Evil Website here                                        Visit DLF Website here

        Follow me on Twitter  - @RayASullivan

        Join me on Facebook -  use raysullivan.novels@yahoo.com to find me

Time To Monetise Your Life?

If you are a regular visitor to this blog you will know that I don't have adverts flashing in the wings.  Of course I do have promotional links to my various websites and, by extension, I'm promoting my books in what I hope is a fairly passive way.  If you wander onto my websites you'll find that they are ad free too.  This is in large part a deliberate choice.

I have looked at the options, mainly through Google who host this blog for free despite me constantly being mean to them over their lack of tax payments.  At least they don't seem to hold a grudge.  To 'monetise', in the awful modern terminology that Google and the rest of the internet world seem to use, my blog and/or webpages would require me to jump through some basic hoops that include abiding to some vague rules about the content.  As far as I can tell I can't use the blog to promote bad language or to promote evil things - shit, B L O'Feld wouldn't like that at all.

But the main reason I've resisted the opportunity to 'monetise' the blog is that I really get irritated by those flashing adverts that spring up on virtually every webpage I visit that tries to convince me I really ought to buy life insurance - I have plenty, thanks - or tries to convince me to hook up with ladies of my age group - I'm not sure the wife would be too happy about that.  Other adverts, clearly targeted, try to get me to visit Disney establishments - now there's one Micky Mouse outfit, and others try to get me to buy everything from a new car to double glazing. 

There's nothing wrong with people selling stuff.  I buy stuff, most days, definitely every week, often the same stuff that I bought last week.  I'm a sucker for semi-skimmed milk and salad, but both seem to last less than a week.  I do buy cars now and then, rarely new ones, but I'm unlikely to buy one after seeing a web page advert for a model.  I had double glazing fitted two years ago by a local firm I found by carrying out basic research that didn't involve the internet (I asked a neighbour).  I'm not anticipating renewing it for some time.

Now it's possible that I get these adverts because I'm a bit tight with my personal data.  I wrote about this a little while ago - What Does Your Data Say About You?  - and following my rationalisation of the data I allow Facebook and Twitter to access I found the adverts that hit my computer were way more generic than before I culled it.

However there is an opposing view on the subject, and not just from Google or Facebook, who obviously should have an opposing view.  It's from a guy who is named Jaron Lanier and although I hadn't heard of him before - he probably follows this blog and my advice - he's quite famous in his own house.  He's listed in no other than the Encyclopaedia Britannica as one of the top 300 greatest inventors of all time.  I'm not sure which edition lists him in that way - I stopped buying the books in the mid 90s when they went over to CD - it looks way less impressive on the bookshelf.  He is the guy who coined the term Virtual Reality and by all accounts designed the world's first immersive avatar.  No, I don't know what that means, either.  An Avatar that can swim?

Whatever, Mr Lanier has written a new book and in it he questions not whether we should be hiding our data but selling it instead.  In his opinion the difference between us and the owners of Google, Amazon and Facebook - apart from several trillion dollars - is that they make money from our freely provided data and we don't.  He makes the point that we should have a value planted on all of our data and every time it is used we should get a royalty payment.  Part of his rationale is that if the data isn't truly free then organisations and governments - yup, he wants them to play this game too - will be more cautious about when they use our data.

He's got a point.  When there is no cost or penalty for using something there is no barrier to doing so.  Why not run that data through thousands of databases, make it work a million times, if there's no cost involved.  But if every time you use the fact that I bought such and such a book on a Sunday afternoon wirelessly cost you a notional amount of money, even if it's just a cent, you'll consider the impact of that activity and only use the data you need to.

We won't get rich on the proceeds - no matter how much we charge for our data - but it may be used more thoughtfully.

I just don't know how this process could be policed and even if it could, what chance have we got of getting the likes of Google and Amazon to pay us our dues when the British government is struggling to get them to pay their taxes? And even if they did pay, would I be able to get my royalties out of the US without paying the US government 30% withholding tax?  In fact, policing the process suddenly seems the easier part of the problem!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                          Visit my Book Website here

        Visit Project: Evil Website here                                        Visit DLF Website here

        Follow me on Twitter  - @RayASullivan

        Join me on Facebook -  use raysullivan.novels@yahoo.com to find me