Always On technologies, the use of wireless networks as an application platform linking sensors and data between you, your stuff and the Internet, can have powerful, positive impacts on our lives.
But it can also have negative implications. Always On can be misused to create a surveillance state, in which you are constantly a criminal suspect, where Big Brother is always watching, where freedom is just another word and control — from business and government — becomes absolute.
Unfortunately, that is the way it’s being used today. AT&T, a company no one should trust with anything, let alone their security, is now selling businesses "remote monitoring" systems, from $350, which let businesses put customers and employees under constant surveillance.
While it’s cool to do security monitoring using wireless networks, that’s just one application space.
There are many others where the benefits are clear, where the privacy
implications don’t exist, and where there isn’t enough being done:
- Always On chips can monitor your heart, your blood, or whatever else needs monitoring and alert doctors before a fatal attack.
- Always On RFID chips can help you find your keys or wallet when you lose track of them.
- Always On RFID chips and sensors can tell you what is in the refrigerator and what is going bad.
- Always On systems can help people with Alzheimer’s and other
dementia problems stay in their homes longer, where they can live
instead of just wait to die.
These application spaces are not being developed because of the
obsession with security, which is perceived as having fewer legal or
regulatory hurdles. The negative perception of this technology which
will result could kill other Always On application spaces in their
tracks. What we’re doing here is privatizing the war of terror, making everyone a suspect, raising our own levels of fear and suspicion against one another.
I’ll say it again. Break up AT&T.
Don’t you think there are privacy implications for pretty much every aspect of Always On? RFID could help me find me lost wallet, but it could also help someone else, who is not inclined to return it, find it before me. While it would be nice to have one’s health remotely monitored, there are many people who would like to keep their medical state confidential from everyone but their doctor and as such that link and database better be secure. Many, myself included, are willing to trade privacy/anonymity for utility, but enough aren’t that it is very hard to make a business case for mass-market Always On until privacy issues are fully addressed.
Don’t you think there are privacy implications for pretty much every aspect of Always On? RFID could help me find me lost wallet, but it could also help someone else, who is not inclined to return it, find it before me. While it would be nice to have one’s health remotely monitored, there are many people who would like to keep their medical state confidential from everyone but their doctor and as such that link and database better be secure. Many, myself included, are willing to trade privacy/anonymity for utility, but enough aren’t that it is very hard to make a business case for mass-market Always On until privacy issues are fully addressed.