Showing posts with label ad networks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ad networks. Show all posts

Monday, February 18, 2019

Zucked: Waking Up to the Facebook Catastrophe


Zucked: Waking Up to the Facebook Catastrophe

by Roger McNamee 



Well, this is awkward.

Roger McNamee, the author, was a mentor to Mark Zuckerberg, invested very early in Facebook, and introduced Zuck to Sheryl Sandberg. But when after the 2016 election he informed them he thought Facebook had become a danger to democracy, they didn't seem to want to talk about it.

McNamee is a smart guy, and figured out earlier than most that Facebook's unintended consequences were harming public health and enabling any number of bad actors to influence elections (Trump, Brexit) and oppress minorities (Myanmar, Sri Lanka). Facebook can be and in fact is incredibly harmful to children--for commercial gain. This is the sharp edge of what Shoshana Zuboff calls Surveillance Capitalism.


If there's a sliver lining at all, it's that McNamee and a small team of experts has been busy educating people of the hazard and what can be done. His briefs included the US Senate Intelligence Committee, the House Intelligence Committee, Nancy Pelosi's staff, experts in academia, the EU, and elsewhere. But make no mistake: Facebook (and Google, and the rest of Big Tech) won't give up money and power without a fight. And they have all of our data.

Surveillance Capitalism

The Age of Surveillance Capitalism

By Shoshana Zuboff





-->
You should read this book.

What’s your view as to the most pressing issue facing humankind today? Climate change? Nuclear war? Viral pandemic? Mine is surveillance capitalism.

Whoa, but aren’t the other issues of an existential nature, capable of wiping out the human race? Yes, but… in each case there are experts and activists working hard to make sure that doesn’t happen.

The problem with surveillance capitalism is that very few people outside of Google, Facebook, and other Big Tech even know what it is, and they aren’t working to stop it. Far from it.

You should read this book.

Shoshana Zuboff is a social psychologist who studies and writes about the impact of technology on people. I read her 1988 book, In The Age of the Smart Machine, where, over 30 years ago, she investigated the early impact of smart machines on people’s lives. But that was before Google, and Facebook, and surveillance capitalism.

Zuboff is a professor at Harvard Business School. She has spent her career researching how the information age has morphed into something not so positive: surveillance capitalism. What does that term even mean? Here are her many definitions, with which she begins the book:

Surveillance Capitalism, n:
1. A new economic order that claims human experience as free raw material for hidden commercial practices of extraction, prediction, and sales; 2. A parasitic economic logic in which the production of goods and services is subordinated to a new global architecture of behavioral modification; 3. A rogue mutation of capitalism marked by concentrations of wealth, knowledge, and power unprecedented in human history; 4. The foundational framework of a surveillance economy; 5. As significant a threat to human nature in the twenty-first century as industrial capitalism was to the natural world in the nineteenth and twentieth; 6. The origin of a new instrumentarian power that asserts dominance over society and presents startling challenges to market democracy; 7. A movement that aims to impose a new collective order based on total certainty; 8. An expropriation of critical human rights that is best understood as a coup from above: an overthrow of the people’s sovereignty.

I came across surveillance capitalism in my final job, working in cybersecurity and learning about the dark side of mobile phones with their persistent surveillance and egregious invasions of privacy. I have therefore been aware of how our corporate masters cynically capture many aspects of our lived experience so they can deliver “better” ads. The overall goal, as with all advertising, is to sell us more stuff. For this, our privacy is stealthily violated. This I already knew.

But I now know that I was only seeing the tip of the iceberg. Zuboff outlines how Google, Facebook and Big Tech can now take a “God’s eye view” of the data resulting from our lived experience--our location, calls, texts, emails, digital assistants, web surfing, online purchases, offline purchases, connections, friends, social media posts, likes, follows, and many other factors--and can appropriate that as their proprietary data and inferences which can be sold to advertisers, yes, but also to other entities including insurance companies, financial service companies, educational institutions, law enforcement, city, state and federal governments, and any other entity willing to pay.

We know that websites track us. We know our phone also tracks us, to the degree we should call is surveillance. But as the so-called Internet of Things (IoT) relentlessly comes into pervasive reality, we can (and are) being tracked by smart speakers, TVs, appliances, cars, toys, thermostats, smart vacuums, security systems, and soon--clothing and other wearables. Zuboff refers to the sum of surveillance devices as Big Other (sounds like Big Brother--get it?). And here’s a key point: It’s not big brother. It’s not the government. Out 4th amendment rights don’t protect us. This pervasive surveillance infrastructure--the Big Other--is controlled by our corporate masters. Companies such as Google and Facebook gather bazillion data points daily, and, using millions of servers deployed around the world, unseen but powerful, and deduce characteristics about us that we can’t know, can’t appeal, and which control our lives. Want a job? The algorithm that used to just scan resumes now adds everything it knows about you--right or wrong--to determine who gets the job. And who gets the loan. And who qualifies for the house. And what the length of your sentence is.

As time goes on, surveillance capitalism shifts from a system that can deliver you relevant ads, to one that controls your life. Without transparency or accountability.

I won't go too far in describing what these technologies can do to children, because it makes me too upset. Suffice it to say, something called "persuasive technology" has been weaponized by Facebook and others to manipulate children's emotions for commercial gain.

Zuboff is not a technologist, but she puts tech in perspective. She compares surveillance capitalism to the industrial revolution, totalitarianism, the cultural trend towards individualism, and how behavior modification became accepted (which also caused me to drop out of college as a psych major, coincident with B.F. Skinner’s publishing Beyond Freedom and Dignity). Zuboff cites philosophers, social scientists, economists, psychologists, and of course tech industry leaders. In this book she provides a 360-degree perspective on the many factors that influence this movement. And she sounds a warning.

Naomi Klein says “everyone needs to read this book as an act of digital self defense.” Robert Reich says “Her sweeping analysis demonstrates the unprecedented challenges to human autonomy, social solidarity, and democracy perpetrated by this rogue capitalism.”

Rogue capitalism. You don’t have to be a techie to understand it, but you have to pay attention.

You should read this book.

Wednesday, October 18, 2017

ADINT: Do It Yourself Surveillance


"If it's free you're the product." Most of us have heard this meme often enough, and have a vague understanding that it relates to online ads. But when most of us think about online ads, we think about the occasional annoyance of having to scroll past or otherwise ignore an ad—doing so is assumed to be the price of free online services, and it seems a small price to pay.

If only it were so simple.

Researchers at the University of Washington published a paper at the ACM Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society entitled "Exploring ADINT: Using Ad Targeting for Surveillance on a Budget." The subtitle is "How Alice Can Buy Ads to Track Bob." Yes, it's as bad as it sounds. The authors point out that for as little as $1,000, someone can use targeted ads to track the location of specified individuals. The mobile advertising infrastructure allows any attacker with modest means to to "know where the target goes, where they live, and other sensitive information such as what apps they use". Knowledge of what apps are being used can be considered sensitive for a variety of reasons, including mental health conditions, diabetes trackers, dating apps (which can indicate relationship or sexual preferences), political affiliation apps, and religious and church apps.

As I've pointed out before, most people think it's a reasonable trade-off to allow ads to be shown in order to get apps and services for free. But in order to deliver those ads, the ad networks need to learn as much as possible about all of us, so that advertisers know whether it's worth paying to target an ad to any of us (and when and where it should do so). Advertisers have enabled what we can refer to as a stalker economy. If you think it sounds creepy, you're right. And it's also ubiquitous, part of the background noise of being a mobile-phone using netizen. 

This is how Alice can buy ads to track Bob. But what is meant by "ADINT"? The authors invented this term, and I think it's a good one. Whereas the intelligence community refers to human intelligence as "HUMINT" and signals (electronic) intelligence as "SIGINT", the corresponding term for advertising intelligence has been coined by the paper's researchers as "ADINT."

Most of the focus on mobile security has been around malware and network attacks that deliver malware. But malware is rare, whereas the stalker economy, or ADINT, can affect us all. In my previous post, I noted that mobile devices send considerable amounts of data into the cloud, which is to say the data is now in the wild—outside of our ability to track and control it. ADINT represents another threat vector regarding the digital exhaust of our mobile devices. This should worry us.