5 ms·

To respond to the last sentence : Yes, things like that can be illegal. As an example, in France it is forbidden to count the number of people who get in & out

To respond to the last sentence : Yes, things like that can be illegal. As an example, in France it is forbidden to count the number of people who get in & out of a subway at a given station. I guess it's really a strong difference of culture between Europe and America : laws are made in Europe to make sure that people should not have to make the effort of guessing if a company will mess with their data or not. The company has to make that effort.

pyre 15y ago
> As an example, in France it is forbidden to count the > number of people who get in & out of a subway at a given > station. That seems lame. That number is highly anonymous. How does a statement like "between 8am and 9am 250 people boarded the subway, and 130 people exited the subway" affect a person's privacy?
- anigbrowl 15y ago
  In July 2009, civil society groups opposed the implementation of intelligent advertising LCD screens in a Parisian subway station.[163] These screens not only broadcast messages but can also count the number of people passing by and measure the time spent looking at the screen thanks to a face scanning sensor. Since these actions, the French data protection Authority, the CNIL, has issued a report considering that this technology must take into consideration the data protection rights of individuals as provided under the Data Protection Law: individuals must receive proper notice and the devices must be notified to the CNIL. https://www.privacyinternational.org/article/france-privacy-profile#_ftn163 https://www.privacyinternational.org/article/france-privacy-... European law tends to work on the assumption that it's up to the owner of a technology to show how it will safeguard against the abuse of it. Failure to do so in the past has had disastrous consequences in some parts of Europe.
  - 0x12 15y ago
    And that was before large scale facerecognition software that could be employed to determine not only how many people are walking by the device but also who. Now doing this in real time with a large crowd is still not technically feasible but at some point we will probably cross that line. Good to know there is at least one country where you'll be safe from that.
    - randallsquared 15y ago
      Good to know there is at least one country where you'll be safe from that. Well, until it gets so cheap that there's no way to know whose glasses or contacts are recording and compiling information about you as part of their lifelog. This sort of thing is like the tide coming in: legislation against it can only ultimately be effective by severe restrictions on allowed technologies for the people of the country.
      - 0x12 15y ago
        Hm. This comment reads like something straight out of an SF novel and yet I can't shake the feeling that it is just around the corner. Interesting times indeed. Thank you for opening my eyes a bit further. Gargoyles seemed like a fun thing when Neal Stephenson wrote about it and Steve Mann (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Mann http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Mann) was experimenting in that direction. I never expected it to possibly hit the mainstream this quickly though, and especially not with some of the possibilities that you are hinting at.
      - dredmorbius 15y ago
        Well, until it gets so cheap there's no way to know whose glasses or jacket contains a gun capable of shooting you dead on the street. This sort of thing is like the tide coming in: legislation against it can only ultimately be effective by severe restriction on allowed technologies for the people of the country. Substitute whatever anti-social mechanism you prefer. The drone wars are coming: pilotless aircraft, possibly autonomous, from the size of a small car to the size of a gnat, with intel or lethal payloads. Bioweapons or nukes. We've had suitcase nukes for a few decades, fortunately they haven't been used. Suitcase-sized conventional explosives are rather frequently deployed in some parts. Weaponized chemicals or biological agents are another option. It's trivially possible to adulter drugs or drinks. Some of the oldest laws on the books deal with food and alcohol purity. Having the technical capability to do something doesn't mean it must needs be accepted. Legal sanctions may be swimming upstream at times, but other norms (social, cultural, religions. technological) generally help keep us from tearing one another to pieces, most of the time.
- sixtofour 15y ago
  If it's lame, then someone who wants to count must instead throw up his hands in exasperation as they obey the law and don't count. Until a few years ago it was illegal to sell liquor on Sunday in Colorado. That was lame, but I never saw a liquor store open on Sunday. If any did, they'd probably get fairly good public support and letters to the editor in favor, but they would still lose their liquor license.
  - pyre 15y ago
    I was criticizing the law (or at least an example of how a law is being applied) that you used as an example, because it seems to be that it goes far beyond just protecting personal privacy. You seem to be stating in response that the law must be followed while it is in place. I'm unsure what your driving point is as I wasn't even advocating civil disobedience of said law.
    - sixtofour 15y ago
      I'm referring back to Facebook, who would probably like to not follow the privacy laws if they aren't convenient.
- mnutt 15y ago
  In NYC, the MTA has opened up an API to their turnstile data: http://www.mta.info/developers/turnstile.html http://www.mta.info/developers/turnstile.html They even put ads for their data API in the subway.

pyre 15y ago

> As an example, in France it is forbidden to count the > number of people who get in & out of a subway at a given > station. That seems lame. That number is highly anonymous. How does a statement like "between 8am and 9am 250 people boarded the subway, and 130 people exited the subway" affect a person's privacy?

anigbrowl 15y ago
In July 2009, civil society groups opposed the implementation of intelligent advertising LCD screens in a Parisian subway station.[163] These screens not only broadcast messages but can also count the number of people passing by and measure the time spent looking at the screen thanks to a face scanning sensor. Since these actions, the French data protection Authority, the CNIL, has issued a report considering that this technology must take into consideration the data protection rights of individuals as provided under the Data Protection Law: individuals must receive proper notice and the devices must be notified to the CNIL. https://www.privacyinternational.org/article/france-privacy-profile#_ftn163 https://www.privacyinternational.org/article/france-privacy-... European law tends to work on the assumption that it's up to the owner of a technology to show how it will safeguard against the abuse of it. Failure to do so in the past has had disastrous consequences in some parts of Europe.
- 0x12 15y ago
  And that was before large scale facerecognition software that could be employed to determine not only how many people are walking by the device but also who. Now doing this in real time with a large crowd is still not technically feasible but at some point we will probably cross that line. Good to know there is at least one country where you'll be safe from that.
  - randallsquared 15y ago
    Good to know there is at least one country where you'll be safe from that. Well, until it gets so cheap that there's no way to know whose glasses or contacts are recording and compiling information about you as part of their lifelog. This sort of thing is like the tide coming in: legislation against it can only ultimately be effective by severe restrictions on allowed technologies for the people of the country.
    - 0x12 15y ago
      Hm. This comment reads like something straight out of an SF novel and yet I can't shake the feeling that it is just around the corner. Interesting times indeed. Thank you for opening my eyes a bit further. Gargoyles seemed like a fun thing when Neal Stephenson wrote about it and Steve Mann (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Mann http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Mann) was experimenting in that direction. I never expected it to possibly hit the mainstream this quickly though, and especially not with some of the possibilities that you are hinting at.
    - dredmorbius 15y ago
      Well, until it gets so cheap there's no way to know whose glasses or jacket contains a gun capable of shooting you dead on the street. This sort of thing is like the tide coming in: legislation against it can only ultimately be effective by severe restriction on allowed technologies for the people of the country. Substitute whatever anti-social mechanism you prefer. The drone wars are coming: pilotless aircraft, possibly autonomous, from the size of a small car to the size of a gnat, with intel or lethal payloads. Bioweapons or nukes. We've had suitcase nukes for a few decades, fortunately they haven't been used. Suitcase-sized conventional explosives are rather frequently deployed in some parts. Weaponized chemicals or biological agents are another option. It's trivially possible to adulter drugs or drinks. Some of the oldest laws on the books deal with food and alcohol purity. Having the technical capability to do something doesn't mean it must needs be accepted. Legal sanctions may be swimming upstream at times, but other norms (social, cultural, religions. technological) generally help keep us from tearing one another to pieces, most of the time.
sixtofour 15y ago
If it's lame, then someone who wants to count must instead throw up his hands in exasperation as they obey the law and don't count. Until a few years ago it was illegal to sell liquor on Sunday in Colorado. That was lame, but I never saw a liquor store open on Sunday. If any did, they'd probably get fairly good public support and letters to the editor in favor, but they would still lose their liquor license.
- pyre 15y ago
  I was criticizing the law (or at least an example of how a law is being applied) that you used as an example, because it seems to be that it goes far beyond just protecting personal privacy. You seem to be stating in response that the law must be followed while it is in place. I'm unsure what your driving point is as I wasn't even advocating civil disobedience of said law.
  - sixtofour 15y ago
    I'm referring back to Facebook, who would probably like to not follow the privacy laws if they aren't convenient.
mnutt 15y ago
In NYC, the MTA has opened up an API to their turnstile data: http://www.mta.info/developers/turnstile.html http://www.mta.info/developers/turnstile.html They even put ads for their data API in the subway.