Paradox of large data: Why is privacy and monetization both?

Absrtact: For individuals, a more realistic question is how to reasonably monetization their personal data assets. This was also mentioned by Professor Puntland in his speech. He pointed out that the establishment of a mechanism to encourage people to share and contribute to data, both for themselves, but also for others and the community as a whole benefit.

The joy of life is uncertainty. If large data as a technology, in the future ruling people's work and life, then each of us will be naked even the skin may be lost!

We will enter a world of certainty and predictability. This is the most direct idea that I took part in the science and technology dialogue activities of Baidu Big talk, the third big data opening of the future, yesterday. Professor Puntland from the United States is the soul of this dialogue, not just because he himself is the head of MIT Media Labs, a first-rate scholar in the Big data field, and his students are among the most famous, including the inventor of Google glasses.

Before going, I did a little homework. Because I have always been skeptical and cautious about the claims of big data technology. Because I think the excessive technology immersed in human life and work, not entirely positive. In particular, wearable products are becoming more and more transparent as human beings think and do. So many businessmen are cheering, the traditional theory of consumer behavior can finally die, in their view, as consumers we are no longer a black box.

"Personal data assets cannot be handed over to commercial companies"

Therefore, I am more concerned about Professor Puntland's speech on privacy. Because in a digital society dominated by big data, I don't see how happy it would be to be a digitally transparent customer.

One of the points mentioned by Professor Puntland in his speech, which I think is worthy of the whole community, is that we should not give personal data to a for-profit business company. In Professor Puntland's view, he believes that, as individuals, there should be four powers in the age of large data:

1 the right to be informed: be able to clearly know when, where, and how the data will be collected

2 Informed Consent right: the individual clearly know how the data will be used, and must pass my consent

3) Audit: Here mainly refers to the government legal body responsible for the audit

4 the right to revoke: individuals can destroy their personal data assets at any time.

In layman's parlance, what Prof Puntland calls "new data Resolution" Three principles: you have the right to have your data, you have the right to use the data, you have the right to destroy or contribute your data.

So in his solution, he proposed a concept of a trusted network, using the SWIFT (Global Bank Telecommunications Association) Inter-bank communication and real-time clearing system for global interbank construction. He also proposed an "open personal data store" model in which it is the only place where personal data is stored, and the final answer, rather than the data itself, is given when faced with an external access request.

Of course, running and managing such a personal data store is not a simple and easy thing to do, especially if it is not possible to unify around the world. This involves both governments ' management and service of their own citizens, as well as the huge commercial interests of global corporate giants. So the author has reservations about whether this open personal data store, which is taught in Puntland, can really address personal data privacy.

The ideal of a professor is that a personal data asset cannot be handed over to a commercial company.

How to reasonably monetization your personal data assets

But the grim reality is that, in addition to commercial companies on our personal data assets have a strong interest, it is difficult to find a jump out of the five elements outside the Buddhist people and institutions, to hold a continuing interest and motivation. (Government agencies, of course, have a strong interest, but that's another story)

So the more realistic question for the individual is how to make a reasonable monetization of your personal data assets. This was also mentioned by Professor Puntland in his speech. He pointed out that the establishment of a mechanism to encourage people to share and contribute to data, both for themselves, but also for others and the community as a whole benefit.

I agree with you. For example, if every driver is willing to share the speed, position, braking and acceleration of his vehicle in real time, the whole city's road network has been monitored and operated dynamically, which may be beneficial to improve the efficiency of all drivers.

But the important question is that there should be enough economic incentives to motivate individuals to share their data on the premise that trust is safe and secure. Clearly, it is the most direct business model for organizations or organizations willing to invest directly in individuals, but in real life, third-party pay patterns are more prevalent.

The new problem, however, is that if people know that their data can bring benefits to themselves, it may affect their conscious deviation from the normal pattern of behavior, thus causing new problems in the authenticity of the data. This, in fact, in the current internet world, Third-party paid business model, cases abound, false prosperity of the data from the benefits.

However, there is an incentive mechanism, obviously overall performance is higher than the mechanism of no incentive, which I think is a big data age, if to obtain complete and real data, must be considered.

At present, the emergence of large data is mainly to improve productivity, improve the effectiveness of marketing, improve our traffic, environment, health, the situation of the city. But with the development of biotechnology, information and communication technology, the Internet of things, the integration of the network development, our world may inevitably enter a "full data" of the world--in such a world, anything that cannot be data, will be the same as does not exist.

In such a world, will be ruled by large data world, each person is a string of binary code, transparent and simple, everything is OK, are predictable, are step-by-step, do you like? Anyway, I do not like, no uncertainty of life can have how much meaning?

(Responsible editor: Lvguang)