.png)
Artificial Intelligence and data protection
Research Paper: Privacy and data protection in the age of artificial intelligence
The group I was apart of during the 290COM module researched the topic privacy and data protection in the age of artificial intelligence we particularly delved into the ethical, legal and social issues of accessing private data for investigation (Police and Private Investigators) taking in to account new laws such as GDPR.
Individual contribution
My contribution to the group was in relation to the social and ethical effects and hypothetical scenarios that take place as a result of the police accessing our data; particular case study I focused on was the stingray phone surveillance towers erected around america for the purpose of surveillance and collecting information on the public. This was an important case study as it encompasses the social and ethical effects associated with this subject it also spans in to the area of legal laws.
Issues working in a group
Our group found difficulty in talking about the subject as it was so wide therefore we narrowed it down however we still found it difficult to discuss which could be due to lack of preparation before the meeting as well as this sometimes the conversation was not conducive to the task and would be relevant in other topics of this module. Holding meetings was sometimes an issue even though most of the time we met after our lab sessions and lectures there were times were you wanted to me but it wasn't possible as there were other commitments such as work.
Ethical Implications
The Ethical implications accessing private data for investigation (Police and Private Investigators). The first question most people ask is can the government be trusted with our private data? Will they use it for the purpose that is specified? As well as this will our information be collected with or without our permission. There have been concerns in the public raised about the collection of our personal data without our permission by the government to use for investigations to solve crimes. Some people may say it's not ethical to collect data without the consent of the individual however this may be necessary for police cases as if this information is disclosed it could alter the behavior of the individual in question and therefore and allow them to escape without any punishment.
Not only this but it can also be used to help the defendant and establish justice in a court as was the case with 18 year old Tadrae McKenzie in 2013 where he stole $130 worth of drugs which originally would have gotten him a minimum of 4 years in prison as this is considered robbery however due to the surveillance that was taking place by the police officers they were able to reduce his sentence to minimum 4 months( Louise Matsakis, 2018). This shows that accessing private information without consent can be conducive to upholding Law and Order as well as justice for the defendants and the victims as it priduces more relevant and precise information.
The tool that was used to tap into his phone is called a stingray which is a powerful surveillance tool which gains access in to a phone by mimicking it’s signals. The tool normally tracks the personal information of unsuspecting citizens as a by-product of surveilling the criminal such as the content of their texts and phone calls as well as their location(Bates,2017). Tadrae McKenzie's case is emblematic of the increase use of highly advanced hidden surveillance technology on the public. This tool is under Suspicion as criminal cases are thought to be a guise for targeting many people's private information without their knowledge and consent as not just the criminals phone is tapped but the equipment “is evaluating all the handsets in the area.” ( Nakashima ,2015).
This naturally raises problems such as who is looking at this personal data and where is it stored; Often times people don't know what happens to the information( if they get the chance to find out it was collected) and hope that it is deleted. This is symptomatic of the lack of transparency between the government and the public and is in contradiction to the cultural notion of democracy why the government and the people are working together to create a better country. If what the government is doing is not malicious then why are we not informed of our private and sensitive information being collected?
Social impact
A sense of privacy can play a significant role in the control people feel over their lives. We all have private thoughts and behaviours that we’d prefer private, but mass surveillance makes this much more challenging. A sarcastically typed or angry Facebook update can become ammunition for imprisonment or in-depth surveillance of you leaving people wearing to go out or to have conversations in person or online which would cause people to become more clothes in breaking down there relationships. Being watched is directly linked to people feeling a loss of control.Oftentimes these feelings can lead to depression and anger on a large scale these could cause riots on the streets as there is decreased trust between the people and the government.
Legal legislation
GDPR is tightening the grip on access to private information which, it was enforced on May 25th 2018. Its purpose is to give greater data protection laws as previous laws (the data protection) are not up to date with the fast pace of technology; it was also used to harmonies law across the EU (Albrehet ,2016). In the realm of the GDPR law police in theory will not be able to access private information as the law reinforces a person's right around automatic processing especially if it produces a significant effect on the person. However they are loopholes as it's contingent upon the idea of personal data which is information of a" living person who can be identified directly from the information in question"(ICO,2014).
Date of birth and gender are not considered personal information however this can be used to build a profile of an individual using big data Analytics, meaning that police can still have access to sensitive information without our permission through data brokers. Even though this road of police access to a private information has not been closed others have, big social media companies such as Facebook were hacked which lead to the access of 50 million tokens taken by unknown people and due to the law we were notified by this within 72 hours of it happening. In summary, the implications accessing private data for investigation (Police and Private Investigators) will surface a myriad of ethical issues, invariably altering public perception on the government creating tension between the two groups and could have a knock on effect on the physical and mental health of the public as people feel they are losing their privacy and freedom even with the new laws put in place.
Although it can help us solve criminal cases and possibly ate the safety of society it seems unlikely that this will be it's primary use, in reality this technology will be used to intrude into the lives of the people as we have seen with other surveillance technologies such a street cameras used to catch criminals but have a 98% chance of failure in achieving its purpose(Wired, 2018). Appendix.
Appendix
1st meeting:
18/10/2018 I think devices like Alexa are beneficial as the police can use it for data retrieval to go through information that could lead to data which would increase the pace of the case allowing for affected families to have closure quicker and allows the police to implement prevention strategies quicker. However the team also thinks these devices accumulate bundles of information whilst waiting for a command, which is filled with sensitive data such as political and religious views leading to a lack of privacy which raises question on how much control the public have over their lives.
2nd meeting notes:
25/10/2018 We discussed access to information without a person's consent and agreed that there are many variables to take into account. The team said legal dilemmas could occur as it clashes with the GDPR this law increases a person's rights around automated processing of data. If a decision has an effect on somebody then they have the right to know however I said there are some exceptions such as it being the only lead in a case then it should be taken.but generally people must be provided with an explanation of a decision made about them.
3rd Meeting
13/11/2018 Our group's opinion is that the social effect of accessing private data will ultimately be bad. We see this is a defiant push towards a society that's a big prison, people feel anxious about how they act as it could be used to put them in prison. Nationwide anxiety would build up and lead to riots. However I think this can make some people feel safe as it's a means of preventing crime as suspicious activity is monitored so crimes are prevented before producing less victims and thereby making the society more safe.
4th Meeting 15/11/2018
Some group members said the GDPR doesn't apply outside of the EU making those outside vulnerable to companies using the data however I added that even though a lot of companies are not based in the EU they will have to comply with GDPR laws as they are in contact with data from the EU. Companies such as Amazon therefore can’t pass on our data without our permission unless it is specified in the agreement this could in turn include police departments and affect the operations in the their investigation making the new GDPR law a barrier for police officers.
5th meeting 16/11/2018
I said Data brokers use as loop holes to retrieve information on an individual without breaking GDPR laws. Companies need the permission of the individual to pass on their personal data but this does not mean that users will not have the information spread as data on date of birth and gender are not considered personal information, this can be used build up a profile of an individual using big data Analytics to deduce discrete. We concluded that this method is lawful but not ethical as personal information is still being retrieved on a without consent.
6th Meeting: 22/11/2018
The group said the ethical issues are linked to where the boundaries are for the police. There have been reports of devices called stingrays being used which force telephones to give information and this is used for investigating potential criminals however we see the issue being that bundles of data from people who are not connected to the criminal are also collected and have to be sifted through without consent. I added that there's a trade-off between a potential criminal endangering society and people's private information being accessed and we concluded that the former is more important in excruciating circumstances.
7th Meeting 30/11/2018
The group discussed Alexa's case again and reviewed some of the GDPR’s laws. I said these laws can help us as it blocks us some avenues of our private information to be accessed however there needs to be more laws in relation to you private data and increasing the scope of the definition. the group also said that the law is helpful as Police don't have complete access to our private information we still have to be contacted in relation to that which affects us.
8th Meeting 06/12/2018
In the last meeting we went over any rough patches we had in the topic the group discussed the topic of information brokers and how they can use loopholes in order to access private information legally and send it off without coming into Direct opposition with the GDPR law cases to this effect were found in India were private investigators were used to dig out information on potential spouses. I also gave other cases of this such as the case of MADHUMITA VENKATARAMANAN Where simple information was collected to make a detailed profile of who she is.
List of References
Matsakis, L. (2018) [online] , available from [1 September 2018]
Nakashima, E (2015) Secrecy around police surveillance equipment proves a case’s undoing page 4 [online] , available from [22 February 2015]
Bates, A. (2017) Stingray: A New Frontier in Police Surveillance page 1 in Cato Institute Policy Analysis No. 809 [online] . Available rom [18 February 2017]
Albrechet , J P. (2016) How the GDPR Will Change the World Page 287 [online], available from [4 March 2016]
ICO (2014) What is personal data? – A quick reference guide page 3 [online] available from [15 August 2015]
Wired, (2018) Wednesday briefing: London's automated facial recognition system has never identified a criminal [online] , available from [16 May 2018]
