Drowning Big Brother
1984 was a dud of a year for Big Brother scares, at least as envisioned in the George Orwell novel, 1984. We did not see every home get one of those sneaky two-way TVs that could be used to spy on its viewers. Instead, what we have seen is the proliferation of video cameras in public places such as banks, convenience stores, parking lots, even restaurants. I do find this phenomenon pernicious — mainly in how it shapes our attitudes about surveillance — but not an immediate threat. That is, I assume (not naively, I hope) all this video data isn’t being stored by some secret government agency.
2001 was supposed to be another landmark year for Big Scares, this time at the hands of computers. In the film 2001: A Space Odyssey, the soft-spoken HAL/9000 conversed amiably with his human companions about science and philosophy, all the while plotting to lock them out in the deep cold of space. Again, fiction has jumped the gun on reality, in terms of both space and computer technology.
The common bad guy in all these doomsday tales is a centralized authority run by human and/or artificial intelligence that exerts control via pervasive surveillance. We are not there yet, thank God. The notion of such a wickedly capable computer intelligence is laughable when you consider we can’t even get a Javascript program to run on two different browsers. And the futurist writers consistently ignored a problem with such intensive surveillance: the sheer volume of data generated would likely be unmanageable.
Still, I am not advocating complacency about Big Brother, who seems intent on getting here, if by banana boat. The latest worrisome trend is an annoying practice being adopted by businesses and dotcoms: they "harvest" or "mine" data from their customers — which I guess makes us the equivalent of ears of corn or piles of dirt, take your pick. The businesses then use this data either as an aid in making marketing decisions, or to sell directly for profit. For instance, my local grocery chain issues free “membership” cards to customers, offering discounts in exchange for the ability to track their purchases. In theory, the chain more than makes up for the lost revenue by exploiting the data collected. (I have my doubts, but that is another matter.)
All this and now comes a news report that severe power shortages are expected on the west coast, partly because major megawatts are being sucked down by “data centers” located in Seattle and Silicon Valley. I am not sure what a “data center” is, but I can envision thousands of spinning hard drives out there on the San Andreas, squirreling away little factoids as fast as you and I can generate them. Which is to say, I suspect that 90 percent of the data being stored is just crap. And I find that strangely comforting.
When I first set out to write this editorial, I had in mind a sanctimonious tirade against the invasion of our privacy. Now I am not sure that’s the right approach. Maybe instead of carefully guarding our most trivial secrets, we should actively encourage businesses to gather our junk data: sign up for those special discount cards; make random, inexplicable purchases; fill out every survey that comes your way, and if you happen to screw up the facts, well hey, you know, life is short.
If we can’t stop the surveillance and data gathering, let’s beat Big Bro’ at his own game. Let’s drown the old boy in data. Maybe his servers will get so clogged with meaningless junk that he won’t have time to bother anyone. I guess we can always hope.
Marc Briand
Editor-in-Chief