User:Miama979/Lifelogging and Privacy

In Reza Rawassizadeh’s article “Towards sharing life-log information with society,” the author claims that, “Fried (1968) defines privacy as ‘control over knowledge about oneself’, according to his definition privacy is one of the base factors in establishing new social contacts.” That shows how important privacy is because people built up social network based on that. When people are getting to know each other, personal information is being shared, and lifelogging give people a new option of how they want to remember and share the details in their life. Additionally, since we live in a digital world, there are a lot of social media where allow people to share things that happen in their daily life.

After lifelogging came out, privacy became one of its problems. Although people do care about privacy, sometimes personal information is given out by ourselves unconsciously. In fact, using Facebook, Twitter and posting status is seen as a form of lifelogging. However, in the article “Re-identification of Smart Meter,” Buchmann, Erik, Klemens Bohm, Thorben Burghardt, et al address that because there are a lot of social media like Facebook and Twitter which allow people to post personal information freely, some people think that the privacy problems of lifelogging are over magnified. However, people have different understanding of what kind of information is privacy, so there is not a certain line between of privacy and non-privacy. Nevertheless, according to Petroulakis, Nikolaos, Elias Tragos, Alexandors Fragkiadakis, “Life-logging creates the possibility of disclosing things about someone’s life that should not be revealed.” When lifeloggers are logging, there will be somebody else in their pictures, and when they upload the data online, they somehow spill others’ privacy because it could show what a person did at a specific time and location. Life-log information does not only disclose other’s information, it is also a threat of leaking out the owner’s information. Therefore, one thing that people should keep in mind is lifelogging could take down everything that happened in the daily life including inappropriate things that people did, and it is possible that one day those information is stolen by somebody.

Nowadays people could access to online information easily, so lifeloggers should be aware of how to keep others’ and own privacy private. Rawassizadeh states that if someone posts something inappropriate online, it could be a record of his or her mistakes that fellows him or her forever. In other words, people should know what kind of things is ok to be posted and what is not because the information that people posted may impact the future education and jobs. Rawassizadeh also claims that, “For instance a recruitment company can check a candidate’s psychological and physical health and his lifestyle during the recruitment process, in order to find out whether the candidate is suitable for a job or not.” Therefore, personal information plays a big role on people’s future life, and lifelogging could contain a lot of private personal information. It could also have a record of the good things and bad things that a person did. In addition, people have different opinion of what inappropriate things are, so once something is posted; there is no control of who and how people look at it. Therefore, there are a lot of things that people have to deal with in terms of lifelogging, in order to make personal information more secure.

Even though people have already done a lot to protect online personal information, lifelogging gave people another chance to break that protection. O’ Hara, Kieron, Tuffield Mischa, and Nigel Shadbolt write that, “The practice of lifelogging could decrease those reasonable expectations of privacy, and therefore undermine privacy protection.” Not only employers and schools could access to individual information, governments have power to make data that has already excited available to them. Moreover, lifelogging provides a big platform for government and those who are interested in others’ information to access to it. O’ Hara, Mischa and Shadbolt also said that, “governments are likely to want to appropriate whatever information exists—they are not noted for restraint in this area—but there may be an argument to say that lifelogging technology in itself is neutral.” Even though the technology itself is neutral, it is hard to keep people who look at life-log information neutral.

Therefore, keep lifelogging staying in control will be the thing that people care about of lifelogging. From the article “I Don’t Mind Being Logged, but Want to Remain in Control: A Field Study of Mobile Activity and Context Logging,” Kärkkäinen, Tuula, Tuomas Vaittinen, and Kaisa Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila mention that, “A related issue is the amount of control required to make the users willing to use the logging.” Therefore, lifeloggers have to consider about what and when they should capture, what information they could post online, especially when it is related to something sensitive. Then that leads to the sensitivity of information, some information is more sensitive than others, for example, “a movie’s rank or a book’s rank” is less sensitive than the “life-log data which contains information about the private life of the user.” Petroulakis, Nikolaos, Elias Tragos, Alexandors Fragkiadakis, et al say in the article “A lightweight framework for secure life-logging in smart environments” that, “The disclosure of sensitive information about the location, track and identity of a user may cause significant problems for him and his interconnected network and users.” That means sensitive information doesn’t only do harms to a lifelogger, but also to people who are around. Therefore, lifeloggers should be wise to when to capture and what to post. Additionally, lifelogging could be a way for people to remember the details in their life if there is enough control. Therefore, Lifeloggers are responsible for controlling those photos that they took, then they have a lot of work to do of managing and deleting photos because a lifelogging device may take thousands of pictures a day. According to Hoyle, Roberto, Robert Templeman, Steven Armes, et al, to make lifeloggers have less stress of managing photo. He or she should “control the collection of images consciously” rather than looking up and delete a photo form a database. This conscious behavior makes others’ and personal sensitive information more secure, and also make lifeloggers concentrate more on what to take not what to delete.

Reference:

Buchmann, Erik, Klemens Bohm, Thorben Burghardt, et al. “Re-identification of Smart Meter data.” Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 17 (2013): 653-662. Web.

Hoyle, Roberto, Robert Templeman, Steven Armes, et al. “Privacy Behaviors of Lifeloggers using Wearable Cameras.” In UbiComp (2014).

Kärkkäinen, Tuula, Tuomas Vaittinen, and Kaisa Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila. “I Don’t Mind Being Logged, but Want to Remain in Control: A Field Study of Mobile Activity and Context Logging.” In Proc. of the 28th Intl. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM (Atlanta, GA, USA, 2010), 163–172. Web.

O’ Hara, Kieron, Tuffield Mischa, and Shadbolt, Nigel. “Lifelogging: Privacy and empowerment with memories for life.” Identity in the Information Society 1 (2008): 155-172. Web.

Petroulakis, Nikolaos, Elias Tragos, Alexandors Fragkiadakis, et al. “A lightweight framework for secure life-logging in smart environments.” Information Security Technical Report 33 (2010): 801-812. Web. 2 Sep. 2013. 23 Apr. 2015.

Rawassizadeh, Reza. “Towards sharing life-log information with society.” Behaviour & Information Technology 31 (2012): 1057-1067. Web.