Staying alert to avoid losing identity

We are all interconnected to varying degrees, constantly exchanging information when using goods and services or browsing the web with all due respect to privacy protections.

In the late 19th century, lawyer Samuel Warren wrote an essay called "Privacy Law" after becoming tired of reading about his wife's social activities and his daughter's love affairs in the local newspaper. This essay laid the foundations for the legal recognition and protection of privacy. Little did he know how much the issue would evolve with the advancement of mass communication technologies and the emergence of modern databases.

The vast quantity of news and information constantly being collected and disseminated has turned us into digital beings. We are not just physical bodies but also data entities. This digital identity needs to be protected.

Living in a society where people find themselves at the centre of a continuous flow of information has altered the relationship that individuals have with their private sphere. Choosing not to engage with this information can result in exclusion from social processes and restrict access to knowledge and services.

A semantic shift follows: privacy no longer means only the 19th century right to be left alone - the protection of intimacy - but also, as we shall see, more complex situations. A change in language that reveals a profound change, a different cultural and political paradigm: we have indeed entered a new era, that of information and the Internet.

Outgoing data, incoming data

Two related but distinct realities. The former has centuries of history behind it and rather strict limitations that have been set over time, provided that they are handled properly. The latter is still recent, although by now, almost all Western countries have equipped themselves with regulations to defend us from the pervasive spread of information and communication technologies.

In this sense, the European Union is acting as a pioneer. Its Charter of Fundamental Rights distinguishes between the traditional right "Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life" (Art. 7) and the right "Everyone has the right to the protection of personal data concerning him or her" (Art. 8), making personal data protection a new and independent right.

The protection of privacy is a delicate balance between the universal need for personal space and the equally universal need for social interaction. Today, privacy protection encompasses not only the protection of intimacy and preventing others from collecting and sharing personal data but also the right to know what personal information is being stored, how it is being used, who it is being shared with, and where it is being disseminated. Additionally, it includes the right to access this data, correct any inaccuracies, or have it deleted if it is being used unlawfully (a never-ending task, given that records are constantly growing).

Consequently, the protection of the private sphere must cover both outgoing and incoming data, including unwanted information such as spam and scams, not just disclosed data like cookies.

(Un)conscious erosion

The final paradox is that at a time when there is a growing awareness of the individual and social importance of privacy, and it is being recognised as a fundamental right, various forms of (un)conscious erosion of this right are occurring. A significant role is played by social networks, where one goes to be seen, to acquire a permanent public identity, or at least one that is far greater than Andy Warhol's fifteen minutes of fame, considered to be everyone's right. What is public is fuelled to make sense of the private, personal information - the digital body - is displayed in the same way as the physical body, so that people spontaneously put an enormous amount of information online, exposing themselves to invasive marketing strategies. It is not for nothing that the commercial uses of the Internet now outweigh all its other uses. It is identity that becomes communication, intimité that becomes extimité (Jacques Lacan).

These problems also arise when we consider the world of the so-called "Internet of Things" and autonomic computing (networks built using the neural system as a model). Are we now on the verge of what some researchers have called a digital tsunami, or are we in the presence of a two-faced Janus, bearer of advantages or disadvantages as the case may be?

THE EXPERT - "Managing digital is key"

The digital world is now a reality we have to come to terms with. We cannot ignore or reject it because it has given us tools to free ourselves from time and space constraints, making our lives, social interactions, and access to knowledge much easier. It is precisely from this aspect that Professor Marc Langheinrich, Dean of the Faculty of Informatics at Università della Svizzera italiana, begins to introduce us to this world, which in many respects is unknown to most people "but which we must learn to manage, because it is clear that information technology not only simplifies our lives but also presents endless possibilities, with more to come in the future."

Network data also to our advantage

Perhaps "it has not given us more free time; in some respects, it forces us to work more, increasing our stress", but nevertheless, Professor Langheinrich has no doubts: the result is positive, also for privacy. "Most of the data we share online can be used in various beneficial ways. For example, hospitals can use it to provide better care, apps can inform us about our health, and online banking has made it more convenient for us by eliminating the need to adhere to bank teller hours". The examples could be numerous. What is important, however, is "to understand the business model of digital companies: either I, the user, pay with money for the service they give me (including data management and analysis), or these companies have to profit from something else". Such as our personal information, which is one of the most coveted "commodities". This is why "we must be cautious about who we entrust with our data". Whoever chooses to use a technology is, in fact, responsible for assessing the effects and consequences each time and on a case-by-case basis and drawing their conclusions.

A subtle limit

As with the protection of privacy, cybersecurity also treads a fine line. "Information technology is theoretically capable of creating 100 per cent secure systems; however, we all want to be connected with the outside world, companies even more so, so a door somewhere has to be opened." And if the door is open, something can fatally slip through it. Recent developments in artificial intelligence (AI) are changing this balance significantly. Think of social networks: it is easy to forget that we do not only give away our data but also that of others. The classic example is photographs in which "I appear not only by myself but also with others (children, relatives, friends...) who have not given me permission to do so". On the one hand, "advanced AI techniques now make it possible to replace and protect the faces of the people portrayed with others of their own invention, self-generated by software". On the other hand, "artificial intelligence also facilitates new scams, because it is now easy to find a clip or photo on the net and in a few seconds process it" to create something deceptive. In this sense, our responsibility, therefore, remains unavoidable and must rest on common sense, caution and "education about the implications of this hyper-digitalised life."

Robust, current and effective laws are needed

Of course, an institutional response is also needed. And here Langheinrich agrees that "in Europe, we have a good level of privacy and data protection", a level that is, of course, constantly evolving, as "every now and then something unexpected happens, like the Cambridge Analytica scandal", which forces us to revise the rules. "Drawing a line, for politicians, is difficult," Langheinrich admits. "It is crucial to have robust, current, and high-performing laws." that enable us to counter those with malicious purposes. It is also important that politicians, before introducing "innovations in fundamental areas, such as e-voting, health or energy, assess very well the security risks and the implications for our existence and our society".