Bloggers
Search Blogs
Note: The views expressed in the blogs and associated comments are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily reflect those of POB.
POB Editor Christine Grahl offers insights on issues of interest to surveying and mapping professionals. She can be reached at pobeditor@bnpmedia.com.
Unintended Consequences
Esri's Survey and Engineering GIS Summit sparked some good discussion about "the cloud." (See Working in a Cloud and Trends in GIS: Surveying & Engineering GIS Summit.) It seems inevitable that the cloud is where everything is headed. Back on earth, however, a potential storm is brewing.
In May 2010, Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Va.), chairman of the House Subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet, released a discussion draft of legislation intended to protect consumers' privacy both online and offline. Some of the language in the draft caught the attention of MAPPS, the national association of private sector geospatial firms. Specifically, the draft contains a provision limiting the collection of “precise geolocation information.”
“The intent of the bill drafted by Rep. Boucher —to protect personal privacy — is laudable, but in its current form, the provisions would result in a number of unintended consequences by severely limiting information collected by the geospatial community for government agencies, to support government programs, and to provide for commercial applications that consumers are demanding in the marketplace,” said Jeff Lovin, MAPPS president and Woolpert vice president and director of geospatial services. On July 14, MAPPS sent a letter to Rep. Boucher outlining its members’ concerns.
The cloud is here, but with it comes the swirling winds of how best to share data without compromising privacy or data integrity. It’s an issue that’s likely to get even stormier before the skies clear.
What do you think? Should surveyors be concerned about legislation that would restrict data sharing? Is the trend toward free and open sharing of data in the cloud a positive move? Please share your thoughts below.
In May 2010, Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Va.), chairman of the House Subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet, released a discussion draft of legislation intended to protect consumers' privacy both online and offline. Some of the language in the draft caught the attention of MAPPS, the national association of private sector geospatial firms. Specifically, the draft contains a provision limiting the collection of “precise geolocation information.”
“The intent of the bill drafted by Rep. Boucher —to protect personal privacy — is laudable, but in its current form, the provisions would result in a number of unintended consequences by severely limiting information collected by the geospatial community for government agencies, to support government programs, and to provide for commercial applications that consumers are demanding in the marketplace,” said Jeff Lovin, MAPPS president and Woolpert vice president and director of geospatial services. On July 14, MAPPS sent a letter to Rep. Boucher outlining its members’ concerns.
The cloud is here, but with it comes the swirling winds of how best to share data without compromising privacy or data integrity. It’s an issue that’s likely to get even stormier before the skies clear.
What do you think? Should surveyors be concerned about legislation that would restrict data sharing? Is the trend toward free and open sharing of data in the cloud a positive move? Please share your thoughts below.
Comments
Date Posted: Jul 22, 2010 at 7:29 AM
I think Rich may be correct. Technology appears to be moving so quickly that it's like a freight train - anyone who tries to stand in the way (legislative or otherwise) will just get run over. I saw an interesting prediction this morning:
According to the latest report from Analysys Mason (www.analysysmason), entitled Enterprise cloud services: worldwide forecast 2010–2015, the global market for enterprise cloud-based services will grow from USD12.1 billion (EUR9.4 billion) in 2010 to USD35.6 billion (EUR27.5 billion) in 2015.
The cloud is definitely big business. And yes, the interest MAPPS has in this draft bill is to protect its members' business interests. Interestingly, this legislation was drafted to help "protect consumers," but it is consumers who are driving the market for more free and open access to data. I don't think most people understand the compromise.
According to the latest report from Analysys Mason (www.analysysmason), entitled Enterprise cloud services: worldwide forecast 2010–2015, the global market for enterprise cloud-based services will grow from USD12.1 billion (EUR9.4 billion) in 2010 to USD35.6 billion (EUR27.5 billion) in 2015.
The cloud is definitely big business. And yes, the interest MAPPS has in this draft bill is to protect its members' business interests. Interestingly, this legislation was drafted to help "protect consumers," but it is consumers who are driving the market for more free and open access to data. I don't think most people understand the compromise.
Date Posted: Jul 22, 2010 at 5:41 AM
If technology can make all things available, technology can also make all things private. The ability to block, hide, encrypt, etc. closely follows the technology to publish. Then the technology to hack that encryption closely follows, then new technology to control, etc.
Loss of privacy is not a good thing. The other side of the coin is there is so much information, it is difficult to find or process it all.
Loss of privacy is not a good thing. The other side of the coin is there is so much information, it is difficult to find or process it all.
Date Posted: Jul 22, 2010 at 1:05 AM
Clear back in 2003, Scott McNealy, former CEO of Sun Microsystems, said, “You have no privacy. Get over it.”
He was referring to the fact that our private information is already in the hands of the government (federal, state and local), credit card companies, health care providers, banks, and so many other third parties, the notion of privacy is irrelevant.
The first paragraph of a recent New York criminal court case, People v. Klapper, — N.Y.S.2d —, 2010 WL 1704796 (N.Y.City Crim.Ct., April 28, 2010) reads as follows:
“In this day of wide dissemination of thoughts and messages through transmissions which are vulnerable to interception and readable by unintended parties, armed with software, spyware, viruses and cookies spreading capacity; the concept of internet privacy is a fallacy upon which no one should rely.”
The courts are already starting to give up on privacy.
MAPPS has no concerns about privacy. MAPPS’ only concern, as it should be given their purpose, is about restrictions that will affect the private sector’s ability to make money from precise geolocation information.
Whether the trend toward free and open sharing of data in the cloud is a positive move, is irrelevant. Legislation that would restrict data sharing is irrelevant. Positive or negative, it’s too late to stop it. It won’t be too many more iterations of technological advancement before any twit with a cell phone will be able to snap a photo, precisely geolocated to within a millimeter, of a dime on the sidewalk and have it posted in “the cloud” before you can bend over and pick it up. And when you do pick it up, there’ll be a precisely geolocated video of that in the cloud, too. How can legislation stop that?
He was referring to the fact that our private information is already in the hands of the government (federal, state and local), credit card companies, health care providers, banks, and so many other third parties, the notion of privacy is irrelevant.
The first paragraph of a recent New York criminal court case, People v. Klapper, — N.Y.S.2d —, 2010 WL 1704796 (N.Y.City Crim.Ct., April 28, 2010) reads as follows:
“In this day of wide dissemination of thoughts and messages through transmissions which are vulnerable to interception and readable by unintended parties, armed with software, spyware, viruses and cookies spreading capacity; the concept of internet privacy is a fallacy upon which no one should rely.”
The courts are already starting to give up on privacy.
MAPPS has no concerns about privacy. MAPPS’ only concern, as it should be given their purpose, is about restrictions that will affect the private sector’s ability to make money from precise geolocation information.
Whether the trend toward free and open sharing of data in the cloud is a positive move, is irrelevant. Legislation that would restrict data sharing is irrelevant. Positive or negative, it’s too late to stop it. It won’t be too many more iterations of technological advancement before any twit with a cell phone will be able to snap a photo, precisely geolocated to within a millimeter, of a dime on the sidewalk and have it posted in “the cloud” before you can bend over and pick it up. And when you do pick it up, there’ll be a precisely geolocated video of that in the cloud, too. How can legislation stop that?