They changed the world for good, and then became monsters. You love them, you hate them. Some would not live without them, others would prefer to live without them.
The Internet is now synonymous with Google, Facebook, Apple, Amazon and their ilk. It is the place where people sell and buy stuff, avail of services and do things good and bad.
All the big companies which dominate the Internet are accused and considered guilty of using data. Data is the new gold, it is said. However, I would like to pause and reflect.
Are the IT giants bad guys? The opinion is divided. Is the market place on the Internet different from the market places of earlier years? Yes and No.
All operators in the market place need market intelligence. The buyer needs to know where to get the stuff he wants at the best price, and the seller needs to know if a particular person would be susceptible to make a purchase or may be induced to make one.
How does all this happen? The answer quite simply is “intelligence” which is based on “data” generated through “surveillance”. Why do these words sound ominous to the lay person? People are known to say “That’s a lovely dress, where did you buy it from?”. The reply could be a particular store in a particular location, or it could be “Myntra” an online store.
So what is the difference between then and now. The only difference is the use of interconnected computers, which store all this information, to be served to the user who demands to know. There is not much difference between the yellow pages of the earlier years, and the search on Google or Amazon.
Really? The answer is once again Yes and No. Yes because from the point of view of the seller, there is not much of a difference; but from the point of view of the buyer, there is. The difference lies in that earlier sellers wanted their wares to be known to the buyer, and today it is possible to determine which buyer would be willing or wanting to buy what?
So, why is this difference so important? What is this obsession with privacy? Would it not be nice, if you were to go to a building housing many services, for a service provider to know that you have come for a hair cut or to buy batteries? This is only possible if somehow a method could determine your purpose of your visit.
If a person looks at a dress in a showroom’s window, longer than a passing glance, an astute salesperson would not take long to determine the prospective buyer’s interest. What is wrong in the salesperson approaching the person, and helping her in making a decision? Has the salesperson violated the prospective buyer’s privacy by reading her mind?
It is different, others would argue, choosing the line, that when a machine does it, or an algorithm determines it, then that artificial thing is “spying” on you. There is an extended fear that if a “machine” could be spying on you, it could know your deepest secrets.
The fear is not unfounded. Yet, we have little problem in keeping the mobile phone by our bedside, without even realising that some “app” could be listening to everything we utter. And why just the bedside? The mobile phone is always with us – in the restaurant, in the meeting room, in the lecture hall? How do we know that someone is not eavesdropping all the time.
When Microsoft bought Hotmail from Sabeer Bhatia, and provided the mail service for free, only to be joined by Yahoo, and Gmail who provided the same service, how many of us gave it a thought that the machines would be reading the mails. Today, when the usage is rampant, and the service providers admit it openly, why has it become such a big issue?
Is the world a better place? Are we moving in the right direction? Do we need a course correction?
PRAVAK 