<nettime> Why Doesn't Your Browser Have A ''Privacy'' Button?

["Xeni Jardin" <xeni.jardin@siliconalleyreporter.com>]

URL: http://www.siliconalleydaily.com/issues/sar11292000.html#Headline7002
>From Silicon Alley Daily
29 November 2000

Jason McCabe Calacanis: Why Doesn't Your Browser Have A ''Privacy''
Button? (or, Why TrustE is a Lame-Duck Solution to a Problem Microsoft and
AOL Have No Incentive to Solve)

Some solutions are so obvious and simple that when a vision of them
crystallizes in your mind you're stuck with the sense that they must not
exist for some diabolical financial or political reason. Collectively, we
realized at some point in the '80s that all cars should have airbags, and
that the only reason they didn't was because auto manufacturers didn't
want to spend the extra cash. A debate ensued that followed a familiar
course: A rabid press core presented information that angered citizens,
who then lobbied their politicians. The process resulted, as it generally
does, in a combination of corporate concessions and government
regulations. This year, we all realized--thanks to Al Gore winning the
popular vote but losing (it seems) the Electoral College--that our
electoral system needs an overhaul. Again, a rabid press core, disturbed
citizens, and politicians will--I predict--try to reform our democracy by
disbanding the Electoral College and instituting a long-overdue
popular-vote system.

Why isn't there a Privacy button on Internet Explorer and Netscape?

This week I had an "Aha!" moment regarding what will become one of the
most important issues of the next decade: Our quickly evaporating right to
privacy. Why isn't there a Privacy button on Internet Explorer and
Netscape? If you want privacy on your browser you've got to drill down
five or six menu levels to turn off "cookies" (which I'm sure still means
Oreos to 99 percent of the world). Why?

There could easily be a button on the browser--next to the Back, Forward,
Stop, Reload, and Home buttons--that is simply labeled "Privacy." When
clicked, that button would enable the user to easily set his or her
desired level of privacy: "total," "some," "none," or "custom." Now, I'm
sure every tech geek, privacy expert, and marketer out there is going to
respond with some very basic and valid questions like: "How do we define
the four settings you're proposing?"; "Why should the browser have to do
this?"; "Isn't TrustE handling this issue?"; and "Why should I care in the
first place?" Here are my responses.

Question One: How do we define the four settings?

"Total" privacy is pretty straightforward: No one can track you, period.

Actually, we only have to define one of the four settings. "Total" privacy
is pretty straightforward: No one can track you, period. The "none"
setting is also straightforward: You have no privacy and a site can track
your every move. (By the way, this is your browser's default mode.) The
"custom" setting clearly does not need to be defined, because clicking it
would generate a window in which a user could define his or her own
privacy preferences. The "some" privacy setting is the one a standards
committee would need to address. If a user selected "some," a pop-up
window explaining what the setting means would be appropriate. Question
Two: Why should the browser do this?

This should be a browser-level feature because trusting individual
websites to adhere to a standard (e.g. TrustE, which I'll get into in a
minute) is never going to work. Having this feature built into the browser
will ensure that no matter where you go on the Net, you're protected. The
browser interface is standard across all websites; privacy is not, nor can
it be.

Question Three: We have TrustE. Why do we need a Privacy button? TrustE
has good intentions, but it is fundamentally and critically flawed. Now,
before you flame me please know that I support its efforts and recognize
that TrustE has done a lot of positive work in educating the world about
privacy. However, a publisher/server-side privacy solution is a PR effort
at best.

TrustE has good intentions, but it is fundamentally and critically flawed.

As you probably know, the way TrustE works is that it gives certificates
to publishers who adhere to its standards. These publishers then display
the TrustE logo on their sites to install confidence in users. The concept
is fatally flawed because it relies on the trustworthiness of each
individual website and the person running it.

Ironically, TrustE may be the worst thing to happen to privacy on the Net
because it serves as a convenient lame-duck solution for folks like
America Online and Microsoft. As long as they back the self-regulation of
TrustE's solution they avoid having to take real action on the privacy
issue--such as creating the Privacy button. Did I mention that two of
TrustE's five "Premier Corporate Sponsors" are AOL and Microsoft? Can we
really expect an organization to police its own benefactors?

If TrustE wants to help the situation, its leaders should lobby the Big
Two (Microsoft and AOL/Netscape) to lead by example and add a top-level,
easy-to-use privacy button. Question Four: Why should I even care about
privacy? My computer is not a car; this is not a life-or-death situation.

Today, you may not care if a site records your surfing habits. However, if
that information was hacked and used maliciously, you might care very
much.

Privacy is a clearly a reactive issue: You only care about it once you've
lost it. However, there are a number of very scary and practical reasons
why the press corps, the public, and the government should lobby
corporations to address this issue. Today, you may not care if a site
records your surfing habits. However, if that information was hacked and
used maliciously, you might care very much. What if you read about
anti-depressant medication at Medscape or perused some adult films at a
video site, and that information became publicly available? That could
very well happen at some point: Information wants to be hacked. Frankly,
I'm surprised that no one has written an ILOVEYOU-style virus that sends
your History file of the last 20 websites you've visited to everyone in
your e-mail address book. Can you imagine the effect that would have? If
you can't, hit the drop-down arrow to the right of the URL in your Web
browser, then open your address book and imagine what each person in it
would think of your last 20 choices. Your Web browser is just the start.
Take these same scenarios and apply them to your cell phone or interactive
TV. Imagine if someone hacked in and discovered your location for the past
30 days (what were you doing in the East Village at 4 A.M.?) or your
complete TV-viewing history (didn't realize you were such a fan of HBO's
G-String Divas). We're on the cusp of integrating some very powerful
technology into our lives, and this is the best time to empower users.
Every single cell phone and set-top device should have a Privacy button on
it--prominently, not hidden five levels deep on a menu somewhere. It
should be as easy to turn off tracking on my mobile phone as it is to turn
off the device itself. We've made it easy for people to get online, we've
made it easy for people to shop there, and now we need to make it easy for
people to enforce their ethical right to privacy. The Caveat: Why it may
never happen The bottom line is that we will never have something as
simple and powerful as a Privacy button on our browsers until we force
Microsoft and AOL to put one there. However, it doesn't take a genius to
see that it's in the best interests of the Big Two to play down privacy
concerns because the future of their businesses, and this medium, are
based on collecting and selling information about users, so marketers can
fine-tune their pitches. Targeted advertising streamed to interactive TV
boxes, Web browsers, and phones is going to make a lot of money for the
browser-controllers, their affiliates, and their partners. Don't think for
a second that the cable TV folks aren't salivating at the chance to record
your TV-viewing habits, or that cell-phone providers don't want to beam
you a $1-off coupon when you pass Starbucks. (Which, by the way, would
bring the cost of a cup of Joe down to the once-standard 50 cents. )
Undoubtedly, there will be tradeoffs in giving up your privacy. There are
those aforementioned coupons--or the videos-on-demand of the Knicks games
I miss that I could get by filling out a survey to Cablevision. I'd do
that. However, it should be my choice to make, and it should be simple
(from a technical standpoint) to express that choice. As individuals and
as a nation we have to draw a line in the sand. We must demand that
individuals be given the chance to easily decide how much of their privacy
they want to give up and at what price. This decision should not be left
in the hands of corporations. Only a top-level, easy-to-use Privacy button
on all devices will enable true technological privacy for all citizens. It
is ultimately up to us--and, in truth, to the two Steves (Case and
Ballmer)--to do the right thing and put the interests of consumers first
by adding a Privacy button. Empowering people to easily retain the right
to privacy is going to be the next step toward getting everyone to trust
and participate in this medium.

Best, Jason

Jason McCabe Calacanis doesn't want to move to France in order to protect
his privacy, but does enjoy having brunch at Pastis and visiting Cannes
for the Milia conference. Would you support a Privacy button on all Net
devices? Send letters for publication to letters@siliconalleyreporter.com

Feedback: letters@siliconalleyreporter.com






#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net