I spent last
weekend at Nesta’s Future Fest. Every year it continues to blow my mind.
Bringing together thousands of people interested in an alternative reality, as
Nesta says “looking for a different story” one that is desirable, plausible and
able to connect past, present and future”. I strongly believe that people’s
beliefs about their ability to shape or control their destiny strongly depicts
whether or not they thrive or just survive. This year we looked at the
fragility of nature, the brokenness of politics, sex, race, gender in robotics
and Artificial Intelligence (AI) and what I’d like to touch on in this blog,
the challenges of data sovereignty.
I found an
empty space at the blackjack table within the darkened ‘Black Box Bellagio’.
This transforms what we know as a casino, into something unusual. “Take a seat at one of our playing tables
and place your bets at Social Strip Poker (not sure the stripping actually happened, thank the good Lord),
Best-Bet Blackjack, or maybe Risky Roulette”. Instead of money, your personal
data becomes currency. “Play with the (un)fairness of expected values and chances, predicted
risks, and giving up your identity” states the house. This
and recent articles I have been reading on big data have led me to reflect on
my concerns about data handling.
The data
industry is one which has massively exploded in recent times. You will hear
people talking about ‘big data’ being used to improve systems, improve customer
experience and have better tailored services and products for clients. Overall
it is a near-essential for any company in this day and age. The collection and
use of all this data is what will be driving AI and machine learning. Indeed,
even 'The Economist' agrees in a recent article about AI that “the world’s most
valuable resource is no longer oil, but data.”
I was watching
a TED talk yesterday. Dina Katabi talked through how vital signs can now be
monitored by wireless signals. Data on breathing, heartbeat, sleep and even
impending cardiac arrest and other chronic diseases can be collected, analysed and provided to an individual
or health care professional without the needs for probes, censors or intrusive
data collection methods.
In my line of work, what would data look like for the
safety of young people? How does it fit into the notion of a smart city where
data from multiple sources and agencies is layered and mapped to give a more
detailed reflection of “the whole picture”? Gathering and sharing the latest
and most accurate information on cities and where trouble occurs exposes
recognisable ‘trends’ in incidents that can be better prepared for and faster
responded to. SafeStats’ recent work around ‘hotblocking’ is case in point: a
crime mapping method showing where the risk of violent street crime is highest.
Making optimal use of shared data from Ambulance services and A&E
departments the Met police were provided with clarity about where and when
particular police activities should be targeted so as to maximise efforts to
cut violent crime. The Children’s Society, working with a number of partners,
is exploring how this might work to link up victims, perpetrators and common ‘hotspots’
of exploitation, thereby enabling disruption of common exploitation and
trafficking networks.
Data quality will also become increasingly important.
There will always be, and increasingly so as we walk into the future, a need
for roles which ensure data quality – people who possess the skills and assets
to collect, clean, consolidate, store and analyse the data. This is the only
way we can truly ensure that we as humans, and our AI counterparts, are making
educated decisions.
When it comes
to data, privacy is understandably a major concern. How do we as members of the
public understand how our data is being used and handled and how will it be
regulated. I guess the first test is GDPR (if you don’t know what this is after
the thousands of e-mails you have received on the 24th May 2018,
then you need to do something drastic like go to specsavers). This will be an
early indicator of how companies are able to comply with this legislation and
no doubt demonstrate how effective legislation is or can be with tackling
non-compliance. If anything, it has given people like me a huge opportunity to
clean up existing personal data.
It is a common fact that Facebook uses algorithms to track
our behaviour. But what these algorithms do, or when they are around, is
commonly unknown. Still, we are being held responsible for our own knowledge.
In this imposed state of insecurity, all our options seem to be untrustworthy.
What is good and what is evil?
The Economist, in its report, makes the point that the
current outlook is “likely to be between utopia and disaster”. Doesn’t fill me
with much hope, or doom either. I believe that as the likes of companies like
DigiMe and ArchiveSocial which help to unlock the power of your data, grow, we
will be able to build new rules which are featured around the individual as the
central decision point for sharing and protection. True data sovereignty. Many
of these issues I have highlighted can be tackled if we decide to address them
immediately and with significant legislation and frameworks to provide
boundaries within which to work and operate safely.
As for my stakes at the Black Box Bellagio? Let’s just say I
lost my ability to maintain data sovereignty when I lost to the house. The
impending result being I had to ‘like’ a facebook page randomly selected by the
Croupier. I wasn’t as unlucky as getting Britain First or some kind of neo-nazi
group page as some people did, but I did have to like Gary John, Flat earth
conspirator. Perhaps someone Nesta could engage with for next year’s Future
Fest? *pops note onto suggestion wall
