Data Mining: A Billion Dollar Industry that is Costly to the Average Joe

One of the characteristics of cyberpunk fiction is the massive datasphere owned and controlled by mega corporations. Unfortunately, this is one of the characteristics our world shares with cyberpunk fiction. If you need an example of this, just look at Google, a massively popular search engine that not only logs and stores all user searches, but links those searches to a user profile. Google likely knows the average person better than that person knows himself. And Google is but one company out of thousands of mega-corporations that all want a piece of the pie, which is a large chunk of the average person, his data, and his life.

Have you ever considered how much your information is worth? What’s your birthdate, interests, gender, browsing information, marital status, home ownership status worth? According to this site, all of my data is only worth around $0.30. Doesn’t seem like a lot, does it? That’s because it isn’t. Kind of insulting, really. However, when this information is sold, it is sold in bundles of 1,000. That is, the information from 1000 consumers is bundled up and bought by a business. In my case, the bundle would be worth around $300. That’s quite a bit more, isn’t it? However, what happens when a company like Facebook takes information from millions of its users, bundles it up, and sells it off? Those bundles of information are worth millions, if not billions of dollars. And all it took to get that information is a simple request by Facebook, which most people are happy to oblige. But, hey, when your birthday draws near, Facebook sends a notification to all of your friends just in case they cared to know.

Now, a Facebook user might say:

Who cares if Facebook is making all that money off my info? It’s not hurting me.

But is that true? Are there no consequences to having your data sold off to the highest bidder? Perhaps there really isn’t any consequence outside of a more targeted advertisement stream. But, I’m not so hopeful. Information is the most valuable commodity on the planet. A birthdate, an interest, a dream, a life goal, a hobby, a marriage status all command a price higher than $0.30. Remember that datasphere I mentioned earlier? Most of the people on this little blue marble of ours are a number within that datasphere. All of their information is retrievable for any purpose, by the powers that be. Your whole identity is stored in some database, somewhere. And it probably was sold at a $0.30 bargain.

Again, why worry? I’m not a fan of hysteria. I think all fear should be backed by a reasonable amount of evidence and logic. Is this something worth worrying about? I think it is. Every piece of data on me, from my grade school years to my years of higher education and beyond, is stored in some warehouse database and can be retrieved with a few keystrokes. I don’t think I need to say much more. I don’t think I can say much more. I’m a number within a database, along with the other billions of numbers. And I have absolutely no control over that. I just have to accept it. But what could possibly be done with this information?

The first thought that comes to mind is targeted advertising. Companies would use that information to sell me a car or a house or maybe a few friends. A second use for that information would be to predict my actions in the future, should some higher-up politico care about my future actions. A third use would be to use the data to convict me of some crime. Maybe I violated some obscure law while browsing the web and, now that I got on someone’s bad side, they want to use that law to punish me. A fourth use would be to aid in any investigations of my person. Maybe someone would like a little more information about me, for whatever reason. All they would have to do is tap into the datasphere to retrieve it. Come to think of it, so much could be done with that little bit of information. If I’ve lost you, I’m just trying to rationalize my paranoia. Pay no mind. But pay no mind at your own risk. There is plenty to worry about, but we aren’t completely helpless either.

There are people out there who recognize this problem and who are taking steps to obviate it. DataArbitrage is the first program that comes to mind, and there are others. Additionally, there are steps you can take to, partially, free yourself from the datasphere. At this time, I’ve written two posts on the subject. Give them a look.

Don’t be just another number in some database, somewhere. Protect your identity and help others protect their own identities.

The Free Software Movement: An Explanation

I’ve been a supporter of the Free Software Movement, and the Free Software Foundation, for a couple years now. And, come to think of it, I haven’t really been the best supporter. Sure, I’ve bought merchandise from their store, donated a bit more, and, once, even offered coding support for a free email client that some guy was developing. This is all just a drop in the bucket, however, but as I’ve found out, every little bit helps. Perhaps the best way for someone to help the FSM is to just get the word out. Few people know about operating systems outside of Windows and OS X and fewer still know about the FSM, open-source movement, and the respective operating systems/software those movements support. Only a few people read my blog but, since every little bit helps, I think I’ll take some time to explain the Free Software Movement.

First, a little history. The Free Software Movement was founded by Richard Stallman in order to pursue freedom within the context of software. There is a lot of confusion caused by the word “free”. As Stallman says, when you hear the word “free”, think of freedom, not free beer. Whenever Stallman means “free” as in free stuff, he will say gratis. Additionally, as Stallman knows too well, gratis software is often unfree software. Just how does freedom apply to software? The FSM lists a few criterion a piece of software must meet before it can be called free.

From gnu.org, software is free when the user has these four freedoms:

1. The freedom to run the program as the user wishes, for any purpose.

2. The freedom to study how the program works and modify it so it runs the way the user wishes. A precondition is that the code must be viewable and accessible.

3. The freedom to distribute copies of the software.

4. The freedom to distribute copies of software the user has modified.

As mentioned above, gratis software isn’t (necessarily) considered free software since it doesn’t (necessarily) meet all of these criteria. WinRAR, while being monetarily free software, isn’t free software because its source code isn’t viewable, modifiable, or distributable by the Average Joe. Conversely, there is paid-for software that could be considered free, by the FSMs standards.

The Free Software Movement is for free software, but what is it against? In a nutshell, the FSM is against proprietary software. But why? What does Stallman have against proprietary software and what is proprietary software?

From linfo.org, proprietary software is software that is owned by an individual person, company, or organization; there are almost always restrictions on its use and its source code is almost always kept secret.

Well, already we can see that proprietary software, by definition isn’t considered free software since its use is restricted and its source code is kept secret. So, what exactly does Stallman have against proprietary software, aside from that fact that it violates the freedoms provided by free software?

Stallman believes, and rightly so in most cases, that proprietary software contains malware that is harmful to the user’s privacy. Since users usually aren’t able to examine the source code of proprietary software, software programmers are free to put any kind of tracking and information stealing malware they please into the source code. Stallman believes, and rightly so, again, that since software users are at the mercy of the software’s developer, the software’s developer is likely to incorporate activity tracking malware, spyware, and other bad things, into the software.

Why doesn’t the government make laws to prevent programmers from doing this? Well, the government tends to be the biggest culprit of installing tracking software into programs. Governments will often encourage, and even require, companies to insert tracking software into their product’s source code for a number of reasons. Purportedly, the government’s reason for doing so is to catch criminals and enemies of the state. This is likely true, so what do we have to worry about? All the citizen has to do is behave himself and the government will give him a pass, so again, what do we have to worry about? There are a few things to consider.

Have you ever thought of yourself as an enemy of the state? I know I’ve never seen myself as such, along with most other people. But, the truth is, you might just be a criminal (assuming you live in the U.S). Not a single lawyer in all of the U.S. knows all of the federal laws that are currently in effect in our little region of the world. And this doesn’t include all of the state laws and common laws. There has never been a better time to be a lawyer and a worse time to be an Average Joe computer user. The Average Joe likely breaks five obscure laws a day just by browsing the web. But why isn’t he prosecuted? Well, that’s likely because no law-enforcement institution has the time, resources, or desire to persecute 99% of the U.S. population. However, what happens when an Average Joe computer user pisses off the wrong person? What if this wrong person has ties within law-enforcement agencies or some other government institution? Then, those obscure laws might just be used against the Average Joe. Stepping on the toes of the wrong person could mean prison time for some unfortunate individual.

There is always the possibility of the government misusing the gathered information. I’d love to believe the government would never do such a thing, however, I just can’t make myself believe that. I’m a student of history and I know of the atrocities government’s can commit. And I don’t believe my government is the one exception to the cycle of violence often perpetrated by out-of-control governments. I believe governments must be constrained by the people and the people can partly constrain the government by limiting the information a government has access to.

Even if our governments have proven themselves to be benevolent, they are still vulnerable to mistakes. What if the information gathered by a government falls into the wrong hands. Since the government would likely be centralizing much of the information it collects, it wouldn’t be hard for a rogue group of hackers to hit the information repository and steal all of that critical information. And what about the information collection process? I bet it wouldn’t be too hard to eavesdrop on that process in order to grab a juicy bit of info. Why are we putting so much trust in the competency and benevolence of this beast known as government?

And this isn’t even mentioning the annoying tendency companies have to sell our information to highest bidder. I’m looking at you Facebook and Twitter. I know I don’t want businesses exploiting my information in order to fill their pockets. And I doubt other people feel much different. The funniest thing about this is that companies will tell the user that they may sell their information. It’s all in the fine print, but who has time to read the fine print? Businesses like Facebook know that very few people will read the fine print, so include it all in there. What a kick in the teeth, right?

Still, isn’t this all just unfounded paranoia on the part of Stallman? I wish it was.

As Snowden has so boldly (or stupidly) proven, government spying is not only a real thing, it is more common than initially believed.

Free software may be the way out of the government/corporate spying ring. But, why care whether the government spies on its citizens; also isn’t spying for our benefit? I’m not one to trust the government. In addition to the reasons above, I can trust the government no more than I can trust the average hacker. Both are unknown to me and have power over me, the government more so than the hacker. Additionally, I can’t hold the government responsible for any reprehensible actions it may pull with its massive surveillance abilities. So, in this case, a healthy and reasonable distrust is the option I have chosen.

I won’t force anyone to make the complete jump to using free software. I won’t force anyone to throw their Windows out the window or trash their Mac. I use Windows because it has many useful programs that just aren’t available with free software. In fact, this is a common reason why people stick with proprietary software. Stallman may not consider it a good reason, but I consider it a good enough reason. The truth is, however, that a person doesn’t need to make the complete jump to free software in order to enjoy the benefits of free software. I’ve incorporated free software into my daily computing. In fact, I only keep Windows around to handle the tasks that can’t be easily handled by free software; I encourage others to do the same. Thank goodness for virtual machines and dual-booting. Indeed, I won’t force anyone to completely jump ship and use only free software. The only thing I want is for people to consider using and supporting free software.

With this post, I want to educate and spread the word about free software. I think information is the most valuable commodity on the planet. I’m doing my share by spreading it. Will you do a little bit to support the Free Software Movement? Remember, every little bit counts.

Preliminares 2013 [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

The Importance of Understanding What’s Happening in the Background

Every would-be hacker and computer expert needs to understand the basics and what goes on in the background of the computer. But why? Don’t hackers and computer experts only need to know what programs work to achieve a certain end? Why would a hacker need to know how a password cracker cracks a password? Does knowing how really provide any benefit? Well, yes, knowing what goes on behind the scenes makes all the difference. Let me explain by using an example from my past. This post will help to explain why I am teaching the basics of computing in my Cybercation courses.

I was once an avid gamer. My favorite game to play was Warcraft 3: The Frozen Throne. I loved to play this game competitively, but I wasn’t all that good. And, for the longest time, I couldn’t figure out why I wasn’t good. I mean, I copied the play-styles, builds, and strategies of the best players. In fact, I copied them extremely well and I executed them well. Why did I lose so much? Only after many, many losses did I discover that I wasn’t really understanding the strategies, I was merely copying and replicating them. I didn’t understand the strengths and weaknesses of the strategies. And, most importantly, I didn’t understand under what circumstances certain strategies would work. In short, I didn’t understand why a strategy worked.

If a hacker doesn’t know how a particular password cracker works, he won’t know how to best use that password cracker. He may not even know how to properly use the password cracker. By the same token, if a computer expert doesn’t understand how a computer works, he won’t be able to make the best use of that computer. This is why understanding the basics and inner-workings of a computer or computer program is important.

Understanding the basics and inner-workings not only allows the user to best use a computer or tool, it allows the user to use the tool creatively. Creativity is the likely the one indepensible trait in the hacker’s arsenal. If a hacker isn’t in the least bit creative, he may as well drop hacking altogether. If a hacker can’t apply a tool creatively, or use a programming language creatively, then he may as well hang up his hat and call it a day. Hacking is a lot of trial and error, it involves a lot of patience, practice, and persistence. If the hacker can’t think creatively, he won’t be able to hack for crap. Am I getting through to you, yet?

A good computer person must look at a problem from all, or most, sides. A good understanding of the problem and its context requires intimate knowledge of the computer’s inner workings. And that intimate knowledge is dependent on how well that computer person understands computing. A good motto for the initiate hacker would be: Understand first, hack second. Or, hack to gain understanding and knowledge, then hack some more.

So, crack open those boring computing books and get to work. “But that’s boring, I want to hack now!”. Didn’t you listen to a damn thing I said? If you don’t understand what you’re doing or how a program works, your hacking will be crap.

Take my advice and you’ll be a true guru.

Happy learning.

Memes: Annoying Trivialities or Cultural Delights?

Let me be the first to say that I am not fond of Internet memes, in general. I do enjoy the rare meme. And I think other memes are funny and even clever. However, generally, I don’t like them. But memes are an important part of Internet culture, so I think something positive can be said about them. And the more I reflect on memes, the more I see memes for what they truly are, spontaneous, stunningly insightful (but not in the way you would expect), blips on the fabric of the Internet. Memes can’t be forced into popularity, however, they can be kept on life support by the average user. And if other users like the meme, that meme goes on to gain cultural momentum.

But what do memes have to do with the future, technology, or the Internet? Memes existed long before the Internet, to most people’s astonishment. Memes are simply ideas that are spread through cultural osmosis. Again, how does this relate to the modern technology? Well, I’ll tell you how. Today’s memes are a bit different than the memes of yesteryear. This is due to modern technology. More specifically, it is due to the Internet. The Internet was once called an “information superhighway” for obvious reasons. With the Internet, Information, like never before, gained the ability to be transported at supersonic speeds across great expanses, only to be delivered to the Average Joe’s monitor. Modern technology allows ideas to be spread at such great speeds that it, necessarily, influences the ideas themselves. All that information slamming together at incredible speeds tends to produce a lot of crap, but, still, it’s an interesting process.

But what did I mean when I called meme’s “insightful”? How could some crap some idiot threw together, and other idiots supported, possibly be called insightful?* I like to think of memes as a cultural barometer that anyone could use to measure what’s popular in society or in a subculture. Most memes capture perfectly what is important and valued by a subculture (humor, usually, but there is often more to it). Think about it. I’m sure you’ve visited some part of the Internet where certain phrases or image macros were commonly used by many users, with most users understanding what was meant by the phrase or image. You may not have immediately known what these phrases or images meant, but, after spending some time within that subculture, you began to see just how those memes related to the culture. The culture generated the memes and the memes generated the culture. A perfect feedback cycle (there tend to be a lot of those in our collective futures).

Meme’s also act as a sort of social-cohesion device. People who frequent certain websites understand the memes being used and will feel a bond to either that site or to the people who use those memes on the site. It’s that shared knowledge of the meme that creates a very real bond between people. The person who understands a meme will feel more like a member of the community than the person who doesn’t get the meme. Additionally, since memes are created within those subcultures, the collective contribution to the memes only adds a person’s sense of community and social-cohesion.

Memes aid in one of my favorite features of the Internet: the distribution of information. Of course, most of the information spread by most memes in meaningless crap. But, as I mentioned above, memes do spread other, more valuable, information about Internet subcultures, values, and ideas. So, I guess memes can be tentatively forgiven for being incorrigibly obnoxious. 

In the end, the modern meme owes its existence to the Internet. The meme of the moment is a perfect representation of popular Internet culture and I believe memes should be respected for that reason alone. But if you want to disparage memes regardless of any other considerations, I won’t hold it against you. If you ever want some idea as to what is currently popular on the Internet, take some time and visit knowyourmeme.com. But don’t stare into the abyss for too long. It will drive you mad.

Whether memes are annoying trivialities or cultural delights or both is something that will be debatable for the next 10,000 years, one thing is certain. Much like the Internet and because of the Internet, memes are here to stay.

*Please note, I’m using the word “idiot” in the least offensive way possible, we’re all idiots in some way or another.