skip to main content
research-article

Privacy trading in the surveillance capitalism age viewpoints on 'privacy-preserving' societal value creation

Published: 08 November 2019 Publication History

Abstract

In the modern era of the mobile apps (part of the era of surveillance capitalism, a famously coined term by Shoshana Zuboff), huge quantities of data about individuals and their activities offer a wave of opportunities for economic and societal value creation. However, the current personal data ecosystem is mostly de-regulated, fragmented, and inefficient. On one hand, end-users are often not able to control access (either technologically, by policy, or psychologically) to their personal data which results in issues related to privacy, personal data ownership, transparency, and value distribution. On the other hand, this puts the burden of managing and protecting user data on profit-driven apps and ad-driven entities (e.g., an ad-network) at a cost of trust and regulatory accountability. Data holders (e.g., apps) may hence take commercial advantage of the individuals' inability to fully anticipate the potential uses of their private information, with detrimental effects for social welfare. As steps to improve social welfare, we comment on the the existence and design of efficient consumer-data releasing ecosystems aimed at achieving a maximum social welfare state amongst competing data holders. In view of (a) the behavioral assumption that humans are 'compromising' beings, (b) privacy not being a well-boundaried good, and (c) the practical inevitability of inappropriate data leakage by data holders upstream in the supply-chain, we showcase the idea of a regulated and radical privacy trading mechanism that preserves the heterogeneous privacy preservation constraints (at an aggregate consumer, i.e., app, level) upto certain compromise levels, and at the same time satisfying commercial requirements of agencies (e.g., advertising organizations) that collect and trade client data for the purpose of behavioral advertising. More specifically, our idea merges supply function economics, introduced by Klemperer and Meyer, with differential privacy, that, together with their powerful theoretical properties, leads to a stable and efficient, i.e., a maximum social welfare, state, and that too in an algorithmically scalable manner. As part of future research, we also discuss interesting additional techno-economic challenges related to realizing effective privacy trading ecosystems.

References

[1]
Alessandro Acquisti, Curtis Taylor, and Liad Wagman. 2016. The economics of privacy. Journal of Economic Literature 54, 2 (2016), 442--92.
[2]
Susan B Barnes. 2006. A privacy paradox: Social networking in the United States. First Monday 11, 9 (2006).
[3]
Volker Benndorf and Hans-Theo Normann. 2018. The willingness to sell personal data. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics 120, 4 (2018), 1260--1278.
[4]
Dimitri P Bertsekas and John N Tsitsiklis. 1989. Parallel and distributed computation: numerical methods. Vol. 23. Prentice hall Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
[5]
Ronald H Coase. 1960. The problem of social cost. In Classic papers in natural resource economics. Springer, 87--137.
[6]
Julie E Cohen. 2012. What privacy is for. Harv. L. Rev. 126 (2012), 1904.
[7]
Mathias Dewatripont and Jean Tirole. 1994. A theory of debt and equity: Diversity of securities and manager-shareholder congruence. The quarterly journal of economics 109, 4 (1994), 1027--1054.
[8]
Cynthia Dwork, Aaron Roth, et al. 2014. The algorithmic foundations of differential privacy. Foundations and Trends® in Theoretical Computer Science 9, 3--4 (2014), 211--407.
[9]
Moritz Godel, Annabel Litchfield, and Iris Mantovani. 2012. The value of personal information: Evidence from empirical economic studies. Communications & Strategies 88 (2012), 41--60.
[10]
David Greenberg. [n. d.]. The Open Book: What Your Reading Choices Say About You. The Independent ([n. d.]).
[11]
David M. Greenberg, Simon Baron-Cohen, David J. Stillwell, Michal Kosinski, and Peter J. Rentfrow. 2015. Musical Preferences are Linked to Cognitive Styles. PLOS ONE 10, 7 (07 2015), 1--22.
[12]
Saikat Guha, Bin Cheng, and Paul Francis. 2011. Privad: Practical privacy in online advertising. In USENIX conference on Networked systems design and implementation. 169--182.
[13]
Ramesh Johari and John N Tsitsiklis. 2011. Parameterized supply function bidding: Equilibrium and efficiency. Operations research 59, 5 (2011), 1079--1089.
[14]
Paul D Klemperer and Margaret A Meyer. 1989. Supply Function Equilibria in Oligopoly Under Uncertainty. Econometrica 57, 6 (1989), 1243--1277.
[15]
Wendy L. Patrick. [n. d.]. The Open Book: What Your Reading Choices Say About You. Psychology Today ([n. d.]).
[16]
Kenneth C. Laudon. 1996. Markets and Privacy. Commun. ACM 39, 9 (Sept. 1996), 92--104.
[17]
Natasha Lomas. 2019. The case against behavioral advertising is stacking up. TechCrunch (Jan 2019). https://techcrunch.com/2019/01/20/dont-be-creepy/
[18]
Andreu Mas-Colell, Michael Dennis Whinston, Jerry R Green, et al. 1995. Microeconomic theory. Vol. 1. Oxford university press New York.
[19]
Mallesh M Pai and Aaron Roth. 2013. Privacy and mechanism design. ACM SIGecom Exchanges 12, 1 (2013), 8--29.
[20]
Ranjan Pal, Jon Crowcroft, Abhishek Kumar, Pan Hui, Hamed Haddadi, Swades De, Irene Ng, Sasu Tarkoma, and Richard Mortier. 2018. Privacy markets in the Apps and IoT age. Technical Report. University of Cambridge, Computer Laboratory.
[21]
Alvin E Roth. 1991. Game theory as a part of empirical economics. The Economic Journal 101, 404 (1991), 107--114.
[22]
Julie Tuan. 2000. US West v. FCC. Berkeley Tech. LJ 15 (2000), 354.
[23]
Wikipedia. 2018. Facebook-Cambridge Analytica data scandal. (2018).
[24]
Wikipedia. 2018. General Data Protection Regulation. (2018).
[25]
Shoshana Zuboff. 2019. The age of surveillance capitalism: the fight for the future at the new frontier of power. Profile Books.

Cited By

View all
  • (2022)Smart and Sentient Retail High StreetsSmart Cities10.3390/smartcities50400855:4(1670-1720)Online publication date: 29-Nov-2022
  • (2022)Data science for pedestrian and high street retailing as a framework for advancing urban informatics to individual scalesUrban Informatics10.1007/s44212-022-00009-x1:1Online publication date: 3-Oct-2022
  • (2021)Do people favor personal data markets in a surveillance society?Proceedings of the Winter Simulation Conference10.5555/3522802.3523035(1-12)Online publication date: 13-Dec-2021
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Privacy trading in the surveillance capitalism age viewpoints on 'privacy-preserving' societal value creation

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review
    ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review  Volume 49, Issue 3
    July 2019
    43 pages
    ISSN:0146-4833
    DOI:10.1145/3371927
    Issue’s Table of Contents
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 08 November 2019
    Published in SIGCOMM-CCR Volume 49, Issue 3

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. ecosystem
    2. efficiency
    3. market
    4. mobile apps
    5. privacy
    6. trading

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)63
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
    Reflects downloads up to 02 Mar 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2022)Smart and Sentient Retail High StreetsSmart Cities10.3390/smartcities50400855:4(1670-1720)Online publication date: 29-Nov-2022
    • (2022)Data science for pedestrian and high street retailing as a framework for advancing urban informatics to individual scalesUrban Informatics10.1007/s44212-022-00009-x1:1Online publication date: 3-Oct-2022
    • (2021)Do people favor personal data markets in a surveillance society?Proceedings of the Winter Simulation Conference10.5555/3522802.3523035(1-12)Online publication date: 13-Dec-2021
    • (2021)Do People Favor Personal Data Markets in a Surveillance Society?2021 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC)10.1109/WSC52266.2021.9715305(1-12)Online publication date: 12-Dec-2021
    • (2021)Privacy Risk is a Function of Information Type: Learnings for the Surveillance Capitalism AgeIEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management10.1109/TNSM.2020.304670418:3(3280-3296)Online publication date: Sep-2021
    • (2020) Notice of Violation of IEEE Publication Principles: Data Trading with a Monopoly Social Network: Outcomes Are Mostly Privacy Welfare Damaging IEEE Networking Letters10.1109/LNET.2020.30318682:4(185-189)Online publication date: Dec-2020
    • (2020)Preference-Based Privacy MarketsIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2020.30148828(146006-146026)Online publication date: 2020

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Figures

    Tables

    Media

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media