.jpg/dims/resize/740/optimize) |
Ashley Madison was hacked last week, with the hackers threatening to post its membership list unless they were paid. But what got lost in the collective hand-wringing was that membership of a cheating site actually doesn't necessarily mean you are cheating. People could have joined for curiosity, novelty, research, companionship, conversation partners, and any other host of reasons that could ― but also might not ― lead to actual sex between people.
The point I am trying to make is that membership in a cheating site is not necessarily an accurate proxy metric for actual cheating. There are much more accurate ways to tell whether someone is having an affair.
Let's take a scenario that is going on regularly in Korea. Pretty much everyone in Korea uses Kakaotalk to communicate. It's become an absolutely essential part of everyday life. Kakao also recently launched an Uber-like taxi service, which has taken off like a rocket. The same company also offers Pay service as well as wire transfer service. Then you have Daum, the second largest portal site in Korea that has recently joined with Kakao. So, it's more than possible that your everyday life is wholly lived with the Daum Kakao ecology. Then it's also more than possible that Daum Kakao knows that you are having an affair with your co-worker although you might successfully hide it from your spouse or colleagues.
If Daum Kakao knows that you message someone specific at certain times of the day, buy gifts online, travel to different parts of the country known for romantic getaways, check into hotels in certain areas of the town during specific times, search for topics that hint at sex or romance, etc., then it's not that difficult to build in business intelligence to figure out that you are having an affair. It's certainly much more accurate than a membership in Ashley Madison.
As disturbing as this capability might sound, it's not a big deal because it's just tracking your behavior after the fact. However, what I am actually concerned about in terms of privacy in a connected world is the robust analytics that are possible with all the data that corporations are collecting about us. We have already seen multiple stories about how Facebook, based on a couple's pattern of activities on the site, can predict that a couple will break up even before they have made an explicit decision to separate. Amazon can predict that we will need certain products before we even know that we need them, based on our previous patterns of purchases. Uber, I am sure, is also crunching its ridership data to predict demand and allocate resources proactively.
And not just services. Don't forget the Internet of Things (IoT) whereby everyday objects are all being networked to transfer data. Your cell phones, cars, shipping containers, watches, and "things" of all kinds are being connected faster than we can blink. If you consolidate the data that is being streamed from all the "things" that you use and all the "services" that you engage in, then someone somewhere has a very full understanding of how you live.
On second thought, I am actually OK even with this level of predictive analytics. If Hyundai knows that my Sonata's timing belt is going to break and sends out a mechanic beforehand, then I can live with that. If Facebook pops up a news article that I might find interesting based on my past clicking habits, then I am OK with that too. If Amazon drops off a roll of paper towels just before I run out, then that's convenient.
However, what does scare me if the next evolution of this predictive analytics when it becomes preordained analytics. What I mean by that is that these companies ― by proactively offering services and conveniences based on your past behavior ― actually reinforce the same behavior in people.
For example, if Amazon drops off a carton of cigarettes every month, then what's the likelihood that person will ever quit smoking? If Uber automatically sends a pickup service to your house every Saturday night at 10pm to take you to clubs, then who's driving whose behavior? If these corporations ― now with an invested business interest in you continuing with your behavior ― actively work to reinforce your behavior, they are no longer predicting; they are reinforcing and preordaining your behavior.
In other words, we are all "addicted" to certain patterns of behavior. If, for some reason, we want to throw off our "addiction" to certain behavior, we would want to create an environment where we don't have to face the triggering stimuli. This becomes impossible in the world of predictive analytics when companies will find every opportunity to expose you to those same triggers.
At that point, it's no longer the past catching up with your future. It's the future never having a chance because of your past.
Jason Lim is a Washington, D.C.-based expert on innovation, leadership and organizational culture. He has been writing for The Korea Times since 2006. He can be reached at jasonlim@msn.com, facebook. com/jasonlimkoreatimes and @jasonlim2012.
![[INTERVIEW] German professor hopes to boost appreciation for Korean traditional music](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/bfd15b77cdda4f549455b97d6ce4863c.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
