Social Media and Digital Fear. Should We fear?

(6/4/2016)

I read this articleyesterday and thought through Mark Cuban's concern today many times. One side is our psychological need to feel connected with other; the other side is afraid of being known too much in a negative and unexpected way. Who should be afraid?

I have to say what Cuban said is a real concern, but it is also an evil of the chilling effect from "the Power." First, social media has been a way of connecting people in the 21st century. Before that, people are more isolated, for those who are in minority (ethnic, sexual orientation, personal interest ...), it is not easy to find someone who are alike. It is the same for someone who has special interest. For example, I love science and astrophysics. For someone who lives in a remote place, it will be very difficult to find someone who has similar interest (through newspaper classified ad? local library? or Craigslist???). Various social media connect people who are very far away but share similar interest, similar background, similar culture, or similar suppressed ideology. Of course, the bad guys can also take advantage of social media. ISIS uses social media to recruit their fighters in Western countries. 

Social media as a tool is neutral by itself, like knife, shot guns, or drugs. When people use it in a beneficial way, they create social benefits; when people use it in a harmful way, they causes damages and some people get hurts. 

Cuban is warning that in the future our social media and digital footprints will be used against us. My question is who will use it against us? Who has that power and who are "the Power?" The government (or the regime controller) and business (that use various way to control the government). I am not against the government, but in most countries (including democratic countries) the government is always the entity defining the boundary of good and evil for the society (through democratic way or not). It uses its influence in propaganda, making legislations in the name of "maintaining social order" and use the police system to do execution. Look at the "Drug War" initiated by Nixon's government in the US. The US government used propaganda and legislation to define what are legal drugs and what are not, it sent millions of violators into prisons. Once the drug war started, the pharmaceutical companies realized that is benefits to them because after the Drug war US government outlaws several drugs that were cheap and easily accessible to people (like Cannabis and cocaine) and have to buy drugs that are now made by the pharmaceutical companies and 'approved' by the US FDA. In the US, the lobby system makes it a perfect system of the elite control.  

What Cuban warned is that "the Power" will trace our digital footprints, which will be used against us. I believe his vision is correct and his concern is valid if we look back to our history. What I don't agree with Cuban is that "we should self-sensor our personal expression, communication and interpersonal connection under the threat." He thinks we should take actions to protect ourselves and based on his recommendation we should either isolated ourselves from social media, deleting our digital footprint once we leave one, or subscribe his startup company's (Cyberdust.com) service, which claims providing private messages in a encrypted private network. This is in their website: 

PRIVATE MESSAGING.
PRIVATE NETWORKING.

Send private, encrypted, disappearing messages to friends or co-workers.

Build intimate networks and private relationships with influential members and celebrities. Secure, easy, and free.

It reminds me several things. First, will it be totally private and safe? The recent war between US FBI and Apple iPhone decryption is still fresh in our memory.  All communications in that private network will be gone in a certain period of time, and it looks wonderful. But it can also be disastrous. When the memories of both parties goes vague, who memory is the correct one? The technology for private messaging, private encrypted network is not difficult. If it truly works in terms of financial success, I will say it is one of the easiest and most profitable digital business model. Cyberdust.com don't need to build thousands of server center like Google or Amazon, because most of the messages will be deleted and they don't need many server at all. They don't even need to worry much of lawsuit in losing client's data because they are deleted on purpose. 

Cyberdust also reminds me of several companies that are profiting from selling "digital fears" like "LifeLock." LifeLock provides "identity theft protection service to help protect your finances and good name from identity theft and fraud." A bunch of companies provide similar identity protection against ID theft and fraud (free or paid service) and LifeLock claims they even compensate your loss up to $1 millions, that many other companies don't provide. This raises even bigger concerns:  the complexity of service coverage for digital ID protection is beyond average people's comprehension, and the "service agreement" users "check" when they subscribe always protect the service provider not the consumers. Did you see anyone who read through the service agreement when they buy on an online website or subscribe a digital service? "To Read All Of The Privacy Policies You Encounter, You'd Need To Take A Month Off From Work Each Year"  Cyberdust will be the same. Cyberdust (or similar companies) are selling "digital fears" to people and make $$$ out of that fear. 

Of course, ID theft and fraud is real and a big issue. Many consumers have experienced various degrees of ID theft, password loss and personal information loss and privacy breaches. But, now hackers don't go after individual Internet users, they go directly to those companies server and steal chunk (millions or hundreds of millions). There are plenty of examples: Target, Ashley Madison, US government, Sony, Home Depot.... (See here for a list in recent years, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_breach#2016). Cyberdust is just sell a different of fear, not ID theft or fraud, but personal damage from we expressing on the Internet and social media. 

I don't mean we should not be concerned, I also don't mean that we should just reveal everything about ourselves on social media without any discretion. But I want to see through the forces that make us concern and fear of reasonably self expression and interpersonal communication. A fear like that is when we cannot differentiate what is a person's "right of expression" and then we allow the government, business or other influential entities using people's digital footprints to discriminate, or even criminalize individuals. When the society allows that to happen (in some countries, it has happened already), we have lost the spirit of open and democratic society. I hope that day will never come.