Tweet summaries of danah boyd’s SXSW talk on “Privacy and Publicity”
greggyour: RT @dotRights: #danahboyd calls it dismantling contextual integrity = privacy violation.
mblafkin: #DanahBoyd basically saying: not worried about #privacy vs. sharing, but we ARE worried about the Worlds Colliding problem
hastac: RT @MobileBehavior: Just because people put things in public places, doesn’t mean they want them to be aggregated
namtrok: Personal (relationship based) vs Articulated vs Behavioral networks. (like location svcs) #danahboyd crossing those lines can cause issues
StaceyMonk: RT @rachelannyes: “People make information available in part to make themselves vulnerable.” That builds relationships
greggyour: RT @mr_lbs: Personal (relationship based) vs Articulated vs Behavioral networks. (like location svcs)
JosephDickerson: RT @McClennan: It’s the technologists that say privacy is dead. Many consumers still share but crave obscurity
blakecannon: RT @hastac: “Early adopters are consistently surprised at how a community changes when it becomes mainstream
CauseGlobal: RT @amandafrench: Danah Boyd has been asking nontechie users what their privacy settings are: not one has actually got it right
dotRights: #danahboyd technologists use argument that privacy is dead in order to justify their desire to make more info public
elysa: RT @drkkolmes: Last Dec, 65% Facebook users made their info public when they selected new privacy changes
dgebler: Teens want to be seen online by peers, but they don’t want to be seen by people who have power over them… namely parent
rachelannyes: “Making something that is public more public is a violation of privacy.”
smc90: interesting: teen demographic more conscious of what they gain in public, adults more conscious of what they lose
greggyour: RT @mbjorn: RT @pgillin: FB is about communicating with the ppl you already know. Twitter has become a place people find an audience
ayatlin: RT @simonmainwaring: #SXSW #danahboyd In life, private by default, public by effort is normal. In social media its the opposite.
johnmjones: Reaction to trending topics during BET awards show how “not everyone is welcome in public spaces
dotRights: #danahboyd talks about those who CANNOT embrace a public-by-default world w/o fear (political, religious, racial minorities)
Beckland: #danahboyd has influence, therefore has control of her #sm presence. Marginalized people have the opposite response to #sm #sxsw #sxswi
joncamfield: RT @hastac: danah: “How public is your kids teacher allowed to be online?” Can s/he date, be perself, etc.
dotRights: public-by-default is not the great democratizer we would like it to be.
smc90: Technologies like Chatroulette blur boundaries between privacy & publicity - expect more such mashups
Beckland: #danahboyd “there is no algorithm to parse private vs public, and changes with each person and over time”
greggyour: RT @PARCinc: Technologists: when designing social systems, you’re moving from code to living systems. Must listen to users when changing
MediaFunders: RT @lizwinks: If you are talking to your kids about privacy DO NOT start w/ “back in my day”. Ask questions
customersmarket: Oxymoronic but true - bloggers and celebs put a lot of info out there to actually maintain more privacy. I know I do that!
hesnow: The paradoxical wisdom of Angela Jolie: the more she puts out in public, the more she can maintain privacy
From "Cicero's Tuscan Disputations"
- V. A. To me death seems to be an evil.
- M. What, to those who are already dead? or to those who must die?
- A. To both.
- M. It is a misery, then, because an evil?
- A. Certainly.
- M. Then those who have already died, and those who have still got to die, are both miserable?
- A. So it appears to me.
- M. Then all are miserable?
- A. Every one.
The ascendacy of the “non-private person”
A fascinating short essay on Boing Boing:
Tiger Woods, described frequently as a “very private” person, was unable to keep his private life private. Why? Because he interacted with non-private people. The reason Kim Kardashian and the Jersey Shore denizens have risen to positions of prominence in popular culture is because they each epitomize the non-private person. They have nothing to hide, so nothing that becomes public knowledge can hurt them. Ms. Kardashian can be urinated on in a sex tape and actually be helped in terms of being a public figure. My own ability to be effective as a transgender rights activist is because there’s nothing anyone could expose about me that would deter me from my activism. That gives me enormous power over anonymous haters who vent their impotent fury at me to no avail. Their own fear of exposure (loss of privacy) is their greatest weakness.