Ethics of Big data
“Would I sell my pictures from Facebook to a corporate entity?” was the first question that came to my mind when I read this article. “Should I sell my pictures from Facebook to a corporate entity?”, “Should I be allowed to do so and should companies be legally allowed to buy them off me?” were the set of questions that followed. The article titled ‘Consumers want rewards for use of personal data’ which appeared in the BusinessNews Daily on the 25th of June 2013 started a war of choice and rights in my mind.
I understand very well that individuals must be allowed the freedom of choice when it comes to their ‘personal’ belongings. I also understand that they have the right to choose to do something as long as this choice has no harmful effects on someone else’s rights. Let us first discuss the absolute nature of right to choice.
The argument of choice is never absolute. Reasonable restrictions exists in it; we are not allowed to murder someone, hit someone, say rude things about someone, commit suicide, live in someone else’s home or even go to parties uninvited, proving the fact that choice is not absolute. The state ensures it guides individuals into making the right choice in these cases by removing the choice in the first case. The law says murdering someone is not an option to anyone in the society and will thus punish you heavily if you do so. In the case of selling personal data as-well, given that the moral implications and harms are huge, companies must be forced to resist offers from individuals. Let us now discuss the harms.
We are talking about individuals selling their stories, pictures and moments of life for some sort of monetary value. Many of them might argue that individuals however share their opinions when they answer surveys or write essays for companies, but the idea in such cases is that the individual is answering the survey or essay with the specific purpose of sharing information and ideas. The ‘personal’ objects we are talking about
I understand very well that individuals must be allowed the freedom of choice when it comes to their ‘personal’ belongings. I also understand that they have the right to choose to do something as long as this choice has no harmful effects on someone else’s rights. Let us first discuss the absolute nature of right to choice.
The argument of choice is never absolute. Reasonable restrictions exists in it; we are not allowed to murder someone, hit someone, say rude things about someone, commit suicide, live in someone else’s home or even go to parties uninvited, proving the fact that choice is not absolute. The state ensures it guides individuals into making the right choice in these cases by removing the choice in the first case. The law says murdering someone is not an option to anyone in the society and will thus punish you heavily if you do so. In the case of selling personal data as-well, given that the moral implications and harms are huge, companies must be forced to resist offers from individuals. Let us now discuss the harms.
We are talking about individuals selling their stories, pictures and moments of life for some sort of monetary value. Many of them might argue that individuals however share their opinions when they answer surveys or write essays for companies, but the idea in such cases is that the individual is answering the survey or essay with the specific purpose of sharing information and ideas. The ‘personal’ objects we are talking about