PosthumanPrivacy - Terasem Movement, Inc.

Transcript PosthumanPrivacy - Terasem Movement, Inc.

@ Terasem Colloquium 07 Posthuman Privacy

Privacy in the posthuman age Sebastian Sethe

S10 1FL Sheffield, United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0) 114 222 6857 Fax: +44 (0) 114 222 6886 Email1: [email protected]  Email2: [email protected]

Certain materials in this presentation are included under the “Fair Use” exemptions of Copyright and Trademark Law

S I B L E

Sheffield Institute of Biotechnological Law and Ethics |Sebastian Sethe

Future studies?

                   

Extrapolation Horizon scanning Pattern Deduction Projection Trend typology Scenarios Writing Morphology Convergence Capture Critical Technologies Cross-Impact Analysis Relevance Tree Panel of Experts Delphi Surveys Game Theory Goals Analysis Brainstorming / Fiction Backcasting Patent Analysis Simulation / Modeling etc, pp..

|Sebastian Sethe

Post-humanity?

Posthuman Privacy

Conceptual A.I.

GM humans Cyborgs ?

‘Uploaded’ Minds ‘Uplifted’ Animals |Sebastian Sethe

@ Terasem Colloquium 07 Posthuman Privacy © |Sebastian Sethe

@ Terasem Colloquium 07

Information = about a (potential) enemy

Posthuman Privacy

intelligence

@ Terasem Colloquium 07 Posthuman Privacy

Our future ability to gather intelligence

Eminence

     Miniaturisation Ubiquity Integration Interdependence Connectedness

Power

     Storage Analysis Control Reach Scope 

Cost 1

   

…

[..]

useful technology is hard to stop Probe a mind for thoughts Solve any violent crime

. [..] , David D. Friedman |Sebastian Sethe

@ Terasem Colloquium 07

about

gathering intelligence/ informational insight

will be

easier

for

Posthuman Privacy

a posthuman

victim perpetrator … of a privacy violation

|Sebastian Sethe

@ Terasem Colloquium 07 Posthuman Privacy

3 The social evolution of privacy



evolutionary trait



ostracism



status symbol



spiritual matter



political right



social duty



◄ ◄ ◄ ◄

also secrecy in commerce & innovation relevance of military intelligence technological capacity individual psychology

interpersonal claim



penumbra



dispositional?

@ Terasem Colloquium 07 Posthuman Privacy © R.Machado, A.Bergmann, BJ. Klein, S.Fonesca Klein, Conny, various trademarks |Sebastian Sethe

@ Terasem Colloquium 07 Posthuman Privacy © |Sebastian Sethe

@ Terasem Colloquium 07 Posthuman Privacy ©

**Posthuman privacy will be reconfigured by:**

Technology

Embodiment

Sociology

Now, what about the law?

|Sebastian Sethe

The usual

Literal vs. Spirit Narrow vs. Expansive

Posthuman Privacy

Now, what about the law?

|Sebastian Sethe

@ Terasem Colloquium 07 Posthuman Privacy

Olmstead v. United States (1928)

“…one who installs in his house a telephone […] intends to project his voice to those quite outside, and that the wires beyond his house and messages while passing over them are not within the protection of the Fourth Amendment. Here those who intercepted the projected voices were not in the house of either party to the conversation.” Chief Justice Taft © |Sebastian Sethe

The usual

Literal vs. Spirit Narrow vs. Expansive

Techno-specific vs. Feel-good

Posthuman Privacy |Sebastian Sethe

@ Terasem Colloquium 07 Posthuman Privacy ©

Olmstead v. United States (1928)

“…one who installs in his house a telephone […] intends to project his voice to those quite outside, and that the wires beyond his house and messages while passing over them are not within the Louis Brandeis & Samuel Warren "The Right to Privacy" (1890-91) 4 Harvard Law Review pp.193-220 Chief Justice Taft The makers of our Constitution […] conferred, as against the Government, the right to be let alone -- the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men. To protect that right, every unjustifiable intrusion by the Government upon the privacy of the individual, whatever the means employed, must be deemed a violation of the Fourth Amendment.

Justice Brandeis, dissenting |Sebastian Sethe

The usual

Literal vs. Spirit Narrow vs. Expansive

Techno-specific vs. Feel-good

Posthuman Privacy right to be let alone |Sebastian Sethe

@ Terasem Colloquium 07 Posthuman Privacy ©

Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)

[…] specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have

penumbras

, formed by emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance.

Various guarantees create zones of privacy .

[1st:]

The right of association contained in the

penumbra

First Amendment is one, as we have seen. of the

[3rd:]

The Third Amendment in its prohibition against the quartering of soldiers "in any house" in time of peace without the consent of the owner is another facet of that

privacy.

[…] [4th / 5th:]

The Fourth and Fifth Amendments were described as protection against all governmental invasions "of the sanctity of a man's home and the

privacies

of life."

+ Liberty Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment

No State shall [...] deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.

|Sebastian Sethe

The usual

Literal vs. Spirit Narrow vs. Expansive

Techno-specific vs. Feel-good

“right to be let alone” Posthuman Privacy “penumbra”

“Due Process Clause of the 14 th Amendment, which protects against state action the right to privacy, including a woman's qualified right to terminate her pregnancy.” ,

|Sebastian Sethe

@ Terasem Colloquium 07

Roe v. Wade (1973)

Posthuman Privacy

“Due Process Clause of the 14 th Amendment, which protects against state action the right to privacy, including a woman's qualified right to terminate her pregnancy.” ,

|Sebastian Sethe

Do you believe in privacy?

  |Sebastian Sethe

@ Terasem Colloquium 07

Life , Liberty

dignity

Posthuman Privacy

Feel-Good jurisprudence -- mostly harmless?

the pursuit of happiness?

autonomy

Privacy ?

as constraint OR as empowerment

|Sebastian Sethe

@ Terasem Colloquium 07 Posthuman Privacy

Privacy revisited

Information Collection

1. Surveillance 2. Interrogation

Invasion

1. Intrusion 2. Decisional Interference

Information Dissemination

1. Breach of Confidentiality 2. Disclosure 3. Exposure 4. Increased Accessibility 5. Blackmail 6. Appropriation 7. Distortion

Information Processing

1. Aggregation 2. Identification 3. Insecurity 4. Secondary Use 5. Exclusion Daniel J. Solove; "A Taxonomy of Privacy" in: University of Pennsylvania Law Review, (2006) Vol.154, No. 3; pg. 477-560 |Sebastian Sethe

@ Terasem Colloquium 07

information

**What do we really want to protect?**

Posthuman Privacy

privacy autonomy

Shame Ward vs. Prejudice Informational Property Individualism …

|Sebastian Sethe

stop others from observing you stop others from stalking you deceive others about your health stop others from using information about you without your consent avoid discrimination based on superstitions about genes stop others from using information about you in a way that conflicts with your values leave your old life behind & begin afresh

we really

crime fighting tools

want to

fool others about your true identity

protect?

safeguard against dictatorship wear different masks

|Sebastian Sethe

The social evolution of privacy



evolutionary trait



ostracism



status symbol



spiritual matter



political right



social duty



interpersonal claim



penumbra



dispositional?

Posthuman Privacy |Sebastian Sethe

@ Terasem Colloquium 07

**Posthuman privacy will be reconfigured by:**

Technology

Embodiment

3 4

Sociology Law

@ Terasem Colloquium 07 Posthuman Privacy

References cited:

 Deryck Beyleveld, Roger Brownsword; Human Dignity in Bioethics & Biolaw ; (2002) OUP  Louis Brandeis, Samuel Warren "The Right to Privacy" in: Harvard Law Review (1890) 4; pp193-220  David Brin; The Transparent Society : (1999) Perseus  David D. Friedman; "The Case for Privacy" , in: A.I. Cohen & C.H. Wellman (Eds.), Contemporary .

Debates in Applied Ethics, (2005) Blackwell  Leon Kass; Life, Liberty, and the Defence of Dignity (2004) AEI Press  Daniel J. Solove; "A Taxonomy of Privacy" in: Vol.154, No.3; pp.477-560 University of Pennsylvania Law Review , (2006) .

Further reading:

 Dale Carrico;

Pancryptics: Technological Transformations of the Subject of Privacy;

forthcoming – draft at authors’ website  Luciano Floridi "Four challenges for a theory of informational privacy" in:

Ethics and Information Technology,

(2006) 8; pp.109

[email protected]

|Sebastian Sethe