It’s not data ethics, it’s ethics.
It’s not data privacy, it’s privacy.
It’s not digital rights, it’s human rights in the digital/networked age.
Let’s make sure we keep the focus on what’s important and not allow well-understood terms, concepts, and existing rights to be redefined by those with vested interests in clouding* the conversation and eroding our human rights by backdooring in a new set of lesser rights for the digital/networked aspects of our selves.
* See what I did there? 😛
@aral My working definition: the right and ability to define and enforce limitations on information sharing.
The very notion of privacy is a response to, and grows proportionately with, information capabilities: observation, storage, retrieval, synthes & analysis, fabrication, and dissemination.
It is an emergent defence.
The reason for a lack of modern senses of privacy in the past was a lack of contemporary informational capabilities.
@dredmorbius @aral @mdekstrand Helen Nissenbaum (now at Cornell Tech) has been working on defining privacy for a while now. This is a good place to start: https://crypto.stanford.edu/portia/papers/RevnissenbaumDTP31.pdf
tl;dr (or at least my understanding): Privacy is the set of norms and expectations that dictate whether information shared in one context or for one purpose can be shared in another context without weirding people out.
This is my personal Mastodon.