Discussions about privacy are muddled. That's because people are often talking at cross purposes.
It turns out that privacy is virtually impossible to define.
And to further confuse matters, we think we care about it. But when it really comes down to it. We don't.
To begin to make progress in understanding privacy we first have to recognise that we relate to privacy at two distinct levels. At a societal level and at a personal level.
Yet another threat to society At the societel level the concern is about government spooks and megacorporations. Pouring over your data and watching your every move. This is a very real concern. But... It's impersonal. And filed away in our heads under "Yet another threat to society." In short people don't feel it acutely enough to actually alter their day-to-day behaviour. Even though they kinda know they should. So, in a practical sense its just as if people don't care about privacy.
This time its personal The erosion of privacy at a personal is very different. I hold that privacy cannot be usefully defined at this level, except to be defined by the breach. By instances of social embarassment. By those moments when social spheres collide with messy consequences. Facebook has gone further than most in bringing this reality to light. At its best Facebook is a serendipity engine. At its worst its a privacy trainwreck. To restate that. When we are pleasantly surprised we call it serendipity. When we are unpleasantly surprised we call it a breach of privacy.
'Privacy' is a red herring Its all very subjective and context sensitive and this is why I say that at this level privacy as a notion is not amenable to definition. And it distract and confuses us, making it difficult to see what is really going on. Its better to reframe the situation. And recognise that people don't care about privacy. What they really care about is social embarassment. They want the happy accidents that are the upside of social collisions without the messy consequences that are the downsides. Of course, this is not possible with Facebook. Its a double-edged sword. You can't have one without the other.
The Future I suppose someone will eventually find a way give the consumers what they want. The upside without the downside. What will it look like? Who knows, but it will likely be a new platform that doesn't have these problems baked in. *****Timely example******** Facebook 'reconnect': The latest Facebook innovation illustrates this baked in double-edged sword... serendipity engine / privacy trainwreck scenario perfectly. Facebook 'reconnect' prompts users to reconnect with ex-lovers and dead friends.