Archive

Archive for the ‘future’ Category

PII 2011: Owning Online Identity: Consumer-Managed Data

November 15th, 2011
1 comment

Fatemeh Khatibloo, Forrester Research moderates panel with Jason Cavnar, Singly, Todd Cullen, Acxiom, Shane Green, Personal, and Mary Hodder, Personal Data Ecosystem Consortium.

Fatemeh: why do consumers care? Jason: consumers have a sense of things being out of control. Todd: clients desperately looking for meaningful way to interact with consumers. On supply side, it’s new territory. Huge demand on marketer’s side. Shane: at core, we realize that who has access to our data shapes our experience, access, opportunities. Value: there’s a blindspot about what data is worth in additional value exchange. The more you start to see the opportunities as tangible, the more value is obtainable. Mary: This event is at a good time. As users get stalked online, they become aware that something’s happening, don’t know what to do, start calling senators. Opportunity for alternative to Do Not Track legislation, market solutions.

Fatemeh: privacy audits, do they provide a false sense of security when the government starts to audit the big companies? Shane: follow the money: big money in top right corner of Facebook (strong tie to advertising). People are waking up in unexpected ways to see connections between dollars and sense. Survey in their marketing: difference between “stuff in the attic that might be sold” vs “spy or thief in my attic.”  Jason: general awareness, at consumer level it’s my data, Sand Hill Road and companies that make money monetizing personal data. He’d like to see Silicon Valley invest in this respect as better model. Mary: zooming out a bit, how this works revolves around incentives (shipping parties, 3rd parties) and how they’re structured, and how does that structure support the business model? Going back down to audits: they’re meant to inspire fear as provocation to do the right thing. But how to incentivize the parties to do the right thing from consumer’s perspective?

Fatemeh to Todd: privacy and audits, marketing disconnect, who do we talk with in these organizations to make a difference? Todd: I wish it were one person such as a data steward, but that’s really rare. Our data is traveling around the web, should be easy to capture it for free. As long as this disconnect persists among marketers, no incentive to contribute to solving “a problem.”

Jason: Infrastructure needs to be put in place. Shane: lots of teaching, CEOs don’t understand how they got in the Wall Street Journal for spying on people. Mary: we talk to folks in advertising and trade agencies, Salesforce and CRM companies, media buying entities… right now they’re heavy users of personal data online. Folks are getting on board, need to know what business model is and how to fix this. Jason: there’s an enterprise need for interoperability too. Business model will be around easy access to customer control of data.

Fatemeh: industries that will help propel this forward, who has the most to lose and the most to gain? Jason: it’s the #2 in every market. Mary: banking and finance, there’s a lot to gain, high value in helping with most basic functions (e.g., reconciling statements with Mint), documenting meta-data around trades of data. Shane: agree that #2, 3, 4 players have a lot to gain. This is really tough for big incumbents because of embedded complex systems. Too much friction getting access to certain kinds of data that could reinvent/innovate travel processes, for example. Smaller innovators can tool up faster. Todd: high tech firms are not traditionally big buyers of data. Drive to grow globally: lack of reputable suppliers.

Questions.

 

[del.icio.us] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Ma.gnolia] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Email] More »

future, records, tools , , , , , , , , ,

PII 2011: Startup Spotlight: OneId

November 15th, 2011
No comments

Lots of problems managing registration and authorization account. Various threats compromise computers. Need for better management tools that are easy to use and secure. Here’s a OneID demo video that shows more.

[del.icio.us] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Ma.gnolia] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Email] More »

future, tools , , ,

PII 2011: Making Privacy Portable

November 15th, 2011
No comments

Larry Downes moderating panel with Chris Babel, TRUSTe, Jim Brock, PrivacyChoice, and Chris Kelly, Kelly Investments. Jim: PrivacyChoice’s mission is to make privacy easier: managing online, templates, partners & their APIs. We’re bootstrapped right now. Chris B: TRUSTe: privacy services have evolved into advertising, mobile and cloud spaces. Was non-profit but 2.5 years ago we went for-profit. Chris K: companies with data components of user behavior, concerns with venture model.

Larry: privacy was a cost (or risk) of doing business, now we’re looking at empowering users in a way that generates profits. Anecdotal experience in making privacy profitable, and what we learned? Jim: customers have been coming to us (on business side) with a compliance model, wanting to see uplift in their site with TRUSTe seal. Customers have concerns, their seal helps address that. Chris B: space between customer needs and marketing efforts. “Profile Choice” allows real-time bidding on aggregate-able info, didn’t find the right mix at that time. Chris K: misunderstandings between what companies are trying to do and what customers believe they’re doing. Using data for ad targeting within a company privacy policy. Beacon became Facebook Connect.

Larry: Beacon, and Google Buzz, had unsuccessful launch: unclear purpose (benefits), generating FTC complaints. Is there something about the launch of a product or service that makes it more dangerous or risky than other times? Jim: use of large datasets are prone to claims of changing the rules. If you’re working in areas that weren’t contemplated, that can be confusing, need to think about how to advance sharing practices. Navigating these waters is extraordinarily difficult. Jim: any future change may be viewed as a breach of privacy, unexpected changes (lack of or poor communications, offer choices, does company honor user choices, no accountability). Chris K: FTC, government isn’t in a good position to deal on this level but you don’t want to attract their attention.

Larry: sources of funding? Chris: question is no longer is privacy big enough, now it’s what are the top level matters? Investment community–advertising (every $ spent wants to be more targetted). Jim: process in ad targeting space, global, and how little is online: ad people are demanding more information about who’s receiving their ads.

Larry: about your not taking public investments? Jim: happy accident.

Chris K: Forensics for providing choice or for analytics/response: there are techniques, can take better control over this as web providers to help users. Data flow as arms business: companies that need to control what’s happening on their site or people who want to offer services to consumers. Chris B: targeted ads now more transparent. Balance against malware, cookies and their sources that feels more like security.

Larry: FTC’s interest in these issues, pending legislation in Congress–how does possibility of regulations affect climate for investment? Chris K: uncertainty is a cloud, straightforward means of regulation can move industry forward. But interim finger-pointing, lobbying gaming, are problems. Likes EU model, but we’re moving away from that. Chris B: gov is crowdsourcing communities, online advertising and ad space initiatives are trying to be more self-regulating. Still uncertain, industry groups and co-regulation being brought up and talked about. Chris K: Congress is a giant consumer of these targeting services. Behavioral targeting seems to be settling. Larry: what if a new regulation passes that takes a business model out or forces… Chris K: legislation takes time to effect.

Questions. Did people that saw the TRUSTe seal click on the seal or just go with it? Chris: clicks were low, most people recognize seal as an envelope.  What are people choosing? (site can collect, store, use for ad targeting, give to 3rd parties) Chris K: policy should say. We can’t make sure people read the policy. Do I have a right not to have data collected? Ends up as different perspectives from people vs industry, investment (collect data).

[del.icio.us] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Ma.gnolia] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Email] More »

future, records, tools , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

PII 2011: Mapping the PII Market: Players, Regulators, Stakeholders

November 15th, 2011
No comments

Session with Terence Craig and Mary Ludloff, PatternBuilders. Terence: their book is Privacy and Big Data (O’Reilly).

Things have changed in privacy and personal information. PII-driven business models (later). Data collectors are the engine: giants like Google, Facebook, Twitter, also organizations and agencies like Florida DMV (sold data to LexisNexus), also mom & pop operations. What makes information valuable? Your health and wealth, the networking you do, the Internet of things (you). What role to the aggregators play: markets for buying and selling data. Uses are infinite: research, monitoring, predictive modeling, advertising…

PII-driven business models:

  • Platform plays (SAS, Hadoop, Revolution, Microsoft’s SharingInsight, CouchDB, etc.) – where everything is phoning home all the time.
  • Social plays: LinkedIn, Facebook, Google Plus and Foursquare, but mobile is not this change. Also KISSmetrics, Klout, Zinga, hootsuite, radian6.
  • Goverment plays: TSA and NSA, FBI, IRS, can buy from Facebook, Palantir (DOD).
  • Privacy plays: SafetyWeb, reputation.com, TRUSTe, Singly, also Intellilight (in Detroit, attached to street lights where if there are a couple of people are there it turns audio mike and calls police), Spokeo, Datong
  • Everyone plays: not just about advertising, many industries and business models benefit.

Implications for all PII players: privacy expectations, regulatory adherence (global), transparency (toward customers), crisis management. Privacy concerns are growing with consumers. Government is signalling that concern with new legislation. Companies must invest in this area, including training and certification.

Regulations: it’s confusing and will get more so. US: >30 federal states, >100 state regs for data security privacy. EU, pending legislation adds more. Bottom line; you’re going to need help here. Be transparent, be explicit about what you can’t provide. Use opt-in data options only.

Crisis management: when things to wrong, know how you are going to deal with them. Get a team and process in place. It’s about staying with the story if you can (used to be getting ahead of the story, now stay with). How to avoid a train wreck: be transparent, think global, be ready for breaches, behave as if you were worth your customers’ trust.

Question: opt-in: don’t short the short-term: be transparent. Opt in is a good way for customers to choose, is sticky.

[del.icio.us] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Ma.gnolia] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Email] More »

future, history, records, tools , , , , , , , , ,

PII 2011: Social Sharing and the Data-Driven Economy

November 15th, 2011
No comments

On this panel: Kara Swisher, All Things D, moderates panel with Jim Adler, Chief Privacy Officer, Intellus, David Glazer, Director of Engineering at Google (Plus), Roger McNamee, musician and Elevation Partners, and Fred Wilson, Union Square Ventures.

Kara: We’ll be talking about implications of social sharing for business. Where is the business of social sharing? Fred: Facebook plus, FB is the largest platform but not the only. There will continue to be lots of important social platforms outside of FB. Roger: period of rapid adoption for first 2 years, FB has won the largest share. Cost of entry is high, social is everywhere. David: once things are that way they tend to stay that way? We didn’t name Google Plus “new, now, here” – two things we wanted to do: existing products could be done better, we saw a lot of our products would be better with baked-in sharing. Wanted to improve overall connected state. Jim: things swing from open to closed and back. Fred: top things include Tumblr, wouldn’t be in the picture but for… Mobile is really important. It’s not game over. FB is dominant but market is not devoid of opportunities. Roger: web as an app, number is going to 70% (of what?). Who is going to control the user experience? Things are not shipping on mobile. FB for many people is going to be the platform; connect then identity. Jim: we’re in the process of mapping humanity online. This is a big one. It really does a disservice to say it’s done. How are we mapping? What’s appropriate? rights? mapping social rituals. Of course there will be platforms, and we’re just getting started.

Kara: what are the key critical trends? Jim: we’re going through a new reality, reputation online, a 360 view. You can now reach across time/space. It takes a village, and we’re doing this one hut at a time, building intimate connections. David: I agree with mobile, always on. Shift to living in a world where we’re always on, leaking and sharing, what do we do with that? Kara; continuous partial attention? David: yes, how subconscious should we be? Shift to assuming the camera is always rolling. Jim: this is something we need to get use to. David: there are “many publics” (Kevin Marks said this first). Fred: Tablet is interesting. People are starting to build natively for tablets. More companies are coming to us where FB is the only login experience. This will accrue tremendous value to FB, that’s not really a good thing, especially for the developer (or the users!).

Kara: mobile platforms? Roger: Facebook and Yelp as mobile. Time to market. The thing that really scares me: we’ve lived in a world where people have not been honest with each other for too long. Income gap based on proprietary access to opportunities. Big corps (including telcos) are absolutely using our data. Jim: we’re moving through a threshold. FB is assumed to be public but it’s mostly private. (?) Social media has been like Lake Wobegone, was powerful but there’s going to be interesting consequences: what do people know about me? New product where people can know what we know about them. Too voyeuristic, not narcissistic enough.

Kara: what is sharing now? Fred: when you go out on Friday night, there’s a tremendous amount of sharing going on. Social media is doing the sort of the same thing. This morning was sad about Zucotti Park, human nature to want to share. My kids are much more aware of how to use the technology. David: the way my kids use “stalker” has become a casual term. Fred: I stalk my kids on FB every day, they know it. Jim: Kids know the difference between public and public/private spaces, they’re much more nuanced about how they approach the world. Fred: we’re doing this hire, looking at all of the social media resources of potential candidates. Next generation is using tools to make “resumes” more interesting.

Kara: If FB is the main stalking platform, what are the main business opportunities? Roger: social is today what “new media” is in 1987. My sense: new environment (half cell phones, half computers) is “hypernet” with totally different economic players. Running out of wireless bandwidth, need to replace infrastructure in cellular. Apple’s position is really unstable, capturing the value through hardware. HTML5 has opportunities to change the rules of the game. Safari gets 100% of development today, but notion of one company capturing all the value needs to change. Gigantic change wave of the hypernet, based on whitespace and digital TV spectrum. Instagram is fun but not important.

Kara to David: Google Plus? Tried to have a quiet debut. “We shipped plus, now we’re shipping the Google.” Two things we want to solve: one is how can we make YouTube, Blogger better by making it more social. Fred: Socialization of Google and mobile apps: eventually they’ll get it right but it’s crazy to think of it as a Facebook killer. Roger: maybe a Twitter killer, because they captured the “twitteratti” early on. Costs zero to add a Plus button. Jim: the big opportunity is what you can do with data. Focus on private data becoming public: more frictionless sharing. Understanding data is hugely disruptive. Use cases, danger is in inappropriate use. How do we use the public data to infer amazing things about each other?

Kara: Are you investing in data companies? Fred: we like to invest in platforms that have a lot of data and can use it to do things natively on the platform. We’re not investing in capturing data for 3rd party things. Kara: How do you look at Twitter? Fred: my favorite platform of all, but not as an investor–I connect to people there (@FredWilson has over 200K followers). It’s all public, everyone knows that.

Roger: two things that Apple did wrong: 1) fight with amazon over one-click, 2) if they get AppleTV right, all they have to do is in-app purchases back. Fire is not a great tablet. Fred: it’s a Kindle with the web on it. Roger: yeah. Nook is much cooler.

Questions.

[del.icio.us] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Ma.gnolia] [Technorati] [Twitter] [Email] More »

friends/family, future, history, records, tools , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Switch to our mobile site