The interview that follows is peculiar in that, in the answers, the precision of a researcher from the Laser Laboratory of the University of Malaga is reflected (which not only is not at all at odds with the plasticity of the examples that he brings up when he is necessary, but it is also appreciated, given the subject matter discussed). Jose F. Alcántara is the author of the book The controlling company y vsvs, tribunes from which he talks about privacy, about cyber rights, about the implications that technology has in relation to freedom and control.
Such implications, far from leading to a phobia, have led him to reflection. In their answers, then, there is a defense of anonymity, when it is often considered one of the evils of the internet; a commitment to the distribution of information, at a time when centralized networks such as Facebook beat visitor records; a clear dart against what he qualifies as "Newspeak", in reference to the concept coined by Orwell; etc. An interesting analysis, in short, on "certain repressive dreams" that in his opinion makes technology possible, as a preview of what he explains in the essay The controlling company.
Do you consider yourself a technophobe? Regarding the use of new technologies to control citizens, I mean ...
Technophobe? Not at all, I love technology (I think I like almost everyone). The technology does not it serves to control the citizenry. The technology used to control the citizenry. And it is used, in turn, for many other very beneficial things. What must be achieved is that we become aware of these harmful uses, because only in this way will we be able to limit them. And limiting uses is not a technical problem, but a legal one. We need laws that act like a mountain's firewall: defending our rights in the face of threats.
Who watches the watchman?
More people than the vigilante believes 🙂 In the network and in the streets, the vigilante can only be watched by us. Focus on the abuses of power that, as in the case of state governments, they hold by and for the people (or so it is supposed), precisely so that they continue to use power by and for the people and not against the people.
On the cover of the book The controlling company An image similar to that of the Pacman video game appears, in which the labyrinth is like a jail, the ghosts are policemen and suspicious individuals. And in those is the kite, trying to get along. Given the forcefulness of the image, the question is inevitable: Why that title? Why that cover?
Technology makes certain repressive dreams possible. If contemporary democracy arises in macrourbes like Paris, where the population could lose itself in anonymity, technology makes it possible to know everything about people's communications, as well as to know their location in a reasonably precise (sometimes extremely precise, with uncertainties of less than 1m in the case of GPS or barely a hundred meters in the case of our mobile phone, as long as we are in a populated urban nucleus). All that surveillance has, whether we are aware of it or not, a repressive effect. It inhibits the normal communication of people, the way we would communicate. If you know that it can be used against you, you will measure your words a lot, as well as who you are addressing. It is the panopticon ideology, extended to the streets. The policing and punishing of Foucault. The society of control: an ecosystem in which retaliation, inevitable after loss of anonymity, inhibits any response to power. And we all know that the difference between a Western democracy and an African dictatorship is not that our leaders are less corrupt (look at internal politics, or European politics, to verify it), but that here there is a public opinion that can be opposed to that corruption and put a stop to it. What if all opposition were retaliated thanks to the loss of anonymity?
Moving on to the cover, it is the work of Fernando Díaz, a very good and talented designer who from the first moment appropriated the pac-man proposal and took it further, and with more success, than I know. it would have never happened to me. We chose this cover because I think it sums up very well how we can find ourselves if we don't do something about it demanding a legal defense of our privacy.
At the book presentation, which took place in Madrid a few weeks ago, there were several people related to the world of banking, a world in which video surveillance cameras are the order of the day. What policy would you advise them to follow, in relation to respect for privacy, if you had the opportunity to do so?
Security is not an absolute magnitude. Rather, it must be seen in balance with the price we pay for it. If it is a question of insuring the gold deposited in the bank, surely there are measures that compensate (armored vaults, opening timers, multiple key systems,…). If to increase the security of their business they need to damage the rights of people, either by using video cameras or by demanding that you open your private life as if it were transparent glass prior to granting aid, perhaps the price they are paying in image it will not compensate them. Banks violate our privacy much more aggressively than their camcorders do. When they ask us for very long details of expenses and income, when to make us an insurance (insurers and banks go very hand in hand) they demand all kinds of guarantees (economic, health, habit, history) they are demanding that we give them our privacy in a way that totally undermines the trust that the user has in banking. The bad reputation that banks have is due not only to their lack of transparency, but to the fact that the same transparency that they do not provide is never required in advance and in very high doses from anyone who wants to do business with them. If I could speak to the bank, I would tell them that they have an image problem because they have not understood that they demand transparency that they never give later. That sometimes the risk of getting to know your client a little less (risking picking a lemon from the pile of peaches) is beneficial in terms of image and may pay them much more in the medium and long term. I'm not saying giving money to fools and crazy, that would not be profitable, but perhaps be more respectful of the privacy of your customers.
Jose F. Alcántara, at one point during his speech at the presentation of The controlling company.
The centralization of information has positive aspects, for example ease of location. The distribution of the information can be useful, for example to ensure that it is never destroyed, allowing copies to be made more easily. If there are pros and cons in both models, why this defense of the distributed model to protect privacy? Isn't it just a halftone solution, hiding just a little bit?
Because above all, these models (the centralized and the distributed) represent two radically different informational architectures. In one, the information descends pyramidal from where it is centralized, passing the controls that the pyramid controller has placed. In the distributed there is no pyramid, there are many streams, as in a thaw, that flow through the periphery of the informational ecosystem. If someone tries to turn off the information tap, the information flows around, because each node is connected to many others and the information depends on a single central node allowing it to be accessible. The data may be accessible in a somewhat longer time, but the profits of such an organization far exceed this price to pay: the information is more persistent (due to redundancy in storage) and it is more difficult than a power interested in filtering it I managed to filter it. All advantages.
In your opinion: What is the weapon of the control society that is already being used and that goes unnoticed?
From combat semantics (euphemisms, newspeak) intended to sell us every measure of control as a security gain (though often the exact opposite), to widely spread control technologies (video surveillance, RFID chips in official documents) to Unavoidable laws that make abuses possible without the citizenry being able to claim against an "illegal espionage activity" by the state, since everything is legalized. If there are two laws that I would have to highlight in all this, I would highlight the one that made possible access to the private trace of telecommunications without judicial control and the law of retention of telecommunications data that, among other things, ended the anonymity in telephony mobile.
Allow me a couple of topical questions: What do you think of Facebook? What would you say to someone who refuses to give up their account because it allows some contact with who is far away, but is concerned about their privacy?
As a personal assessment: I think that Facebook does not contribute anything that we did not already have on the internet (we had a personal website, we had forums, and instant messaging, and places to upload photos and videos, and blogs to talk with our friends), the only thing that Facebook contributes it is the centralization of all that information. Centralization, once again. That makes that information easier to find, by you and by whoever wants to harass you. And I know that 99.99% of people will never harass anyone, we must be prepared not to make it easy for that remaining 00.01%.
Are you worried about your privacy and even after reading this you want to continue using Facebook? A rare case, I guess. If you are concerned about your privacy, I would tell you not to put on the internet what you would not put on a postcard. If you put it on the internet (even on a supposedly closed page), you should be prepared for that information to be made public. If you are concerned about your privacy, you shouldn't even use Facebook. Use mail or conventional instant messaging, both can be encrypted and are more secure.
In relation to what is stated in the book, why have you been so critical of the actions of governments in this matter of swine flu?
It is proven that this flu (whatever you want to call it, American, swine, or type A flu) is not more virulent than conventional flu (each patient infects, in turn, 2.5 people - on average). It is proven that the death rate is apparently lower than the conventional flu. There have been barely a hundred deaths from this new type of flu, when hundreds of thousands of people in the world die from the flu each year. Certainly, the figures speak against social alarm. Why so much alarm? I don't know, but at the very least we can accuse the governments (the Spanish for proximity, the Mexican for the exaggeration of their reaction) of having carried out a very bad risk assessment in this case, of having taken perhaps exaggeratedly drastic measures. I believe that conducting an accurate risk assessment (and the State must have professionals capable of it) is profitable from the economic point of view, but also from the point of view of social tranquility: perhaps we would avoid plunging the population into a panic unjustified.
About Ediciones el Cobre (which publishes The controlling company), and about the collection Planeta 29: What can you tell me? Are you satisfied with the work, with the involvement, with the result?
The truth is that all parts are working very well, and it shows. In the Planta 29 collection, both the work of the Electronic Society of the Indies (promoter of the idea) and of the sponsor (BBVA) is being exemplary. It is very risky to launch an essay collection and launch it by publishing all the books directly in the public domain and allowing the free download of the electronic book, when the dominant model is committed to increasingly restrictive licenses. And yet, there is Planta 29, with a radically free model proving (in addition) that it is possible to make money with it (at the end of the first year, the collection showed benefits). The work of the publisher, which has less apparent weight but is very important because it implies a good distribution of the copies, is also being remarkable. There are no problems finding the book in the main cities or in major bookstores such as FNAC or Casa del libro.
Indeed, the book can be purchased in various bookstores (publishes El Cobre, collection Planta 29), and, in addition, download it for free, on the author's website. Many thanks to Jose F. Alcántara for his time and attention.
Thanks to you, Álvaro 🙂