Interesting Research on the Economics of Privacy

New paper: "The Economics of Privacy, by Alessandro Acquisti, Curtis R. Taylor, and Liad Wagman:

Abstract: This article summarizes and draws connections among diverse streams of empirical and theoretical research on the economics of privacy. Our focus is on the economic value and consequences of privacy and of personal information, and on consumers' understanding of and decisions about the costs and benefits associated with data protection and data sharing. We highlight how the economic analysis of privacy evolved through the decades, as, together with progress in information technology, more nuanced issues associated with the protection and sharing of personal information arose. We use three themes to connect insights from the literature. First, there are theoretical and empirical situations where the protection of privacy can both enhance and detract from economic surplus and allocative efficiency. Second, consumers' ability to make informed decisions about their privacy is severely hindered, because most of the time they are in a position of imperfect information regarding when their data is collected, with what purposes, and with what consequences. Third, specific heuristics can profoundly influence privacy decision-making. We conclude by highlighting some of the ongoing issues in the privacy debate.

Posted on March 7, 2016 at 3:59 PM • 8 Comments

Comments

Brain in a canMarch 7, 2016 8:19 PM

The economics of the universal human right to privacy, how innovative. Can't wait till they apply their powerful analytical methods to the economic surplus and allocative efficiency of other rights. A nuanced view of freedom from slavery could really benefit slave consumers' ability to make informed decisions. And freedom from torture is provably suboptimal in important empirical and theoretical situations like when you want to make people do stuff they don't want to do. Life, liberty, pursuit of happiness? What we need is some market discipline to rationalize that.

MarkMarch 7, 2016 10:11 PM


Can I digress a bit [ that's the 6th octal bit rather than the 6 bit byte ] ?

Am saddened to say, that my employer, has decided to blame the Oz Gov, as the reason for my employment being terminated. They basically stated, that due to The AGSVA / ASIO processing delays, they had to terminate my position.

The timing was designed, to correlate, with the release of the current sitting government here in Australia, release of the 'Defense White Paper'. Taking no note at all, to my medical condition of being a localized prostate cancer survivor who chose to have robotic surgery in an aim to have a better outcome. My surgeon, Professor Webb, also consults to the RAAF.

Of course, my open source work, which I have been redeveloping since surgery and currently waiting for Department of Defense approval to publish, is now being delayed, due to intervention by my employer and the Australian Government.

Shit happens hey ?

Am currently locked in legal bullshit, financial impairments and trying not to end up on the streets again.

Oh, the 'good news' ?

My latest PSA test is still

Penetration testing has also been progressing well, with complete access being obtained for 30+ minutes based on the wonders of my surgeon Webb.

I should get around to thanking the guy that filled up the generators the day before some time soon...;)

https://www.gofundme.com/foocrypt needs funding to live.

jonesMarch 8, 2016 8:41 AM

If privacy wasn't valuable, corporations wouldn't be trying to take yours.


"Privacy is dead" is propaganda used by those who view your personal life as the new frontier wilderness to conquer. It's neocolonialism for the soul....


jonesMarch 8, 2016 8:48 AM

@ Brain in a Can

No joke, I get frustrated with research like this too.

Want to know the economic value of your privacy? Add up the revenues from all the firms that depend on privacy invasion as a business model. It's a reasonable starting point.

I cam across this article in the journal Science last week:

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/351/6275/818

Abstract: Traditional economic theory could not explain, much less predict, the near collapse of the financial system and its long-lasting effects on the global economy. Since the 2008 crisis, there has been increasing interest in using ideas from complexity theory to make sense of economic and financial markets.

What nonsense!

We don't need fancy models to explain the 2008 collapse, we know it was widespread fraud. How to traditional economics models account for fraud? They don't, it's not a scientific problem per se, but a regulatory and enforcement problem. Science is dumb.

Too Abstract 4 UMarch 9, 2016 9:48 PM

How to traditional economics models account for fraud?

It's sadly funny how catholic theology breaks down in the face of sexual predation.

Consumers get fracked. People have rights.

History Happened A Long Time AgoMarch 9, 2016 10:18 PM

We highlight how the economic analysis of privacy evolved through the decades

Can we openly discuss yet the psychological messaging behind the eye above the pyramid on the U.S. one dollar bill, specifically as it relates to expectations of privacy. Probably good to address the whole "in god we trust, everyone else we polygamize" thing while we're at it.

WaelMarch 10, 2016 3:33 AM

@History Happened A Long Time Ago,

Can we openly discuss yet the psychological messaging behind the eye above the pyramid on the U.S. one dollar bill, specifically as it relates to expectations of privacy.

Oh, I wouldn't worry too much about it. If you look closely, you'll find that the eye has some indications of cataracts. If they fix the cataracts and put an IoT microscope on the eye, then that'll be bad news :)

jonesMarch 10, 2016 8:48 AM

@history

> Can we openly discuss yet the psychological messaging behind the eye above the pyramid on the U.S. one dollar bill, specifically as it relates to expectations of privacy.


The all-seeing eye?

PANOPTICON; OR, THE INSPECTION-HOUSE:
CONTAINING THE IDEA OF A NEW PRINCIPLE OF
CONSTRUCTION APPLICABLE TO ANY SORT OF
ESTABLISHMENT, IN WHICH PERSONS OF ANY
DESCRIPTION ARE TO BE KEPT UNDER INSPECTION;
AND IN PARTICULAR TO PENITENTIARY-HOUSES,
PRISONS,
POOR-HOUSES,
LAZARETTOS,
HOUSES OF INDUSTRY,
MANUFACTORIES,
HOSPITALS,
WORK-HOUSES,
MAD-HOUSES,
AND SCHOOLS:
with
A PLAN OF MANAGEMENT
IN A SERIES OF LETTERS,
written in the year 1787, from crecheff in white russia,
to a friend in england.

America is the original for-profit prison.

Note that year, 1787. 1776 is just for PR purposes.

In '87 Bentham wrote another important treatise, usually overlooked: a defense of usury:

Crichoff, in White Russia, January 1787.

Among the various species or modifications of liberty, of which on different occasions we have heard so much in England, I do not recollect ever seeing any thing yet offered in behalf of the liberty of making one's own terms in money-bargains. From so general and universal a neglect, it is an old notion of mine, as you well know, that this meek and unassuming species of liberty has been suffering much injustice.

22.67

Leave a comment

Allowed HTML: <a href="URL"> • <em> <cite> <i> • <strong> <b> • <sub> <sup> • <ul> <ol> <li> • <blockquote> <pre>

Photo of Bruce Schneier by Per Ervland.

Schneier on Security is a personal website. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of IBM Resilient.