The Smart City Dilemma: Privacy vs. Convenience
Will smart cities become too smart? There’s already plenty to worry about, with massive data breaches, government surveillance, and corporate espionage seemingly always in the news.
Tech evangelists tend to hand-wave privacy away, persuading audiences and investors alike instead to consider the higher concept: the convenience these highly connected ecosystems are designed to deliver on demand. And why not? Automation is sexy, and its advances regularly produce headlines portending incredible advances in quality of life.
Amidst the buzz, however, privacy remains a decidedly low-awareness problem. Indeed, the vast majority of people willingly opt into systems (like social media, IoT hardware, and mobile devices) specifically designed to monitor, record, and interpret their activity and metadata. For most, the boost in convenience and productivity far outweighs the intangible privacy cost. Plus, they can always opt out by deleting a profile, uninstalling an app, or simply avoiding worrisome products in the first place.
But, when the system in question is a hyper-connected smart metropolis, complete with fleets of autonomous vehicles circumnavigating driverless streets and automatic monitoring of every scale and design, how do you opt out?
Data collection is an inevitable trend in mobility, as it allows city planners to design unprecedented convenience into the smart-city ecosystem. That’s why it’s all the more important to remember why we’re collecting this data, and to whom we are delivering this convenience.
A physical presence does not equal privacy consent
Typically, the more ubiquitous a system becomes in society, the less agency individuals have in determining how they interface with that system. You don’t, for example, have much choice in how running water gets to your apartment. Or, you might have sworn off Facebook forever, but could still be dogged by its omnipresence in public discourse.
Similarly, you might not have much of a choice in simply avoiding an entire city simply because you don’t like (or more likely, don’t know) what is being done with the data it collects on you. What’s more, unlike utilities and social media platforms, there’s no guarantee that smart cities will offer (or will even be able to offer) a user agreement by which you can:
a) See exactly what you’re giving up by entering the city; and
b) Opt out of certain aspects in order to retain a greater degree of privacy at the expense of some futuristic convenience.
This isn’t to suggest that smart cities will necessarily be run by data-hungry cabals lurking in the shadows to undermine our collective privacy. However, the predominating vision of the city of the future is fueled by data. And, it is very much in vogue to accept top-down design of pervasive systems which automatically track everything we do–so long as it brings us promised convenience–as inevitable.
But, it doesn’t have to be this way.
Convenience entails–rather than removes–personal choice
There is an alternate vision of the future, one in which hyper-modern conveniences are delivered by more agile, decentralized systems that exist in closer proximity to the user. To visualize what this could look like, we can consider a system which already exists today: E-ZPass electronic toll collection.
On the one hand, you really have no idea what happens to that data point created when your pass activates the toll’s sensors. On the other hand, you consciously abdicate responsibility for that data when you sign up for the service and install the device into your vehicle. If the prospect makes you uncomfortable for whatever reason, you can simply choose to retain your anonymity through cash transactions, avoiding E-ZPass altogether. It’s a system that offers options to drivers with different priorities, all while boosting overall efficiency of toll collections.
In contrast, imagine a toll point which reads your license plate, then automatically debits an account tied to it. Sure, it helps everyone get to where they need to go a bit faster, and probably improves throughput and thus, overall toll collection. However, it also entirely removes the need for cash, cards, or even devices like E-ZPass.
Therein lies the problem: these various methods of payment actually afford drivers greater agency over their mobility experience. Removing these options is tantamount to forcing all the toll point’s users into a convenience-based paradigm, rather than one which balances mean efficiency with personal agency.
A single toll road might not pose too egregious a privacy risk; after all, you can simply take an alternative route to avoid it (at the expense of some travel time). But what happens when this one-size-fits-all, top-down system is replicated to ubiquity? Cameras and sensors are already everywhere, and we’re not even close to realizing the scale called for in current smart-city speculations.
Your data is your property
People have a right to retain their privacy, even (especially) amidst emerging technological conveniences. Therefore, this technology must have an accessible gateway by which users may readily opt in or out. Being merely physically present within a city is not the same as giving conscious consent to its myriad data collection and monitoring systems. The choice must be more nuanced than “all or nothing”.
And, it’s not as though city planners, innovators, and policy makers necessarily disagree with this sentiment. In fact, the UK government has put forth a voluntary program called “midata” which gives residents ready access to their personal data as it has been collected by various entities. This allows individuals to see what’s been tracked, how it’s been tracked, and how to interpret that metadata to better understand and modify their own habits. What’s more, it supports the notion that your personal data is also your personal property–yours to manage and license as you see fit.
Agency in mobility: the Parkofon solution
Parkofon is an example of data collection in the mobility space done right. It exists onboard the vehicle, so long as the driver wants it there. Users are made fully aware of what data is being tracked, and why.
If you want a comprehensive analysis of your driving habits, the power of Big Data is yours to control. If you just want to use the device for its core functionality–making it easier to find a parking spot no matter where you go–you can simply hit a toggle to disallow all non-essential tracking. What’s more, all communication between your device and Parkofon’s servers is locked down with 256-bit AES encryption via VPN–making it all but impossible to hack these data transmissions.
Data collection is an inevitable trend in mobility, as it allows city planners to design unprecedented convenience into the smart-city ecosystem. That’s why it’s all the more important to remember why we’re collecting this data, and to whom we are delivering this convenience.
The gateways through which drivers interface with smart cities are best designed compact, decentralized, and in close proximity to their users. Any system which removes agency to opt in or out will be met with the consternation of privacy advocates everywhere, and for good reason.
