Devangshu Datta | New Delhi January 24, 2014 Last Updated at 22:44
Edward Snowden's revelations make it clear that the battle for individual privacy has been lost decisively. Governments can collect masses of data on citizens; so can private agencies - hence, data will be collected. The more democratic regimes may limit the legal uses of such data, but no nation will stop collecting data.
The scope and scale of collection are bound to increase. Right now, the location, internet history, phone records, financial profile et al of every normal individual are available digitally. As the internet of things - smart appliances and devices that connect autonomously to the internet - gains traction, more granular data about people's habits and movements will inevitably become available.
In the near future, biometrics and DNA will also be collected as a matter of course. Governments will roll out versions of the Aadhaar scheme, or put biometric details on passports and driving licences. DNA profiling will also become commonplace. Many nations already collect the DNA of government employees, convicted criminals, crime and accident victims, etc. Soon, the DNA of the newborn, and of anybody opting for a medical check-up, will be recorded with the same casual efficiency as for blood type.
The tools required to dissect Big Data are also improving. Computer programs can already slice and dice information on large populations and make startlingly accurate projections about the choices of random individuals. Retailers crunch Big Data to target marketing campaigns; politicians use them to target potential voters; dating sites match the sexually compatible.
This will lead to extreme information asymmetry. Governments and private businesses will end up knowing far more about the aam junta than the common citizens will know about officialdom. That will lead inevitably to erosions of democracy and massive increases in corruption.
Information asymmetry is the foundation stone of dictatorships and crony states. The more a dictator knows about the ruled, the firmer that dictator's grip. The less the ruled know about the ruler, the easier they are to rob.
If Big Brother cannot be blinded, what can be done? Information asymmetry can be reduced. Force the state agencies and private corporations to reveal more about themselves and the data they collect.
In a sense, this is what the Right to Information (RTI) is designed to do. An RTI forces the government to reveal information on processes. Similarly, contractual agreements with private agencies supposedly reveal what data are collected. Neither goes far enough.
To reduce asymmetry, consider something on the following lines. One, contractual agreements with service providers and agencies - both private and government - should include tabular digital formats enumerating data collected, with storage, transfer and end-use details. This should not be buried in minuscule font in the 33rd clause of a 19,000-word legal agreement.
Two, any individual should be able to RTI the government for a complete enumeration of the personal data collected and stored about that individual. Again, this should be presented in a simple digital checklist that can be updated.
And finally, all government processes involving financial transfers should be put online in open-access digital databases. Personal data, like the identity of an income taxpayer, or the recipient of a gas subsidy, may be redacted. Details of security spending can be redacted. But the overall Home and Defence budgets should be recorded with as much granularity as possible.
Since all sarkari transactions are recorded, and the majority recorded electronically, this is easily technically feasible. It would actually allow the use of big data tools to crowd-source audits of government spending. Corruption would not show up directly, of course. But the anomalous effects of corruption would show up. Cash flow and other analysis by experts should also indicate areas where spending is just plain inefficient.
This level of transparency may sound utopian, but is it actually impossible? If it is, get prepared for that other vision of the future so well articulated by Orwell: An upturned human face with a boot planted firmly on it, forever.
