The pervasive access to our locations through the use of mobile apps and networks allows companies to silo information even after the point of contact. Imagine opening your parking app from the restaurant, and again at home later. Imagine opening any app, granting someone somewhere the answer to the question of where you went. Data has speculative value, and it must be shared to manifest it.
Apps that we open at our destinations, and from home later, are each collecting your location metadata by the necessities of the architecture that allow the digital chatter. That information, even if processed into vague trend report terms, can create claims with metadata about us, and they are likely to be accurate and have value to others. In aggregate, they may know how soon someone like me goes home. They may not know where that is, but it’s a hint for anyone who already does.
Many chain links all simultaneously attach to our location data, and shaking any one of them is enough to reveal an answer to someone who is not already surveilling you outright.
The value in some apps is that you open them at all, do you understand? ParkMobile finds out where you went during and after and funds the study of it. So could any other app, with enough resale.
The federal government is becoming a data enrichment provider too. And their data is much more complete with attributes they practice querying right now. The pressure for civil departments to make data sharing agreements is for patching the supposed holes in what they know. Their contemplation of control does not go unnoticed. Their imagined possession our voting hardware and software, for example. We can’t let the Unitary Executive fish its way to successful data sharing partners.
An Executive which needs this power must explain itself better. The presumption of the States’ failures is a reputation attack aimed to be fatal to our confidence first. The Executive and its partners err on the side of presuming guilt, and takes the silence ringing in their ears after for our consent. No consent was asked of our representatives, and some of those believe this is a vacation. The glee with which our representatives imagine handing over our powers to a Unitary Executive is concerning. Silence is not consent. Silence can be confused.
Your Silence Can Be Misquoted.
When the autonomy of state-led political data is threatened by the Unitary Executive’s sharp interest, we must wonder at what is changing, if not the enrichment of our well-traveled data with politically useful markers. Government departments are asked to data-share. Privacy Law, medical or otherwise, seems to be stepping aside to deprotect us from any agency that asserts unsupervised need.
Data like this was only a risk more than a real danger when it was with its keepers and autonomously managed by People who take oaths for service. It is not an accident of Design that this service takes place in view of the People they represent. Federal attachment to any State resources represents a loss of fundamental control that cannot be taken back without overcoming grand new authorities we will have never heard before.
Location is one attribute that many know easily, even if there is association required. Enrichment assistance from a federal government is a tainted value proposition that computes fine for everyone but the People, who have their own thoughts to decide on without coercion. The federally-assisted enrichment project is poisoned with capitalism’s full-throated entitlement to speculate on a principle value it did not create.
There is no doubt there is value to be synthesized but our consent is repeatedly missing from these schemes.
There is no ending the ongoing disclosure of your location metadata and you should therefore understand a different method: How will you move in a world where your location data is desirable enough that companies assist each other in stalking you?
The Executive claims our cities are beset by unwanted People, but I am certainly more harassed by State-protected corporate gangs speculating about our worth.
We consider the Executive’s template plan for displacement of houseless People a selective dereliction of their oath. The freedom to be rid of ideas is waning, while the freedom to rid of People is waxing suddenly. The United States has studied contemporaneous displacements across the world and taken from them savage inspirations.
Location is so vital to the Executive that it will assign military assets in domestic settings to begin the practice of using their own locations as a hypothesis for finding marks.
Like the plentiful companies who clutch our data, the places of People are target-rich for a military practicing a Domestic occupation. Should specific locations be unknown: Look anywhere.
The practice of occupying autonomous cities gives militaries and militias large practice fields. Selecting People from an aggregate, to assert control of their future location.
It is also ironic, enriched with location data, that federal actors can choose unremembrance for marks whose data they seek. Unwanted data prisoners will be expunged, though not without unsubstantiated and public smearing, so that they go away with mockery. Presumed innocence is for People, making those without innocence something lesser.
In the aftermath of companies being ruled “people”, an archetype CEO threatens to revise Personhood for original People. The late Conservative movement went out with loud rationalization that a government really should work like a business. It will elude us all which businesses are proving their competence with the handling of People.
What more apt a way to demonstrate that giantism’s CEOs transcend our own Personhood than to point at the way they attack the floor’s support for everyone else. Need we discuss that a corporate “person” need not have a meaningful birth citizenship and can migrate into our dominion and do business by paying fees? Those “people” migrate without state or national borders, and they seize the infrastructure of our cities and declare they have the right to sell us to their acquaintances in the night.
The surveillance of People is enacted by corporate “people”: They are coming for your jobs; They are coming for your families; They are coming for your money; They are coming for your attention; They are coming for your possessions; They are coming for your Privacy; They are coming for your neighborhoods; They are bringing military guns.
“Knowing” that they are superlatively smarter than the rest, they believe it their right to perform this renegotiation. Conservative ideas taught that running government like a business meant positive cash flow, but People know it to mean the CEO is king: Freedoms can be dictated by Policy at any time. Is this not already what the Unitary Executive performs from its desk where it signs Executive Orders without Congress?
The definition of People is contested by gluttonous corporations and the acting captains bred to sail them straight through us. Their “personhood” can be swapped out like an unguilty cog when necessary. Can yours? And, a troubling thought, can an AI worker’s?
When our government wants our data, it need not even pay like a business. This is an unprecedented variety of new Privileged business-like government, and we belong to it already, whether or not the breaching equipment it inherited has yet tasted the paint of our front doors.
Your locations and characteristics are already an open secret; This is the great ad profile project undertaken to model you. There is not one company holding it, to opt out of or boycott. It is a mass cooperation built on the presumption that the speculative trade of People was still on the table. Because it is already so, and because we can’t take it down without astonishingly aggressive legislation in reply, we need to form Terms that are clear and suggest action.
People want havens from surveillance. I want candidates who comprehend the force of that statement. An implementation requires expansive thinking, to block out the metadata invasion to the best of our ability and reclaim what was implicit to our Constitution, that a fundamental right to Privacy was the impetus for this all.
You can reach Autumn Ryan to be heard about this subject at [email protected]. Do not transmit sensitive or private information if it’s unsuitable for others to have.
