Ethics and Law in New Media/ubicomp

Ethical Considerations of Ubiquitous Computing

Introduction

Ubiquitous computing, smart devices, machine-to-machine communication, embedded computing, pervasive computing, the Internet of Things (IoT) - how ever one might call it – is the new area of computing. As Neil Gershenfeld, an MIT professor points out in his book “When Things Start To Think” that was written 15 years ago, it is the next natural step. In Ubiquitous Computing, computers do not appear as distinct objects, but are embedded into everyday working and living environments in an invisible and unobtrusive way. They make information, media and network access constantly and transparently available.

What is ubiquitous computing?

Ubiquitous computing (ubicomp) is a concept in software engineering and computer science where computing is made to appear everywhere and anywhere. In contrast to desktop computing, ubiquitous computing can occur using any device, in any location, and in any format. A user interacts with the computer, which can exist in many different forms, including laptop computers, tablets and terminals in everyday objects such as a fridge or a pair of glasses. The underlying technologies to support ubiquitous computing include Internet, advanced middleware, operating system, mobile code, sensors, microprocessors, new I/O and user interfaces, networks, mobile protocols, location and positioning and new materials. This new paradigm is also described as pervasive computing, ambient intelligence ambient media or 'everyware'. Each term emphasizes slightly different aspects. When primarily concerning the objects involved, it is also known as physical computing, the Internet of Things, haptic computing, and 'things that think'. Rather than propose a single definition for ubiquitous computing and for these related terms, a taxonomy of properties for ubiquitous computing has been proposed, from which different kinds or flavors of ubiquitous systems and applications can be described. Ubiquitous computing touches on a wide range of research topics, including distributed computing, mobile computing, location computing, mobile networking, context-aware computing, sensor networks, human-computer interaction, and artificial intelligence.^[1]

More than 10 years ago, Mark Weiser foresaw this development and described it in his influential article “The Computer for the 21st Century”. Weiser coined the term “ubiquitous computing,” referring to omnipresent computers that serve people in their everyday lives at home and at work, functioning invisibly and unobtrusively in the background and freeing people to a large extent from tedious routine tasks.

In its 1999 vision statement, the European Union’s Information Society Technologies Program Advisory Group (ISTAG) used the term “ambient intelligence” in a similar fashion to describe a vision where “people will be surrounded by intelligent and intuitive interfaces embedded in everyday objects around us and an environment recognizing and responding to the presence of individuals in an invisible way”^[2]

Applications of ubiquitous computing

As stated in the introduction, ubicomp means that computers are embedded into everyday working and living environments in an invisible and unobtrusive way and through its cross-cutting nature it plays a part in almost every aspect of our life. Ubicomp works in the background of people’s private life, but is also widely used in the public sphere, like in healthcare and in industrial production.

Retail

Ubiquitous computing plays a role both in consumer experiences as well as on the product level of the business. Application of ubicomp in retailing is currently based on the use of RFID transponders, (as a supplement or replacement for barcodes) which are attached to product packaging or larger containers. RFID enables the automatic registration and identification of goods deliveries, a more efficient inventory management and the automatic recording of the inventory as well as of goods in the customer’s shopping basket, the possibility to trace products using an electronic ‘‘family tree” and, last but not least, improved ^[3][4]. For the customer side in business, ubicomp can enable pervasive public displays, location sensing and interaction with products and mobile sales assistants. As these upgrades to a ‘‘networked shopping world” need large investments, it is still unclear whether such offers and which of those will be operated in the near future.

Transport logistics

For a more efficient flow of goods and information from suppliers to enterprises, containers, pallets and products can be universally equipped in the midterm with RFID transponders, which will improve traceability and transparency in the supply chain. Thus, the logistics processes can be optimized from the process planning and steering to the handling of goods and information flows. Improving efficiency in the form of automatisation and rationalisation is necessary for firms in the hotly contested international logistics business, for reasons of competitiveness alone. The rationalisation potentials lie not only in internal processes, but also in the co-operation with partners from industry and trade, with whose systems the technology used must be compatible ^[5][3].

Industrial production and material management

Ubicomp has been used in the automobile industry in Germany for some time now. Where its main tasks are the monitoring of raw materials, goods and intermediates as well as the utilization of intelligent transport containers. As in retail and logistics, the optimisation of existing processes and increasing efficiency and productivity are the primary focus. Applications emerge particularly for the areas of production logistics, control of machines and equipment as well as the optimisation of the utilization and availability of production facilities^[6][7]. Similar to the situation in retail, however, a worldwide standardisation of the technology and the data formats used would be beneficial.

Motor traffic

Already automobiles contain several assistance systems that support the driver invisibly but the ubicomp also extends into the community level not only in private. In the field of individual transport, UbiComp can extend to applications to increase safety during travel (state of vehicle, accident prevention), services to optimize traffic flows (navigation, optimisation of fuel consumption) and services for more comfort for the passengers. For public transport, the primary goal is better networking with other transport sectors and assistance for travellers when booking and setting off on the journey or information about the itinerary and possible connections^[8].

Smart homes

in smart homes, a large number of home technology devices such as heating, lighting, ventilation and communication equipment become smart objects that automatically adjust to the needs of the residents.

Inner security

The proof of a person’s identity is an important feature of many applications of ubiquitous computing. Today, this plays a role primarily in applications for access control or payment procedures. Identification systems, such as electronic passport and the already abundant smart cards, are applications of ubiquitous computing in inner security. German passports, for instance, have been equipped since November 2007 with an RFID chip on which the digitized prints of both index fingers are stored along with the usual personal data^[9][10]. Though the systems are developed keeping in mind good intentions, there are still many ethical considerations and questions about data protection and privacy.

Health care

Ubiquitous computing opens up possibilities for a better quality of care. A component of such systems is the automatic remote and self-monitoring and diagnosis for patients, which improve the possibilities for home care and medical care and support self-sufficiency and independent living. On the whole, the healthcare area is certainly the most difficult environment for the introduction of ubiquitous computing for several reasons. Medical data are the most sensitive personal data and thus require appropriate data protection measures, there are also ethical issues which can be summarized under the captions security, autonomy and participation^[11][12].

Ethical Challenges

The three faces of Privacy

Privacy is usually distinguished in three different categories:

• Decisional privacy, which pertains to the level of freedom of decision
• Local privacy, the protection of personal dwelling, domestic information and corporal integrity
• Informational privacy, the control and protection of personal information

Decisional privacy is affected by integrated sensors, digital assistants and ubiquitous internet connection. Digital assistants, constantly analysing personal information and suggesting actions can have a strong psychological effect because they stop being perceived as sources of static information to be seen as individuals with interests and opinions. The more we accept digital assistants as a part of life, the more we accept their suggestions as “advice”. Thus they become a more acceptable, at least psychologically, influence on personal decisions^[13]. This manipulation of personal behavior affects agency or, in layman's terms, the capacity to take personal decisions (more on Ubicomp’s effect on agency can be found further in this text).

The lines between private and public space get blurrier as Ubicomp advances. Locator services (like those used by digital assistants to enrich situational information or those used in messaging services to position friends geographically) see no public/private space boundaries. Also, ubiquitous internet access makes concepts like private/work environment and beginning and end of shift meaningless, because individuals are constantly reachable via email even outside the office and/or business hours. Smart homes also blur the lines between personal and public space as it connects to the world-wide web and integrates to external providers, like your fridge telling the local supermarket to set apart a bottle of milk as you’re running out. Even the most private of spaces, your own body, becomes public space as fitness applications and health-collecting devices and implants share bodily information with doctors, health insurers, your social network and even merchants peddling medicine and health supplements^[11][13] (more on the ethics of Ubicomp and health further in the text).

Informational privacy has been one of the most attacked facets of privacy since the advent of the web - blogs, personal webpages, smartphones, social networks are all fertile ground for personal information leakage. Most communication channels and online services put the burden of informational privacy maintenance on users. Add to that the fact that personal information is the centerpiece of most ubicomp services, be they based on health data collection, positional information, etc and you get a situation where less than careful understanding of the terms of service and copious privacy setting tweaks leads to serious over-sharing of personal information^[13].

While some services shift the burden of privacy maintenance to the user, others give you no such option. So is the case, for instance, in public health.

Ethics of Ubiquitous healthcare - Privacy, Agency, Responsibility

Who owns your public health records? While medical information is, according to the European Union, sensitive information, the British implementation of centralized medical records allows not only a patient but also every single doctor or nurse connected to the National Health Service’s network access to medical records. As more and more health sensors such as glucose and heart rate monitors are worn or implanted in patients, the amount of information amassed and stored in such records will grow exponentially^[11].

Medical ethics is usually a balance between two concepts - beneficence and autonomy, with the former taken precedence whenever in conflict. This is of course an oversimplification of the discussion, but a very useful one. Information ethics are primarily taken as a question of autonomy, especially when discussing privacy, but beneficence’s ugly cousin, paternalism, has been influencing more and more discussions on information ethics, especially pertaining censorship^[11]. In ubiquitous healthcare the balance of beneficence and autonomy must be re-thought as well - for example, in a case where data sharing could benefit the health care of patients, should privacy or beneficence take precedence?

Privacy is not the only concept at risk - agency can also be manipulated through ubiquitous healthcare tech. Private insurance companies already require full check-ups in order to insure someone - it’s not far fetched to believe they might, in the near future, require full access to past and/or future records or even the implantation of such monitors as a prerequisite to insurance^[11]. If an implanted monitor administers electroshocks directly to the brains of patients or injects mood stabilizers straight into the bloodstream, who is in control of decisions: the patient or the implant? Can you say if a patient whose brain chemistry is under control of software is a consenting patient? With the enormous information amassed through smart sensors, could public or private insurers manipulate and control unhealthy behaviours? And should they?

Also, who is to blame for medical mistakes made by ubiquitous medical computing? The doctors who prescribed them, the companies responsible for the monitoring or the software itself? Medical malpractice laws will need to take ubiquitous medical computing into account soon. These issues - privacy, responsibility, agency - are not limited to healthcare but universal to any implementation of Ubicomp.

Conclusions

As more and more information is being collected about us, we face numerous issues - from who is responsible for the errors of ubiquitous systems to who is in control if a person’s mood is being regulated by smart implants. As more and more computing moves away from access terminals and into everyday objects, we run the risk of, eventually, no longer knowing where our agency stops and where machines begin running the show. As Bill Joy said in his seminal “Why the future doesn’t need us”

Eventually a stage may be reached at which the decisions necessary to keep the system running will be so complex that human beings will be incapable of making them intelligently. At that stage the machines will be in effective control. People won't be able to just turn the machines off, because they will be so dependent on them that turning them off would amount to suicide.^[14]

Privacy in special runs serious risks now already, and such risks will only increase as more information gets collected by wearable sensors, ambient intelligence and public information systems. The 2012 draft European Data Protection Regulation Article 17 details the right to be forgotten and to erasure, which guarantees you should be able to tell any “data controller” to erase any and all information related to your person which should not be in the public domain but that requires you to actively seek such “data controllers” individually and does not guarantee that you’ll be, in fact, forgotten, only that “controllers” be fined if your right is not respected. What we might need is to teach machines to forget naturally. Computers are devoid of absent-mindedness, blocking or transience and they also do not suffer from misattribution, suggestibility or bias. If we are able to insert human fallibility to some ubicomp systems (to a greater or lesser extent) we might arrive at an ethics of forgetting which, being fallible, allows us our own fallibilities so we can be forgotten and forgiven^[15].

References

1. Wikipedia. "Ubiquitous Computing" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubiquitous_computing
2. Weiser, Mark. "The computer for the 21st century." Scientific american 265.3 (1991): 94-104.
3. Chopra, Sunil, and ManMohan S. Sodhi. "Looking for the Bang from the RFID Buck." Supply Chain Management Review 11.4 (2007).
4. Lapide, Larry. "RFID: what’s in it for the forecaster?." The Journal of Business 17 (2004).
5. Reyes, Pedro M., et al. "RFID: the state of the union between promise and practice." International Journal of Integrated Supply Management 3.2 (2007): 192-206.
6. Schmitt, Patrick, et al. "Adoption and diffusion of RFID technology in the automotive industry." Proceedings of the ECIS—European Conference on Information Systems, St. Gallen, Switzerland. 2008.
7. Fleisch, Elgar, and Christian Tellkamp. "The business value of ubiquitous computing technologies." Ubiquitous and pervasive commerce. Springer London, 2006. 93-113.
8. Friedewald, Michael, and Oliver Raabe. "Ubiquitous computing: An overview of technology impacts." Telematics and Informatics 28.2 (2011): 55-65.
9. Říha, Zdeněk. "An overview of electronic passport security features." The Future of Identity in the Information Society. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2009. 151-159.
10. Gipp, Bela, Jöran Beel, and Ivo Rössling. "ePassport: The World’s New Electronic Passport." A Report about the ePassport’s Benefits, Risks and it’s Security. CreateSpace (2007).
11. Brown, Ian, and Andrew A. Adams. "The ethical challenges of ubiquitous healthcare." International Review of Information Ethics 8.12 (2007): 53-60.
12. Orwat, Carsten, et al. "Adopting pervasive computing for routine use in healthcare." IEEE Pervasive Computing 9.2 (2010): 64-71.
13. Heesen, Jessica and Oliver Siemoneit: "Opportunities for privacy and trust in the development of ubiquitous computing" International Review of Information Ethics 8 (2007): 48-51.
14. Joy, Bill. "Why the future doesn’t need us." Nanoethics and Nanosciences – defining the disciplines? (2000): 3-16.
15. Dodge, Martin, and Rob Kitchin. "The ethics of forgetting in an age of pervasive computing." (2005).