Difference between revisions of "Informational Friction"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | '''Informational friction''', similar to ontological friction<ref name = "Floridi1">Floridi, L., Four challenges for a theory of informational privacy, Ethics and Information Technology, 2006, 109–119.</ref>, is resistance felt in any means for obtainment of information on a[[File:Info_friction_diagram.JPG|400px|thumb|right|Floridi’s Theory of (Ontological) Informational Privacy and Friction]] given subject matter. The ability to access information correlates to this friction so that a greater amount of available data creates less informational friction and vice versa. This can also be thought of as the information gap widened by informational friction. While this concept relates to all types of environments, it has become increasingly relevant with the development of ICT (Information and Communications Technology). Luciano Floridi, a leading philosopher on this idea, goes further to differentiate between the informational friction surrounding older ICT (radio, telephone, television, etc.) and newer ICT affording some resistance.<ref name = "Floridi2">Floridi, L., The Fourth Revolution: How the Infosphere is Reshaping Human Reality, Privacy, Oxford University Press, 2014, 101-128.</ref> Just as revolutionary communication technology reduced informational friction, modern digital settings may work to both decrease and increase it. | + | '''Informational friction''', similar to ontological friction<ref name = "Floridi1">Floridi, L., Four challenges for a theory of informational privacy, Ethics and Information Technology, 2006, 109–119.</ref>, is resistance felt in any means for obtainment of information on a[[File:Info_friction_diagram.JPG|400px|thumb|right|Floridi’s Theory of (Ontological) Informational Privacy and Friction<ref name = "Barn">Barn, B., An Approach to Early Evaluation of Informational Privacy Requirements, ACM, 2015, 1370-1375.</ref>]] given subject matter. The ability to access information correlates to this friction so that a greater amount of available data creates less informational friction and vice versa. This can also be thought of as the information gap widened by informational friction. While this concept relates to all types of environments, it has become increasingly relevant with the development of ICT (Information and Communications Technology). Luciano Floridi, a leading philosopher on this idea, goes further to differentiate between the informational friction surrounding older ICT (radio, telephone, television, etc.) and newer ICT affording some resistance.<ref name = "Floridi2">Floridi, L., The Fourth Revolution: How the Infosphere is Reshaping Human Reality, Privacy, Oxford University Press, 2014, 101-128.</ref> Just as revolutionary communication technology reduced informational friction, modern digital settings may work to both decrease and increase it. |
Because informational friction relates to informational privacy, the two may seem conflicting, where achieving a low level of friction and a high level of privacy is impossible. Looking closer at types of data and how they connect to individuals’ privacy may offer some remedy, however, the flux of informational friction continues to complexly relate to progresses in informational privacy. | Because informational friction relates to informational privacy, the two may seem conflicting, where achieving a low level of friction and a high level of privacy is impossible. Looking closer at types of data and how they connect to individuals’ privacy may offer some remedy, however, the flux of informational friction continues to complexly relate to progresses in informational privacy. | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
===Digital ICTs=== | ===Digital ICTs=== | ||
| − | As stated before, digital ICTs | + | As stated before, digital ICTs offer tools for privacy that older ICTs might not. These available options such as encryption, passwords, and enforced privacy policies give some protection to users while simultaneously increasing the informational friction in the digital environment they live. In addition to this, newer ICTs create spaces where sharing and collecting data can be done with great ease and multitude, thus decreasing the informational friction. Digital information and communication technologies hold a complicated relationship with informational friction, offering opportunities to alter it in various ways. |
===Anonymity=== | ===Anonymity=== | ||
| − | In the current informational environment, the use of anonymity in alignment with ICTs may also offer a combination of privacy and informational friction. Beginning with older ICTs and continuing with newer digital ICTs, anonymity | + | In the current informational environment, the use of anonymity in alignment with ICTs may also offer a combination of privacy and informational friction. Beginning with older ICTs and continuing with newer digital ICTs, anonymity contributes to an increase in informational friction, although it is not necessarily comparable to the altogether lack of information friction from ICTs. |
==Ethical Issues== | ==Ethical Issues== | ||
| − | + | ===Privacy=== | |
Ethical issues surrounding privacy, have continued to become more demanding as ICTs affect informational friction. These technologies have continued to decrease informational friction, and thus privacy, yet newer ICTs hold affordances to simultaneously increase friction and privacy. As Floridi points out, individuals would ideally want the benefits from both having the greatest level of information progress with the lowest amount of informational friction as well as the highest level of informational privacy and protection. These things may work against each other, however, Floridi proposes that if data is separated into “arbitrary” (factual and easily shared information like a name) and “constitutive” (intimate details attributed to a person’s self-identity) the task of offering privacy through protecting users’ identity becomes focused on the latter while continuing to promote the sharing and collection of other information.<ref name = "Floridi2"/> | Ethical issues surrounding privacy, have continued to become more demanding as ICTs affect informational friction. These technologies have continued to decrease informational friction, and thus privacy, yet newer ICTs hold affordances to simultaneously increase friction and privacy. As Floridi points out, individuals would ideally want the benefits from both having the greatest level of information progress with the lowest amount of informational friction as well as the highest level of informational privacy and protection. These things may work against each other, however, Floridi proposes that if data is separated into “arbitrary” (factual and easily shared information like a name) and “constitutive” (intimate details attributed to a person’s self-identity) the task of offering privacy through protecting users’ identity becomes focused on the latter while continuing to promote the sharing and collection of other information.<ref name = "Floridi2"/> | ||
Revision as of 20:28, 29 March 2019
Informational friction, similar to ontological friction[1], is resistance felt in any means for obtainment of information on a
Because informational friction relates to informational privacy, the two may seem conflicting, where achieving a low level of friction and a high level of privacy is impossible. Looking closer at types of data and how they connect to individuals’ privacy may offer some remedy, however, the flux of informational friction continues to complexly relate to progresses in informational privacy.
Contents
Friction and ICTs
Information and communication technologies influence the amount of friction in the ongoing transaction of information. The ways in which ICTs can change the flow of information is endless and are often times a hybridization.[4]The ICTs that were catalysts for the digital age tend to only demonstrate an increase in data and a subsequent decrease in informational friction. Contrarily, many newer ICTs allow for methods to both increase and decrease this friction. [3] Anonymity, although minorly involved with pre-digital technology, has become increasingly significant with recent technology. Its presence plays an important role with both privacy and informational friction. Not only do ICTs set new precedents for available information, decreasing the informational friction, they may also provide settings, including anonymity which can in turn increase informational friction.
Pre-Digital ICTs
Pre-digital ICTs tend to offer new affordances that subsequently lessen informational friction.[3] Inventions such as the printing press, telephone, and radio, serve to aid in the progress and sharing of information. These older, pre-digital technologies do not have some of the data control affordances that the digital world utilizes like encryption, authorization, firewalls and more. Because of this, they commonly grapple with a clearer relationship between the amount of collectible data and informational friction.
Digital ICTs
As stated before, digital ICTs offer tools for privacy that older ICTs might not. These available options such as encryption, passwords, and enforced privacy policies give some protection to users while simultaneously increasing the informational friction in the digital environment they live. In addition to this, newer ICTs create spaces where sharing and collecting data can be done with great ease and multitude, thus decreasing the informational friction. Digital information and communication technologies hold a complicated relationship with informational friction, offering opportunities to alter it in various ways.
Anonymity
In the current informational environment, the use of anonymity in alignment with ICTs may also offer a combination of privacy and informational friction. Beginning with older ICTs and continuing with newer digital ICTs, anonymity contributes to an increase in informational friction, although it is not necessarily comparable to the altogether lack of information friction from ICTs.
Ethical Issues
Privacy
Ethical issues surrounding privacy, have continued to become more demanding as ICTs affect informational friction. These technologies have continued to decrease informational friction, and thus privacy, yet newer ICTs hold affordances to simultaneously increase friction and privacy. As Floridi points out, individuals would ideally want the benefits from both having the greatest level of information progress with the lowest amount of informational friction as well as the highest level of informational privacy and protection. These things may work against each other, however, Floridi proposes that if data is separated into “arbitrary” (factual and easily shared information like a name) and “constitutive” (intimate details attributed to a person’s self-identity) the task of offering privacy through protecting users’ identity becomes focused on the latter while continuing to promote the sharing and collection of other information.[3]
Whether we look at types of data differently with weighted priorities for protection or not, there are clear issues surrounding the balance between decreasing the informational friction and maintaining a sense of informational privacy. Ethical concerns enter in deciding where lessening the informational friction will sacrifice privacy and protection or cases of the opposite, where allowing control over personal data creates a large amount of friction in the flow of information.
References
- ↑ Floridi, L., Four challenges for a theory of informational privacy, Ethics and Information Technology, 2006, 109–119.
- ↑ Barn, B., An Approach to Early Evaluation of Informational Privacy Requirements, ACM, 2015, 1370-1375.
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 Floridi, L., The Fourth Revolution: How the Infosphere is Reshaping Human Reality, Privacy, Oxford University Press, 2014, 101-128.
- ↑ Russo, F., Digital Technologies, Ethical Questions, and the Need of an Informational Framework, Philos. Technol., 2018.
