海角大神

Modern field guide to security and privacy

Opinion: If predictive algorithms craft the best e-mails, we're all in big trouble

The new Crystal app creates profiles 'for every person with an online presence' so its users can craft the ideal e-mail for every recipient. That's not only troubling for privacy, but also threatens to strip individuality out of our digital dialogue.

|
Ann Hermes/海角大神

It claims to be "the biggest improvement to e-mail since spell-check."

Sounds impressive, right?听

The huge leap forward promised by Crystal Project Inc., makers of the newly released听听app, is to give its users real-time insight into the recipients of their e-mails.听In the blink of an eye, it can examine the recipient's听online data trail and turn that information into a detailed personality profile. It will even offer听suggestions for how to better communicate to the person you're writing.听

What Crystal is offering is something like digital听clairvoyance when it comes e-mail communications and marketing.听Ostensibly, the automated interface makes it effortless to tweak your prose to conform with a recipient鈥檚 conception of an ideal note.

While that premise might excite e-mail marketers or job seekers, it should concern anyone who cares about privacy, especially if Crystal is a sign of what's to come.

For one thing, the assumptions that Crystal makes about people aren't exactly accurate as far I can tell during a few experiments with the app. But, more importantly, if something like Crystal can be perfected, and that may very well happen, such technology has the potential听to provide nearly anyone with an intimate depiction of who we are and what we鈥檙e about 鈥 information many of us don鈥檛 want widely shared, and already worry about when assembled by data brokers.

Think of it this way: The little and seemingly harmless digital breadcrumbs that we鈥檝e left here and there can be aggregated to form a portrait that鈥檚 too revealing and too accessible.

That isn't how the Crystal Project sees it, though. Here's its听rationale for the product: People听have different communication styles, and if we fail to appreciate them,听misunderstanding and even hurt feelings can be the result. In the corporate world, effectively translating our thoughts into recipient-friendly formats can lead to efficient workflow. By contrast, the company contends, it听can be disastrous to treat highly analytical correspondents who prefer maximum detail as if they鈥檙e trusting intuitive types. Plus, when you don't听speak to people as they want to be spoken to, projects can be undermined and folks can feel like they鈥檙e working with selfish or insensitive colleagues.

Does Crystal actually work? I tested it out by running a search on听. He鈥檚 the executive director of the听, a group I鈥檒l be working for full time during my sabbatical. I thought maybe the investigative technology could give me valuable insight into how to talk to my future boss.

Crystal purported to have a confident read on what makes Mr. Polonetsky tick.

Evan Selinger / 海角大神 Science Monitor
Screen capture of Crystal

Here鈥檚 the detailed profile it created.

Evan Selinger / 海角大神 Science Monitor
Screen capture of Crystal
Evan Selinger / 海角大神 Science Monitor
Screen capture of Crystal
Evan Selinger / 海角大神 Science Monitor
Screen capture of Crystal

I asked Polonetsky if this is an accurate report. Turns out, I鈥檓 better off trusting my instincts than Crystal鈥檚 algorithms. 鈥淚 speak for a living, often to strangers, and often leading the conversation," said Polonetsky. "I probably interrupt far too often and am working to do so far less often.听As a futurist of sorts, I absolutely want to hear about the future plans for products and spend a good of time advising leading companies on their future plans for data use. I welcome informality!听So the algorithm is very wrong in its basic efforts to assess me.听Unless, of course, the program knows me better than I know myself.鈥

OK. So the program doesn鈥檛 shine a light into everyone鈥檚 soul. But could a better version?听, a privacy research fellow at New York University's Information Law Institute, is skeptical. We discussed what happened when I did a search on President Obama. According to Crystal, when it comes to communication, POTUS can be "rambling."

Evan Selinger / 海角大神 Science Monitor
Screen capture of Crystal

Now, maybe what the program is picking up on is that a president gives lengthy responses to major questions of international policy.听But I鈥檇 characterize that as being thorough or maybe thoughtful.听Ms. Zeide notes that the problem, here, is context. Making broad inferences without explicit reference to context, she said, can lead to an 鈥渁sset鈥 being portrayed as 鈥渁 significant character flaw.鈥 听

Sociologist Erving Goffman published a landmark book, "," in 1959 in which he argued that when it comes to communication, context is king because social interaction can be viewed as a theatrical performance. On the 鈥渇ront stage,鈥 we engage in impression management by crafting our expressions to try to听shape听how audiences will respond to what we're听communicating.听But on the 鈥渂ack stage,鈥 we try to听keep things hidden that a particular听audience would find objectionable, including beliefs and intentions they wouldn't want us to hold or would find it inappropriate for us to express. To make our听performances听believable,听it can help to separate one stage听from the other.听

For example, when I'm on social media I always convey a sense that every single class I teach is so amazing as to be flawless and inspiring. Now, in reality, some classes are and some classes aren鈥檛; nothing can be consistently perfect. But because it鈥檚 too easy to offend people with public complaints, my front stage performance always portrays upbeat thoughts about being in the classroom and preparing for it. Consequently, if the only access you have to my views on teaching come from reading my social media comments, you'll get a distorted account鈥 unless, that is, you鈥檙e hip to my idealizing strategy.

But how can a program such as Crystal make sense of the front and back stage dimensions online? It can't unless it knows a lot of intimate information: what we really think, how we engage in impression management, and when we鈥檙e trying to shape what other people believe. And what about the fact that we expect different performances from different people?

Unfortunately, Crystal tries to distill what we're about and what we're looking for into essential, static characterizations 鈥 as if we desire everybody, without exception, to write to us in the same style, and as if we always expect the same style to be used in every note, no matter what the situation is. Such a reductive approach to communication can鈥檛 be a techno-fix that magically makes us all sound empathetic and sensitive. 听 听

Ultimately, Crystal poses a threat to what Woodrow Hartzog and I call privacy by .听Because the service is automated and inexpensive, it dramatically reduces the transaction costs required to scan and interpret large volumes of personal information.

Given the potential for obscurity evisceration, it鈥檚 important to take stock of the main problems on the horizon.

Chiefly, there鈥檚 the problem of distortion. If people don鈥檛 realize that a profile is inaccurate, they can be nudged to come to false conclusions. Imagine technology such as Crystal creating biased characterizations that influence how people view politicians or job candidates. It鈥檚 not hard to see how discrimination and prejudice can be inflamed in those cases. 听听

What's more, programs such as Crystal take our information of context and turn it into something new 鈥 data that others can use for the express purpose of manipulating how we respond to their queries and requests, as well as data that we wish certain people or groups never got their hands on, and which we took practical steps to minimize the chance of them discovering. 听 听

The technology also offers value-laden judgments about a person's character 鈥 a fundamentally moral dimension of their identity 鈥 but is marketed in a way that rhetorically downplays this feature. After all, the tool is characterized as a mean for improving communication and empathy, and not a litmus test for determining who amongst us is virtuous

The software is also opaque. As Zeide laments, the inner workings an app such as Crystal aren鈥檛 accessible to consumers. The inferences the technology generates are shrouded in secrecy, and 鈥渢he app provides no way for users, or the people profiled, to assess the accuracy of the information that鈥檚 scanned and the values underlying the interpretative algorithms.鈥

If Crystal is just the beginning of a new category of similar apps that rely on algorithms to tell people what to say and how to write, these technologies will not only have a troubling effect on privacy but also begin to strip the character and individuality from communication in favor of banal, machine-generated prose.

Should future versions of profiling technology improve, it will be tempting to use them to save time, minimize mistakes, and feed our curiosity. But if the history of privacy problems has taught us anything, it's that there's more to the good life than efficiency, safety, and voyeurism.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
海角大神 was founded in 1908 to lift the standard of journalism and uplift humanity. We aim to 鈥渟peak the truth in love.鈥 Our goal is not to tell you what to think, but to give you the essential knowledge and understanding to come to your own intelligent conclusions. Join us in this mission by subscribing.
QR Code to Opinion: If predictive algorithms craft the best e-mails, we're all in big trouble
Read this article in
/World/Passcode/Passcode-Voices/2015/0427/Opinion-If-predictive-algorithms-craft-the-best-e-mails-we-re-all-in-big-trouble
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
/subscribe