Paper #2

Electronic Privacy as the New Labor in Digital Capitalism

In Thomas A. Hirschl’s Structural Unemployment and the Qualitative Transformation of Capitalism he poses the question: If electronics technology replaces labor, where will the jobs be in ‘information capitalism’? While it is impossible to determine where all the jobs will be, one thing is for certain: the industry of electronic privacy will expand exponentially.

The average citizen, as well as the corporation, is under constant attack from ever-evolving electronic technology. It is a constant battle to defend oneself against data mining, malware, worms, and hacking. In Christopher Jones wired.com article Privacy vs. Freedom of Information he is illuminating the problematic binary between freedom of information and personal privacy. Where corporations go to great lengths to protect their proprietary information, everyday citizens too wish to protect their personal information. Jones relates,

If anything, the push to collect and distribute more and more data - from highly personal information like medical histories, credit, property records, and criminal records to relatively innocuous stuff like phone numbers and mailing addresses - seems likely to cloud things even more (1).

What may yet be more problematic is that it is computers, not people, that are mining this information—and it is difficult to bring a computer to justice. Clearly there are human beings at the controls of these computers but many times they are difficult if not impossible to locate: the only practical answer is to create an electronic army to defend against these ever evolving incursions. In Martin Kenney’s essay Value Creation in the Late Twentieth Century: The Rise of the Knowledge Worker, he notes: “As Marx observed, moral depreciation of machines becomes an ever greater cost to the capitalist. Thus, the introduction of electronics had made machines more productive, but simultaneously, because of rapid technological change, has led to extremely rapid depreciation” (91).

As the defenses against electronic theft grow stronger and more effective, the computer, more specifically the mining as well as the protection software, becomes obsolete and both must evolve or die an irrelevant death. This quickly becomes a dystopian ‘dog eating its own tail’ story. The citizen consumer and the electronic capitalist must constantly and rapidly keep evolving their technological strategies to remain viable. While it may not be the scenario that Marx had in mind, the electronic incursion into every aspect of daily life has let the electronic machinery leave the work place and drive your car home, sit in your easy chair, read your newspaper, pick out your wife’s birthday present, plan your children’s summer vacation, and decide which bourbon you would like to drink.

The United States government sees little need to protect its citizens from having their personal information pilfered by both public and private interests; the European Union sees this issue differently. In Simon Davies wired.com article Europe to U.S.: No Privacy, No Trade he reports,

As marketers in the US lay the groundwork necessary to transform mountains of consumer-profile data into nuggets of gold, the European Union is preparing to make that task even more difficult by launching the biggest privacy gambit in history. If the European plan succeeds, every country on Earth will soon adhere to a global privacy code. If it fails, the United States and Europe could end up in the throes of an ugly trade war over the international transfer of personal information (1).

The European Union sees great value in protecting the private lives of its citizens and is willing to go to great lengths to preserve it. It would be interesting to see if Karl Marx would agree with the directives of the E.U. While he was clearly anti-capitalism, would the proletariat and the bourgeoisie be entitled to digital protections in his world?

The major issue according to Davies is enforceability. While proclamations are comforting, economics and political will ultimately decide the fate of personal privacy. If there is value in protection software then there would be a work force not only to create the ever-evolving software but also a workforce to implement it. Kenney relates, in regards to software, “The character of software as the driving force in the innovation economy is important because it makes explicit the fact that it is the knowledge embedded in a commodity that creates its value” (93). Kenney also informs that the inherent downside to this is that software is easily copied and protections, while valuable, seem to have a short shelf life. In as much as innovation is a key ingredient, is would appear that speed of innovation and implementation are equally important.

Works Cited:

Davies, Simon. “Europe to U.S.: No privacy, no trade.” wired.com. Oct. 2012 http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/6.05/europe_pr.html

Hirschl, Thomas A. “Structural Unemployment and the Qualitative Transformation of Capitalism.” Cutting Edge. New York: Verso, 1997

Jones, Christopher. “Privacy vs. Freedom of Information.” wired.com. Oct.12 http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/1998/02/10460

Kenney, Martin. “Value Creation in the Late Twentieth Century: The Rise of the Knowledge Worker.” Cutting Edge. New York: Verso, 1997