Now this is a very interesting observation. Privacy, from an
analytical standpoint, can simply be viewed as a lack of information.
Even without 100% information, you can stil do useful calculations on
the data. For example, if there is an access controlled region that
you cannot scan but you can scan all regions around it, then you can
still compute the size of the access controlled region and use that to
hypothesize what range of activities can go on in that region.
In fact, this works with a lot of other measurements too. For
example, privacy in family metrics. How many children does someone
have? What are their individualized interests? If the known parents
only have a small number of children, then the “access-controlled
zone” is small and very easy to predict from the public data.
Also, this brings in a very interesting reality, that privacy isn’t
really effective if only a small number of people opt in. It is only
really effective if it applies to a large number of people across a
large geographic area. “Strength in numbers.”
So that’s why Google knows everything about who you are and who your
children are. Even if they don’t know everything, at least they know
what they don’t know and will proceed to search for that information
and attempt to reveal it.
But, there are more practical applications of using this understanding
of privacy as merely a limitation in data collection.
Read on →