Abstract
Human interaction with computers is no longer clearly bounded and so our user expectations no longer fit the pragmatics of design. We are increasingly data subjects within a complex network of lifestyle devices that sense, monitor, and interpret our daily endeavours. When the form that these devices take belies their true nature, a series of social challenges emerge. With the drive to new markets, based solely upon constructing value from human data, we find ourselves in something of a design dilemma. How can we design socially sensitive ‘things’, and what are the implications arising from networking our private spaces? This paper presents an autoethnographic case study, of a smart toilet roll holder, intended to surface some of these issues. Such prototype technologies demonstrate that, without proper consideration, the level of resulting social disruption may stilt progress and stymie the development of emerging data markets.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Arthur C (2013) Tech giants may be huge, but nothing matches big data. Guardian online: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/aug/23/tech-giants-data
Arvidsson A (2002) On the “pre-history of the panoptic sort”: mobility in market research. Surveill Soc 1(4):456–474
Bandyopadhyay D, Sen J (2011) Internet of things: applications and challenges in technology and standardization. Wirel Pers Commun Int J Arch 58(1):49–69
Bell TW (2009) The scale of consent. Chapman University Law Research Paper. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1322180. Accessed 15 Aug 2015
Bell PA, Greene TC, Fisher J, Baum A (1996) Architecture, design, and engineering for human behavior. In: Environmental psychology, 4 edn, pp 410–443. Harcourt Brace, Fort Worth, TX
Bonnici CJ, Coles-Kemp L (2010) Principled electronic consent management: a research framework. In: Proceedings of 2010 International Conference on Emerging Security Technologies. IEEE, pp 119–123
Chandler JD, Vargo SL (2011) Contextualization and value-in-context: how context frames exchange. Mark Theor 11(1):35–49
Corby MJ (2002) The case for privacy. Inf Syst Secur 11(2):9–14
Dritsas S, Gritzalis D, Lambrinoudakis C (2006) Protecting privacy and anonymity in pervasive computing: trends and perspectives. Telematics Inform 23:196–210
Ellis C, Bochner AP (2000) Autoethnography, personal narrative, reflexivity: researcher as subject. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS (eds) Handbook of qualitative research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp 733–768
European Commission (2012) How will the EU’s data protection reform strengthen the internal market? European commission. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/document/review2012/factsheets/4_en.pdf. Accessed 6 Aug 2015
European Commission (2018) 2018 reform of EU data protection rules. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/commission/priorities/justice-and-fundamental-rights/data-protection/2018-reform-eu-data-protection-rules_en. Accessed 18 Sept 2018
Faden RR, Beauchamp TL (1986) A history and theory of informed consent. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Feldman R, Eidelman AI (2004) Parent–infant synchrony and the social–emotional development of triplets. Dev Psychol 40(6):1133–1147. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.40.6.1133
Garun N (2013) Staples connect bridges all your ‘internet of things’ into one managing app. Digital Trends: http://bit.ly/1dGBnhJ
Haddadi H, Mortier R, McAuley D, Crowcroft J (2013) Human-data interaction, technical report 837, University of Cambridge, Computer Laboratory. http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/techreports/UCAM-CL-TR-837.pdf
Hong J-Y, Suh E-H, Kim S-J (2009) Context-aware systems: a literature review and classification. Expert Syst Appl 36(4):8509–8522
Information Commissioners Office (2012) Anonymisation: managing data protection risk code of practice. ICO.org.uk. https://ico.org.uk/media/1061/anonymisation-code.pdf. Accessed 5 Jan 2019
Kasper DVS (2005) The evolution (or devolution) of privacy. Sociol Forum 20(1):69–92
Kerr I, Steeves V, Lucock C (eds) (2009) Lessons from the identity trail. Oxford University Press, USA
Leber J (2012, June). A dollar for your data. www.technologyreview.com. Retrieved from http://www.technologyreview.com/news/428046/a-dollar-foryour-data/. Accessed 17 Aug 2015
Liddell K, Richards M (2009) Consent and beyond: some conclusions. In: Corrigan O, McMillan J, Liddell K, Riahards M (eds) The limits of consent: a socio-ethical approach to human subject research in medicine. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Luger E, Rodden T (2013) An informed view on consent for ubicomp. In: Proc. Ubicomp’13, ACM
Marx GT (2007) Privacy and social stratification. Knowl Technol & Policy 20(2):91–95
Merriman C (2014) Microsoft’s Windows 10 preview has permission to watch your every move. Retrieved from http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2373838/microsofts-windows-10-preview-has-permission-to-watch-your-every-move. Accessed 2 Aug 2015
Ng I (2014) Value & worth: creating new markets in the digital economy. Innovorsa Press, Cambridge
Nissenbaum HF (2010) Privacy in context. Stanford University Press, California
Normann R, Ramírez R (1993) From value chain to value constellation: designing interactive strategy. Harvard Business Review July/August 1993. 71(4)
O’Hara F (2011) Transparent government, not transparent citizens: a report on privacy and transparency for the cabinet office. Cabinet office
Ohno T (1995) Toyota production system: beyond large-scale production. Productivity Press, Portland, OR
Price BA, Adam K, Nuseibeh B (2005) Keeping ubiquitous computing to yourself: a practical model for user control of privacy. Int J Hum Comput Stud 63(1–2):228–253
MIT Technology Review (2015) The emerging science of human-data interaction. Retrieved at http://www.technologyreview.com/view/533901/the-emerging-science-of-human-data-interaction/. Accessed 5 Aug 2015
Richardson L (2000) Writing: a method of inquiry. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS (eds) Handbook of qualitative research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp 923–948
Schneier B (2010) Google and Facebook’s privacy illusion. Forbes. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/2010/04/05/google-facebook-twitter-technology-security-10-privacy.html. Accessed 9 Aug 2015
Sheehan KB (2002) Toward a typology of internet users and online privacy concerns. Inf Soc 18(1):21–32
Solove DJ (2009) Understanding privacy. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Thornhill T (2012) Google will know more about you than your partner: uproar as search giant reveals privacy policy that will allow them to track you on all their products, www.dailymail.co.uk. Retrieved from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2091508/Google-privacy-policy-Search-giant-know-partner.html. Accessed 3 Aug 2015
Tolmie P, Pycock J, Diggins T, MacLean A, Karsenty A (2002) Unremarkable computing. In: proc. CHI ‘02. ACM Press, pp 399–406
Uteck A (2009) Ubiquitous computing and spatial privacy. In: In Kerr I, Steeves V, Lucock C (eds) Lessons from the identity trail. Oxford University Press, USA, pp 83–102
Vargo SL, Robert F (2004) Lusch evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. J Mark 68:1–17
Weintraub J, Kumar K (1997) Public and private in thought and practice. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
World Economic Forum (2011) Personal data: the emergence of a new asset class. World economic forum other-awareness II: Mirror self-recognition, social contingency awareness, and synchronic imitation. Developmental Psychology 32(2). American Psychological Association, pp 313–321. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.32.2.313
Acknowledgements
This work was funded by a UK EPSRC Digital Economy HAT: Hub-of-all-Things as Platform for Multi-sided Market powered by Internet-of-Things: Opportunities for New Economic and Business Model EP/K039911/1.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Speed, C., Luger, E. (2019). Sensing Data in the Home. In: Schnädelbach, H., Kirk, D. (eds) People, Personal Data and the Built Environment. Springer Series in Adaptive Environments. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70875-1_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70875-1_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-70874-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-70875-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)