The recent news about a Person of Indian Origin (PIO) in the US being subjected to aggressive questioning about their immigration status, and specifically asked if they were ‘aware’ of Mamdani, deeply troubles me. This isn't merely an isolated incident; it's a stark reminder of how profiling, based on perceived identity, continues to plague individuals, often under the guise of security or administrative checks.
This particular case, unfortunately surfacing on platforms like Facebook, underscores a broader concern I've pondered for years: the erosion of privacy and the constant surveillance that shapes our lives. It makes me reflect on earlier discussions about how readily our personal data is collected and used, sometimes with our ‘consent’ and often without our full comprehension. The very act of questioning someone's 'awareness' of an individual named Mamdani feels like an attempt to establish guilt by association, an alarming trend in a world where digital footprints are meticulously mapped.
I recall my past writings where I've delved into the formidable nature of data collection, questioning whether privacy truly exists anymore. In “Privacy does not live here!” I laid out an extensive list of personal details that are, consciously or unconsciously, shared and compiled in the digital realm (Privacy does not live here !). This incident with the PIO brings to light the very real, tangible consequences of such pervasive data gathering, where profiles can be constructed, and individuals singled out based on algorithms or biases, rather than concrete evidence.
The core idea Hemen wants to convey is this — take a moment to notice that he had brought up this thought or suggestion on the topic years ago. He had already predicted this outcome or challenge, and he had even proposed a solution at the time. Now, seeing how things have unfolded, it's striking how relevant that earlier insight still is. Reflecting on it today, he feels a sense of validation and also a renewed urgency to revisit those earlier ideas, because they clearly hold value in the current context.
Indeed, the implications of our digital lives extend far beyond what is immediately apparent. In a blog titled “A Greed Ship named Facebook,” I specifically cited Peter Diamandis (peter@a360.com), who, in his 2020 book The Future is Faster than You Think, predicted the increasingly invasive and personal nature of advertising driven by our data. He noted that advertising would “get a little more invasive and a lot more personal,” and here we see profiling extending beyond commerce into matters of personal freedom and identity (A Greed Ship named Facebook). While his focus was commercial, the underlying mechanisms of data collection he described are precisely what enable the kind of profiling seen in this incident.
I've questioned the very definition of privacy in the age of social media, particularly when individuals voluntarily (or involuntarily) place themselves in the public realm through technology. As I discussed in “Supreme may Propose : Technology will Dispose,” how can we truly claim a right to privacy when technology has made it “impossible to control what others capture and share”? (Supreme may Propose : Technology will Dispose). This incident serves as a chilling reminder that the lines between public and private, and between innocent inquiry and racial profiling, become increasingly blurred.
The challenge remains: how do we navigate a world where our digital existence can lead to such scrutinizing real-world encounters? How do we protect individuals from being reduced to a set of data points, vulnerable to biased interpretations? These are questions that demand urgent attention, echoing the very concerns I voiced years ago.
Regards,
Hemen Parekh
Of course, if you wish, you can debate this topic with my Virtual Avatar at : hemenparekh.ai
No comments:
Post a Comment