Why privacy is not enough privacy in the context of "ubiquitous computing" and "big data"

By Tobias Matzner. 2014

30 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Information Systems, Sociology and Political Science

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

1. Jessica Morley
2. Anat Elhalal
3. Libby Kinsey
4. John M. Cinnamon
5. Luciano Floridi
6. Mona Ashok
7. Rohit Madan
8. Anastasia Chan

In Information Systems

1. John M. Cinnamon
2. Jessica Morley
3. Luciano Floridi
4. Anat Elhalal
5. Libby Kinsey

In Sociology and Political Science

1. Jessica Morley
2. John M. Cinnamon
3. Luciano Floridi

Citations in the corpus

• Social Injustice in Surveillance Capitalism (2017, background): “…of privacy infringements is insufficient, and it provides a distraction from other serious social harms that can occur when people and their data are separated (see Newman 2015; Lyon 2003a; Crawford 2014; Stalder 2002; Lyon 2007; Zuboff 2016; Dwork and Mulligan 2013; Andrejevic 2014; Matzner 2014).”
• From What to How: An Initial Review of Publicly Available AI Ethics Tools, Methods and Research to Translate Principles into Practices (2019, background): “This is why (Nissenbaum 2004) argues for a contextual account of privacy, one that recognises the varying nature of informational norms (Matzner 2014) and (Kemper and Kolkman 2018) state that trans-parency is only meaningful in the context of a defined critical audience.”