I'm in two minds when it comes to astrology. On the one hand, given what I understand about science and the workings of the natural and psychological worlds, I can't imagine how it could be that the movements of the planets, and their positions from the perspective of an observer on the Earth, could dictate our behaviour and predetermine our personalities.
On the other hand, it appears to me as though all the advice given out by astrology is of a purely positive nature. You never hear an astrologer tell someone to make a bad decision, to rob someone or to irreparably damage a relationship. The advice is always stuff we need to hear, and couched in psychologically reinforcing terms. We're told to be cautious making big decisions, to have patience, to make bold moves, to be affirmative instead of resigned, and so on. As such, while I see no reason to believe the mechanics of astrology, I am also thankful of its existence.
I'm also in two minds when it comes to privacy advocacy groups. While I'm a fairly cynical person, in that I'm loathe to take things on face value, especially when I suspect there may be ulterior motives, I'm certainly not a conspiracy theorist. In the same way as I can't see how the position of a gigantic ball of gas can determine our personality, I fail to see the connections drawn behind the scenes by conspiracy theorists who talk in subdued tones of big brother, or mega corporations who seek to steal our personalities.
I've written several times on these kinds of things in the past. I remember when Intel announced its Processor Serial Number (PSN) with the Pentium III, which in many ways was the precursor to the upcoming Palladium security technology. The PSN was on by default on most systems, and could be used by software or a website to uniquely identify that particular PC. This could be useful in managing secure transactions or authenticating a remote login. However, there was a wave of concern that rippled over the internet that Intel, or other nefarious operators, would abuse the PSN and use it to track our movements and put and end to the days of the anonymous internet.
I also remember when Microsoft implemented product activation, where each user had to touch base in order to unlock their software. At the time there was talk in suspicious tones that the information sent back to Microsoft would not be trivial, and would in fact take a snapshot of your entire system, including installed software - of the legal or pirated variety.
Of course, both of these technologies turned out to be quite benign, despite the voluminous discourses by privacy advocates across the net. Both Intel and Microsoft upheld their commitment to not collect any personally identifiable information, and to allow the user to maintain control of what information is made accessible.
Now we have a similar situation unrolling with Google's new email service, Gmail. Recently a privacy advocacy group, Privacy Rights Clearing House, gathered 31 other groups together to make a joint statement urging Google to suspend Gmail. Their concerns revolve around Google's plans to scan each email that moves through its system, as well as the fact that Google makes no claim as to when or if any emails on Gmail will be deleted.
On the surface, these concerns seem very real. I certainly feel uneasy about the idea of someone reading all of my emails, as well as the thought that they could be stored indefinitely, and read at a later date without my consent.
However, if you dig a little deeper into the workings of Gmail, things may not be as bad as they first seem. Gmail uses scanning technology very similar to Google's search algorithms. This then builds a profile of keywords that can be used to provide targeted advertising at that user. No human steps in at any part of the process and actually 'reads' any emails. Furthermore, the mail is stored for an indefinite period, but over this time it still never becomes accessible to any human eyes.
This is not so dissimilar to virus or spam filters that scan your incoming and outgoing emails to detect undesirable content. Nor is it that different from the fact that every time you send an email, it winds its way through dozens of nodes throughout the internet, and could be cached in any number of places for indefinite periods - and we have absolutely no control over that.
So, while I feel the concerns of the privacy advocacy groups are, in this case, overblown, I still appreciate the fact that they are there. Without overt public scrutiny of these kinds of issues it would be very easy for companies to exploit us and abuse our privacy. As such, I rest easier at night knowing there are people out there who take these things seriously (even too seriously at times), in the same way I rest easier knowing astrologers are advising people to do positive things based on entirely dubious mechanics. Sometimes, being in two minds is better than being in one.
Know Your Rights
Here's what Google says about privacy and Gmail:
http://gmail.google.com/gmail/help/about_privacy.html
This the open letter from the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse:
www.privacyrights.org/ar/GmailLetter.htm
Googlewatch is a web site that scrutinises many aspects of Google:
www.google-watch.org
The Center for Democracy and Technology is an interesting site that looks at many issues such as privacy online:
www.cdt.org