[Plura-list] The Observatory of Anonymity; Hawley and Taylor Greene faked their donor-surge; What's wrong with EU's trustbusters; Some thoughts on GWB's call for truth in politics

Wed Apr 21 14:23:04 EDT 2021

Today's links

* The Observatory of Anonymity: You are far less of a haystack-needle
than you think.

* Hawley and Taylor Greene faked their donor-surge: Juking stats for
fun, fortune, and fame.

* What's wrong with EU's trustbusters: And how to fix it.

* Some thoughts on GWB's call for truth in politics: Mission accomplished.

* This day in history: 2006, 2011, 2016, 2020

* Colophon: Recent publications, upcoming/recent appearances, current
writing projects, current reading

_,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,_

🐕‍🦺 The Observatory of Anonymity

"Wanting it badly is not enough" could be the title of a postmortem on
the century's tech-policy battles. Think of the crypto wars: yeah, it
would be super cool if we had ciphers that worked perfectly except when
"bad guys" used them, but that's not ever going to happen.

Another area is anonymization of large data-sets. There are undeniably
cool implications for a system that allows us to gather and analyze lots
of data on how people interact with each other and their environments
without compromising their privacy.

But "cool" isn't the same as "possible" because wanting it badly is not
enough. In the mid-2010s, privacy legislation started to gain real
momentum, and privacy regulators found themselves called upon to craft
compromises to pass important new privacy laws.

Those compromises took the form of "anonymized data" carve-outs, leading
to the passage of laws like the GDPR, which strictly regulated
processing "personally identifying information" but was a virtual
free-for-all for "de-identified" data that had been "anonymized."

There was just one teensy problem with this compromise: de-identifying
data is *really* hard, and it only gets harder over time. Say the NHS
releases prescribing data: date, doctor, prescription, and a random
identifier. That's a super-useful data-set for medical research.

And say the next year, Addison-Lee or another large minicab company
suffers a breach (no human language contains the phrase "as secure as
minicab IT") that contains many of the patients' journeys that resulted
in that prescription-writing.

Merge those two data-sets and you re-identify many of the patients in
the data. Subsequent releases and breaches compound the problem, and
there's nothing the NHS can do to either predict or prevent a breach by
a minicab company.

Even if the NHS is confident in its anonymization, it can never be
confident in the sturdiness of that anonymity over time.

Worse: the NHS really *can't* be confident in its anonymization. Time
and again, academics have shown that anonymized data from the start.

Re-identification attacks are subtle, varied, and very, very hard to
defend against:

https://www.cs.princeton.edu/~arvindn/publications/precautionary.pdf

Worse, they're highly automatable:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-10933-3

And it's true in practice as well as in theory:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/12/19/opinion/location-tracking-cell-phone.html

When this pointed out to the (admittedly hard-working and torn) privacy
regulators, they largely shrugged their shoulders and expressed a
groundless faith that somehow this would be fixed in the future. Privacy
should not be a faith-based initiative.

https://memex.craphound.com/2014/07/09/big-data-should-not-be-a-faith-based-initiative/

Today, we continue to see the planned releases of large datasets with
assurances that they have been anonymized. It's common for terms of
service to include your "consent" to have your data shared once it has
been de-identified. This is a meaningless proposition.

To show just how easy re-identification can be, researchers at Imperial
College and the Université catholique de Louvain have released The
Observatory of Anonymity, a web-app that shows you how easily you can be
identified in a data-set.

https://cpg.doc.ic.ac.uk/observatory/

Feed the app your country and region, birthdate, gender, employment and
education status and it tells you how many people share those
characteristics. For example, my identifiers boil down to a 1-in-3
chance of being identified.

(Don't worry: all these calculations are done in your browser and the
Observatory doesn't send any of your data to a server)

If anything, The Observatory is generous to anonymization proponents.
"Anonymized" data often include identifiers like the first half of a
post-code.

You can read more about The Observatory's methods in the accompanying
Nature paper, "Estimating the success of re-identifications in
incomplete datasets using generative models."

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-10933-3

_,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,_

🐕‍🦺 Hawley and Taylor Greene faked their donor-surge

After the Jan 6 insurrection, there were tons of demoralizing stories
about how much pro-insurrection lawmakers like Marjorie Taylor Greene
and Josh Hawley were raising in small-dollar donations, suggesting a
vast base supporting authoritarian overthrow of the US government.

But it turns out that those numbers were hugely and deliberately
distorted by Taylor Greene and Hawley, as Propublica reveals in a new
reporting from Isaac Arnsdorf and Derek Willis.

https://www.propublica.org/article/how-josh-hawley-and-marjorie-taylor-greene-juiced-their-fundraising-numbers

The report analyzes campaign finance disclosures from the pair and
learns that they spent vast sums - $600,000 in total - renting out
mailing lists from sleazy GOP operatives whose business is compiling
databases of suckers who give whenever they're asked.

The cost of those donations is high even by GOP standards, where half
the money donors cough up can be skimmed off by "consultants," and it
echoes the tactics used by Trump to artificially goose his own
fundraising figures through straight-up fraud:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/03/us/politics/trump-donations.html

The lists in this case come from one of the GOP's leading sleazemongers,
Bryan G Rudnick (though his company LGM Consulting Group), who attained
notoriety by spamming Jewish voters in 2008 with warnings that an Obama
victory would lead to another Holocaust.

Spending a lot of money to raise a little money sounds like a losing
proposition, but only if you discount the value that comes from fronting
the appearance of popularity and support that comes from grossing a
fortune in small-dollar donations (nevermind the net).

Hawley and Taylor Greene's fundraisers were political theater, and they
worked, sending progressives into a panic at the thought of a vast
groundswell of support for insurrection, and reassuring conservatives
who worried that the pair were too extreme to garner support.

It was a canny - but ultimately easily discovered - ruse.

_,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,_

🐕‍🦺 What's wrong with EU's trustbusters

In his latest newsletter, the campaigning journalist Nick Shaxson talks
with former EU Commission Chief Competition Economist Tommaso Valletti:
it's an eye-opening view into how European competition policy has failed
so dismally and massively.

https://thecounterbalance.substack.com/p/the-european-system-of-monopoly

Importantly, it's about the European course of the disease of
corporatism, which was rooted in 1920s Austria and then made the leap to
the University of Chicago where it mutated into a virulent, global plague.

The Austria-Chicago plague destroyed the "democratic theory" of fighting
monopoly ("monopolies are bad because they concentrate power into too
few hands") with the "consumer welfare theory" ("monopolies are *only*
bad if they make prices go up).

This neutered competition rules in two ways: first, it ended all
enforcement predicated on harms to society (as opposed to consumers).
Even if a merger or other anticompetitive act was unambiguously about
forcing lower wages, say, competition law no longer got a look in.

Second, though, was that it forced opponents of mergers to prove that
they would result in higher prices, and it defined the standard of
proof: "proof" came in the form of complex mathematical models that only
pro-monopoly partisans knew how to build or interpret.

Thus Valletti describes how any objection to a monopolistic act had to
clear a series of gatekeepers: high-powered law firms that briefed
economists ("useful fools") on how to present the most obviously
anticompetitive mergers so they'd pass muster.

These lawyers would interpose themselves between Valletti and the
economist-experts - he (in his capacity as a senior economist at a
regulator) would ask another economist expert for clarification and the
lawyer would jump in and say, "Don't answer that."

The enablers are drawn primarily from three firms: Charles River
Associates, Compass Lexecon and RBB Economics, and, until recently,
there was precious little pushback from NGOs who might be able to serve
as a countervaling force.

But, as Valletti notes, there's some progress, for example, an
intervention by Amnesty in opposition to the (idiotic) Google-Fitbit
merger. We're going to need a lot more of that, though, thanks to the
timidity of EU competition regulators.

Describing this timidity, Valletti says that his former colleagues face
a "stigma attached to losing cases in court, of having decisions
reversed" and that this makes the reluctant to take bold measures,
particularly in tech.

Echoing James Comey (who called the coterie of prosecutors who never
lost a case "The Chickenshit Club" for their lack of ambition), Valletti
say, "If you are not losing cases in court, you are not being ambitious
enough."

Which is not to say that there aren't NGOs in the mix - there are, on
the side of monopolists, in the form of Koch Network think-tankies who
handwave away rigorous academic work opposing mergers ("Professor
So-And-So is wrong").

What these paid shills lack in rigor they make up for in brevity and
approachability - they know a judge won't read a 50-page, peer-reviewed
economic paper, so they rebut it with "a glossy pamphlet with three nice
pages."

When the arguments do get technical, they enter the realm of absurdity.
Key to antimonopoly enforcement is "relevant market defintiion" - before
you call a company a monopolist, you have to say what they *monopolize*.

The regulators give big companies the most amazing passes when it comes
to this - for example, when Facebook was buying Instagram, it did not
characterize the merger as affecting the social media market - rather,
it said the "camera app" market was the one to look at.

All this market definition wrangling burns resources. To reverse this,
Valletti proposes a new standard - not merely a shifting of the burden
of proof that would force merging firms to prove that the merger WON'T
be anticompetitive.

But also a requirement that firms prove that they can't get the same
benefits *without merging*: "can you prove that this merger is the only
way to bring these benefits?"

Valletti: "You, Google, the most almighty firm in the world, why do you
need to purchase Fitbit to achieve these benefits?  Can’t you do it
yourself, with all the smart guys you have? And leave Fitbit on its own,
or available for purchase by someone without your market power, as this
will increase competition? Prove that you really cannot do it without
buying Fitbit. It is beyond my comprehension. Show me. And leave Fitbit
on its own, or available for purchase by someone without your market
power, as this will increase competition? Prove that you really cannot
do it without buying Fitbit. It is beyond my comprehension. Show me."

_,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,_

🐕‍🦺 Some thoughts on GWB's call for truth in politics

Some reflections on  former President George W Bush's remarks on the
Today Show, that "What's really troubling is how much misinformation
there is and the capacity of people to spread all kinds of untruth.

https://www.businessinsider.com/george-w-bush-troubled-by-misinformation-internet-2021-4

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahaha.

Seriously, fuck that guy.

See also:

* "Thinking through Mitch McConnell's plea for comity"
https://pluralistic.net/2021/01/30/meme-stocks/#comity

* "Further, on Mitch McConnell and comity"
https://pluralistic.net/2021/01/30/meme-stocks/#no-seriously

_,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,_

🐕‍🦺 This day in history

#15yrsago Thieves discover abandoned Soviet missile silo full of cash
https://web.archive.org/web/20060323094858/http://www.mosnews.com/news/2006/03/07/moneyfound.shtml

#10yrsago MPAA: “democratizing culture is not in our interest”
https://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-democratizing-culture-is-not-in-our-interest-110420/

#5yrsago Printer ink wars may make private property the exclusive domain
of corporations
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/04/eff-asks-supreme-court-overturn-dangerous-ruling-allowing-patent-owners-undermine

#5yrsago VW offers to buy back 500K demon-haunted diesels
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-volkswagen-emissions-usa-idUSKCN0XH2CX

#5yrsago Why Internet voting is a terrible idea, explained in small
words anyone can understand https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abQCqIbBBeM

#5yrsago Why is Congress so clueless about tech? Because they fired all
their experts 20 years ago
https://www.wired.com/2016/04/office-technology-assessment-congress-clueless-tech-killed-tutor/

#5yrsago Kindle Unlimited is being flooded with 3,000-page garbage books
that suck money out of the system
https://consumerist.com/2016/04/20/amazon-unintentionally-paying-scammers-to-hand-you-1000-pages-of-crap-you-dont-read/

#1yrago Phishers deploy fake contact-tracing warnings
https://pluralistic.net/2020/04/21/all-in-it-together/#co-evolution

_,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,_

🐕‍🦺 Colophon

Today's top sources: Luc Rocher (https://rocher.lc/), Naked Capitalism
(https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/).

Currently writing:

* A Little Brother short story about pipeline protests.  RESEARCH PHASE

* A short story about consumer data co-ops.  PLANNING

* A Little Brother short story about remote invigilation.  PLANNING

* A nonfiction book about excessive buyer-power in the arts, co-written
with Rebecca Giblin, "The Shakedown."  FINAL EDITS

* A post-GND utopian novel, "The Lost Cause."  FINISHED

* A cyberpunk noir thriller novel, "Red Team Blues."  FINISHED

Currently reading: Analogia by George Dyson.

Latest podcast: Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results
https://craphound.com/news/2021/03/28/past-performance-is-not-indicative-of-future-results/

Upcoming appearances:

* Book launch for Bruce Sterling's Robot Artists & Black Swans (Book
People), Apr 27,
https://www.bookpeople.com/event/virtual-event-bruce-sterling-robot-artists-black-swans

* Seize the Means of Computation, Ryerson Centre for Free Expression,
May 19,
https://cfe.ryerson.ca/events/how-destroy-surveillance-capitalism-seize-means-computation

Recent appearances:

* The Right to Repair Movement, Monopolies, and Solarpunk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmosdDCrL-4

* The surveillance state, digital monopolies, and why we should be
worried (Podsongs)
https://anchor.fm/podsongs/episodes/Cory-Doctorow-on-the-Surveillance-State--digital-monopolies--and-why-we-should-be-worried-eso43k

* Conspiracy Theories (Utopian Horizons):
https://soundcloud.com/utopianhorizons/conspiracy-theory-w-cory-doctorow

Latest book:

* "Attack Surface": The third Little Brother novel, a standalone
technothriller for adults. The *Washington Post* called it "a political
cyberthriller, vigorous, bold and savvy about the limits of revolution
and resistance." Order signed, personalized copies from Dark Delicacies
https://www.darkdel.com/store/p1840/Available_Now%3A_Attack_Surface.html

* "How to Destroy Surveillance Capitalism": an anti-monopoly pamphlet
analyzing the true harms of surveillance capitalism and proposing a
solution.
https://onezero.medium.com/how-to-destroy-surveillance-capitalism-8135e6744d59
(print edition:
https://bookshop.org/books/how-to-destroy-surveillance-capitalism/9781736205907)
(signed copies:
https://www.darkdel.com/store/p2024/Available_Now%3A__How_to_Destroy_Surveillance_Capitalism.html)

* "Little Brother/Homeland": A reissue omnibus edition with a new
introduction by Edward Snowden:
https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250774583; personalized/signed copies
here:
https://www.darkdel.com/store/p1750/July%3A__Little_Brother_%26_Homeland.html

* "Poesy the Monster Slayer" a picture book about monsters, bedtime,
gender, and kicking ass. Order here:
https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781626723627. Get a personalized, signed
copy here:
https://www.darkdel.com/store/p1562/_Poesy_the_Monster_Slayer.html.

Upcoming books:

* The Shakedown, with Rebecca Giblin, nonfiction/business/politics,
Beacon Press 2022

This work licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license.
That means you can use it any way you like, including commercially,
provided that you attribute it to me, Cory Doctorow, and include a link
to pluralistic.net.

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Quotations and images are not included in this license; they are
included either under a limitation or exception to copyright, or on the
basis of a separate license. Please exercise caution.

_,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,_

🐕‍🦺 How to get Pluralistic:

Blog (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

Pluralistic.net

Newsletter (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

https://pluralistic.net/plura-list

Mastodon (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

https://mamot.fr/web/accounts/303320

Twitter (mass-scale, unrestricted, third-party surveillance and
advertising):

https://twitter.com/doctorow

Tumblr (mass-scale, unrestricted, third-party surveillance and advertising):

https://mostlysignssomeportents.tumblr.com/tagged/pluralistic

"*When life gives you SARS, you make sarsaparilla*" -Joey "Accordion
Guy" DeVilla

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.flarn.com/pipermail/plura-list/attachments/20210421/5106a22d/attachment.sig>