Jemima Kiss writes about how quickly and willingly we surrender our digital privacy. I’m not a campaigner for privacy issues. What interests me most is how our understanding of ‘the self’ is subtly transformed whenever some aspect of our personal identity becomes public property.
If everyone knows (and in some sense ‘possesses’) everything about me that I myself know, does that make me less free? Or does it just limit the scope of my freedom to the interior space that I manage to keep private? Or is it an invitation to identify even more fully with the public self that is available to others, and to recreate that self with abandon?
It’s helpful to remember that the word ‘personality’ comes from the Latin persona, which has the literal meaning of ‘mask’. I take from this the conclusion that it is not so easy or desirable to completely separate the inner self from the outer face that we present to the world. The one that is now pasted over the whole digital world.
Here are some of Jemima Kiss’s observations:
Five years ago a pseudonym was de rigueur, yet now we share the minutiae of what we’re reading and thinking, and who we’re seeing. We are all sliding up the adoption curve to a future where this behaviour will only become even more extensive, more normal. How did our perception of what is an appropriate public identity shift so far, so quickly?
Assuming none of us this side of the digital divide are willing to disenfranchise ourselves socially and professionally by giving up the internet altogether, we have to be prepared to give up something. The free lunch is over; we pay with money, time or behavioural data. There is a benefit, too, because sharing information about ourselves opens the door to the semantic web; the powerful, personalised internet of the future.
Already, from your internet connection to the sites you use, everything you share, search, comment, email, read and watch – every social signal you make – is recorded. The only rule you need to protect yourself online is to commit something to the web only if you would be happy for anyone to read it.
Bridges and Tangents 
I suppose, like others, I am reluctant to bare my soul and evrything about me to all on the Internet. Granted, it may be said that, in giving my full name, I am going some way to doing this. However, there are some things about my life I like to keep private and, perhaps, only disclose to a ‘real’ person of my choosing. Am I alone in this?
I think the inner self and truth of each and every one of us is exposed in accordance with our personal form of expression and our personalities. Some people are very expressive, some not so. Some immensely private and some open as a book. I sometimes think people with less expressive personality have a far stronger mask.
I think also although to a certain extent one has a choice what they present to the outside world, with or without a computer, one would hope and assume that how a person continuously presents themselves to others, and even more so how they are continuously perceived by others, reveals its own truth, a truth beyond the mask.
One would also hope that integrity stops somebody from recreating themselves with reckless abandon. Although in the sad case of identity deception where children/people have gone on to be deceived abused or murdered rather challenges this.
I don’t think anybody can ever fully know everything about us. Only God. Aside from privacy this throws up the question of whether your personal freedom is greater when people know less about you, or when they know you a little and on that little base their judgements, or if true freedom is far greater when one is not repressed and feels fully expressed and understood ?
I think one of the modern worlds communication errors is that there is less time spent letter writing, deeply conversing and building intimate relationship with the people in our communities and lives.
Having a pseudonym (when it works) allows somebody the alias to cross liminal boundaries and interact in a wholesome way without attracting intellectual or cultural discrimination or censorship, as well as maintaining privacy.
What ever it is a great reminder and lesson to read the above article, and realize how transparent our on line behaviour can be. And because of this one should always only operates from a core position of honesty and integrity, one that could be defended and upheld by personal truth.
I guess people are the ultimate working progress, and this collection of data if nothing else positive, at least could help us to understand how we all feel, respond, interact, express and communicate as well as realise patterns, fashions and trends in human culture , behaviour and lifestyles.
I have just completed an information governance course, how many of us give out our name and address when returning unwanted goods upon a refund? You did not have to give this information when you bought the goods and are under no legal obligation to give it (probably for marketing purposes) upon return.