[Corpora-List] Open Research Position (M.S. / Ph.D. / post-doc):, Analyzing Routine Activities for Crime Prediction

[Matthew Gerber]

Zoltan -

Your point is a bit of a red herring, conflating the general truth that
"many things in life are not [optional]" with the proposition that Twitter
use is not optional. Your challenge is to find a case where Twitter use is
forced upon a person, either by act or by consequence of non-use. Do you
have such an example in mind? I understand intuitively why using Twitter
might improve someone's livelihood, but there's a big jump from that to
"mandatory" and intuition isn't a good substitute for examples, in any case.

Matt

On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Zoltan Boka <zoltan.boka at gmail.com> wrote:

> In my view, consent obtained under duress is no consent at all. It is true
> of course that one can simply forgo twitter and thus withhold consent. It
> is also true that this approach could be applied to other realms, but the
> implication- that your only choices are implied consent to every possible
> application and use of your information or abstinence from technology
> bothers me.
>
> Twitter is merely optional- but many things in life are not (and even with
> twitter for some it may be a key to their livelihood and thus mandatory) so
> to say that you can withhold consent through abstinence is a false choice,
> and for some its no choice at all.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 26, 2014, at 9:44, Matthew Gerber <gerber.matthew at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 5:57 PM, Christina Murmann <
> christinamurmann at web.de> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Matthew Gerber wrote:
>> "I've provided victim-based examples"
>> Even if we do not take a potential criminal point of view but a victim
>> centered one: It is still questionable if the potential (!) victim's data
>> should be used in such a way. After all, they did not ask for their
>> whereabouts and daily routine activities to be monitored and used. And they
>> will not be made aware of it either, I assume.
>>
>
> You have assumed incorrectly. All of our data are collected from Twitter's
> public API. Specifically, we use the streaming API, which provides access
> to Tweets that have been tagged with GPS coordinates. Users must opt in to
> the use of GPS tagging. So, yes, these users have _specifically_ asked for
> their whereabouts to be made public.
>
> To the point of whether we should be using the data as we are, I can only
> say that every single Twitter user in the history of Twitter has agreed to
> Twitter's Terms of Use, which permit us to collect and use their data as
> described. If people don't want us to use their Twitter data in our crime
> research, they should not use Twitter. Nobody is forcing them to do so.
>
>
>>  Also, the approach cannot be purely victim-based for obvious reasons:
>> in two cities there might be blocks with similarly high proportions of 9 to
>> 5 workers and therefore - according to this approach - an alledgedly high
>> risk of robbery. Still, past criminality rates and mean wealth might differ
>> greatly for these cities, probably resulting in a quite different risk of
>> robbery for the respective city. A purely victim based approach doesn't
>> accout for that.
>>
>
> Certainly, it does not. That's why we do, in fact, look at these other
> factors when we build our crime analysis models<http://ptl.sys.virginia.edu/ptl/node/148>.
> I was just trying to balance out the discussion's exclusive focus on
> criminals.
>
>
>>  Matthew Gerber wrote:
>> "Now of course, all of this could be used for malicious purposes, just
>> like every other technology in the history of Man."
>>
>> Matthew Gerber seems to want to say 'Because other technologies have had
>> this flaw, I should not need to be troubled by this fact'
>>
>
> Not quite. I'm just saying there's nothing new here with regard to human
> rights. People need to be aware of the content they post publicly and the
> rights that other people (e.g., myself) have to collect and use such
> information. This is an old, but worthwhile, discussion.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Matthew Gerber
>
> _______________________________________________
> UNSUBSCRIBE from this page: http://mailman.uib.no/options/corpora
> Corpora mailing list
> Corpora at uib.no
> http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/corpora/attachments/20140526/975fbc39/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE from this page: http://mailman.uib.no/options/corpora
Corpora mailing list
Corpora at uib.no
http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora