back to article Let's get to know each other first: Joe Public won't share their data with just anyone

The British public are much more likely to hand over personal data to an organisation they know than one they don't, and are willing to accept a trade-off if it will help science – or themselves. That's according to a survey carried out by pollsters YouGov for the Open Data Institute (ODI), which asked it to find out what the …

Silver badge

chocolate

So, if I put on a nice suit, get out my most respectable clipboard, go to a typical main street in the U.K. and offer people chocolate for their passwords, I'll have a lot of chocolate at the end of the day?

Or, if I create a social media platform that allows parents think that they are in with da yoof (and, consequently, that they are young again), said members will guard their privacy well.

I'd say Mark Zuckerberg and the phishers are trembling in their boots.

6
0
Silver badge

Re: chocolate

So, if I put on a nice suit, get out my most respectable clipboard, go to a typical main street in the U.K. and offer people chocolate for their passwords, I'll have a lot of chocolate at the end of the day?

Nope

4
0
Silver badge

Re: chocolate

You'll have a lot of false passwords at the end of the day.

11
0
Silver badge
Linux

Re: chocolate

Meanwhile, plenty of patients are sharing their deepest darkest medical secrets on Facebook already.

This kind of "survey" might be horribly skewed. Those that don't have any medical history to speak of may be spiking the results. I suspect this is one of those things were different experiences will alter the results considerably.

I wouldn't trust a government agency to be competent. On the other hand, I do have an interest in sharing information with other patients even in a dodgey place like Facebook.

3
0
Silver badge

The general public are stupid

Sky is blue, water is wet etc.

6
1
Silver badge

Re: The general public are stupid

Sky is blue

If I look out of the window right now, I see that half the sky is a mix of white and various shades of grey, and the half that isn't is becoming smaller.

6
0
Silver badge
Big Brother

If only...

We had a choice....

6
0
Silver badge
Coat

Re: If only...

They should ask people if they deepmind it

2
0

NHS most trusted with our info, survey says, social media isn't

"NHS most trusted with our info, survey says, social media isn't"

...and yet reality shows that people put absolutely everything on social media yet fail to go to the doctor when they have a real problem that needs diagnosing :)

10
0
Silver badge
Devil

Re: NHS most trusted with our info, survey says, social media isn't

Also, people don't go into enough gory and graphic detail even when they do go complaining to the doctor. They leave important things out even when they have a problem and they're hoping the doctor will be able to figure out what's going on.

Nobody wants to go to the doctor. They don't want the bad news.

2
0
Silver badge

Re: NHS most trusted with our info, survey says, social media isn't

Jedidiah» Nobody wants to go to the doctor. They don't want the bad news.

And people are most fond of going to Dr. Google to get potential news that is much, much worse.

0
0
Silver badge
Gimp

ASL

DOBs, names, addresses, I have plenty. More than enough for one each so why wouldn't I share them?

You ain't seen me, right?---->

3
0
Silver badge

Disparity

And here we see the difference between what people ACTUALLY do and what they secretly know they SHOULD do, and claim if anybody asks. People lie to themselves like this all the time. "Surely it's not that bad".

6
0
Gold badge

Re: Disparity

It's why predicting elections is so hard for pollsters. Some people lie about what party they support, but I believe that's actually quite rare. But only a few people are willing to admit, "I can't be arsed to vote".

In general more of the people who say they would vote Labour in the UK, are also the people who don't vote - hence Labour often perform better in the polls than the actual elections.

This also makes referendums really hard to predict. To try to correct for the effect in general elections you can ask people how they voted last time. And they're apparently more likely to admit they didn't vote then, while still saying they're certain to vote this time - and then the pollsters weight their responses down.

If ever you want to nerd out on opinion polls and how to read them, and how to avoid the bollocks written about them, I heartily recommend www.ukpollingreport.co.uk.

2
0

"a survey carried out by pollsters YouGov for the Open Data Institute (ODI)"

Stephan Shakespeare is the CEO of YouGov, the polling organisation, and back in 2013 he wrote An Independent Review of Public Sector Information [PSI].

Professor Sir Nigel Shadbolt is the chairman and co-founder of the Open Data Institute (ODI).

Professor Sir Nigel appeared in front of the Public Administration Select Committee (PASC) to give evidence jointly with Stephan Shakespeare. Tim Kelsey (care.data) and Professor Sir Nigel were both members of the Data Strategy Board and, as such, assisted with the production of Stephan Shakespeare's PSI report (p.4).

ODI and YouGov are not independent of each other and both have an interest in promoting data-sharing.

"The [2013] review", Mr Shakespeare tells us,"will consider the current and anticipated future needs for Government given the current policy objectives across departments and wider public sector bodies as well as the opportunities and challenges presented by rapidly developing technology in the area".

That's false.

Nowhere in its 71 pages does the review tell us what the opportunities are and nowhere do we discover what this "rapidly developing technology" is.

It's been a busy old time for Shakespeare. He's been talking to the citizens and to the experts: "There have been breakfast seminars, larger events with big businesses, SMEs [small and medium-sized enterprises] and start-ups. I have also interviewed individual experts, activists and practitioners".

All those full English breakfasts. Also small and medium-sized English breakfasts. And more – tireless pollster that he is, Shakespeare, the founder of YouGov remember, tells us that: "my own evidence has come from the two waves of surveys, each with simple, defined multi-option questions, with every question accompanied by an open comment box. The first wave was exploratory, helping to develop ideas; the second wave, confirmatory, seeking support for my broad recommendations".

What do these two-wave surveys reveal?

We find out in the Evidence section of his review (pp.21-7): "70% ... of total respondents think that we should make public all that we can about our health care system ...".

Too bad on the other 30%, you may say, the majority has spoken and the majority wants everyone's medical records to be made available for research.

Not so fast.

Your confidence may be partially deflated when you learn that Shakespeare's surveys were conducted on two groups of people. In one of them, 18% of respondents said they were "highly informed" on data issues and in the other group that figure was 4%.

The survey finding above could legitimately be re-stated as follows: "Between 82% and 96% of people asked said they didn't know what they were talking about but nevertheless 70% of them think that we should make public all that we can about our health care system so we should".

Questions of independence. And questions of methodology, too.

6
0
Gold badge
Gimp

"However, 13 per cent said they wouldn't trust any of the organisations on the list – "

Because you shouldn't?

"Trust" any of these f**kers to not pimp your data to any Mark, Eric or Sergei?

I think not.

I'd love to see peoples reactions to how much data FB or Google can cross reference across sites and how detailed a profile they can build of you.

I'll bet it's a great deal more detailed than most people think it is.

3
0

Offline ?

Reading comprehension fail on my half maybe ?

'while 10 per cent trusted social media organisations and offline retails.'

You would probably have to give valid details to an online retailer to pass credit card fraud checks. They also want repeat orders so are more inclined to be honest and not share it with world + dog plus the PCI compliance should help...... unless you log in with Farcebook:o

2
0
Silver badge
Facepalm

If the

public wants to make its data freely available online, then just contract equifax to store it.

Oh sorry not that sort of sharing

2
0

From the article: "However, 13 per cent said they wouldn't trust any of the organisations on the list – which also included governments, insurers and medical research charities – with their data."

I'm in that 13 per cent - I don't trust any of them, not necessarily because I think they are all inherently untrustworthy, but because, as we are all aware, there is always the risk of a successful exploit. With paper records, snaffling and aggregating personal information an even a single person was practically impossible without huge time and resources, but now it is trivial and the information only one hack/lost thumb-drive/underpaid techie away from being spa fed who knows where.

I deliberately give different false information to keep some sense of control (perhaps pointless, but it makes me feel better).

0
0

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018