Can we make the web more inclusive or will our online reality always be a lawless wasteland of trolls and lies?
Most of us are probably having our data tracked in some form. And while there are regulatory safeguards in place to protect user privacy, it's hard to say whether these are enough.
Know the difference between an EMR, EHR and PHR? Our digital data expert sets the record straight.
A US judge has allowed police access to the major DNA database without users' consent (including Australian users). It's a timely reminder that we urgently need genetic privacy legislation.
Many sites offer the ability to 'opt out' of targeted advertisements, but doing so isn't easy. Simplifying and standardizing opt-outs would help improve privacy on the web.
As more data are collected, it's important for the public to understand how their health information is being used. But user agreements are often complex, lengthy and written in inaccessible language.
The complex user-generated nature of YouTube content for kids is proving difficult to control for the online giant, who have been issued with a US$170 million fine for breaching children's privacy.
Privacy starts with the body and extends to digital data. There are few rules governing what companies can do – yet people can't effectively protect their own privacy.
An entire industry exists to trade on your personal data - everything from your shopping habits to your political views and medical conditions. The results can genuinely harm consumers.
Automated decision making has been around in healthcare since the 1970s, and now radiology is the new frontline where AI is being deployed.
There's no way an independent assessor will be able to actually monitor how Facebook might violate or abuse users' privacy in key ways.
People are more willing to participate in fitness tracker-based insurance policies when they are in control of their participation.
Social biases in digital tech create racist face recognition software and sexist hiring tools, but more data collection isn't the answer.
Facebook is built on harvesting platform data about its users, crunching that to predict behaviours and allegiances and then selling this package to advertisers. That hasn't changed yet.
In a recent Canadian court case, defence and prosecution argued over whether a suspect was required to provide his password to allow for a search warrant to be executed on his phone.
South African consumers aren't confident that organisations always use their information lawfully and for agreed purposes.
States like California have been at the forefront of privacy innovation in recent decades. A possible federal law could bring their experimentation to a halt, harming consumers.
The history of how Alphabet Inc. and its subsidiaries manage children and data is a troubling one. How will Sidewalk Labs address concerns about minors and privacy in Toronto's Quayside project?
Even governments in democracies with strong traditions of rule of law find themselves tempted to abuse these new abilities.
Consumers want better protection for their data, and businesses want clear national laws. Yet there is virtually no consensus about what a broad privacy law should entail.