I have recently become concerned about the central control of metadata about large groups of individuals by large companies. On an individual level, it appears to me that this giving away of data is merely a nuisance: companies use it to target advertising toward me. Some individuals even support targeted advertising, which I think of as a kind of Stockholm syndrome. Honestly, while I find targeted advertisements to be annoying I do not find them to be concerning enough to warrant radical action. The problem is, that this practice is only merely annoying when you consider it from an individual level. If you consider it on a massive aggregate level, then you have a situation that is frighteningly dangerous.
The trouble is that metadata about large groups of people is incredibly powerful. It can be used to influence the outcomes of large-scale human phenomena. These may be towards the public good, like dramatically reducing the spread of a disease using targeted treatments, or they can be malicious, such as the pushing public opinion in a convenient direct of a special interest group during an election season such that the election outcome is changed. The fact is that central control of metadata is far too powerful to be ignored. It can be used to manipulate and control people in extraordinarily effective ways. This disturbs me. I think people should have a viable alternative to choose, rather than give away their data to big companies.
This brings me to the point: I actually think that tracking an individual, such as myself could be quite useful and fascinating and the results could be used for the good of that individual. It's just I what that data. I want to be the one tracking me. And then if someone wants to see my data, they have to ask me for it. And then we can maybe come to an agreeable arrangement. But what we have currently is a shit-show free-for-all.
Anyway, enough for the motivation. You get the idea.