Welcome to the European Forum Albak. I'm Claudia Tvinska and you're watching TVP World, and it is my absolute pleasure to welcome Meredith Whittaker, who is the president of the Signal Foundation, as my guest today here in the studio. Thank you so much for joining.
It's a delight to be here. Thank you.
So, as the world of tech industry is changing dynamically, I wanted us to focus today on the question of privacy, because two-thirds of the world are already connected to the internet, and in today's day and age there is a lot more discussion about what happens to our data and who has access to it. So as we're speaking about privacy, I wanted to see if those obstacles and those troubles that we're facing when it comes to keeping our privacy can be — we can overcome them. And so let's start with research from the World Economic Forum. It shows that it's becoming easier for citizens to be monitored, allowing governments to have better access to our data and reach deeper into our lives. So, do you think that we're beyond the point of no return when it comes to our privacy being violated?
Absolutely not. But we are at a point where I think almost everyone is taking privacy seriously and recognizing that privacy is a fundamental human right for a reason. We can't have democracy. We can't have intimacy. We can't have open conversations about what we need to change in the world to make it better if we can't have a private life, if we can't communicate with each other privately. And there's a reason that those in power often want more and more access to the data about our lives. It makes us very easy to control.
I mean, after all, knowledge is power, isn't it?
Knowledge is power. There's a, you know, in a military campaign, what is the first thing you attack? You attack the communications infrastructure because without communications, there's no strategy, there's no action. So, this is very, very fundamental. And I'm actually optimistic because I think people are waking up a bit to realize just how important this is, and the user numbers for Signal are showing that kind of growth.
And why do you think that is, that people are actually waking up to the fact that their privacy is being violated? What are the instances that are pushing society, civil society, towards those kind of conclusions?
I think there are a number of reasons. You know, one reason is that we've had example after example of data breach, of people's data being weaponized, of people posting things online, of governments going after dissidents and journalists and others based on data they have access to. So, it's no longer just a hypothetical. It's no longer theoretical. It is a day-to-day issue that people are feeling closer and closer to home, particularly when we're in an age of such political volatility where those who once were allies may not be allies, where there's a reconfiguration of the geopolitical order that is in play. I think the ability to communicate privately and the ability to maintain privacy is something that people are recognizing as essential to just, you know, living a dignified life.
And how do you think — do we have any data to what extent governments could possibly try and use surveillance when it comes to people's private information, when it comes to communications?
Well, it's very difficult to get data on that because, of course, they don't publish it. But what we do know is that, you know, the largest platform companies are based in the US and in China. You have two poles of the tech ecosystem and...
Yeah, about 50%, if I'm correct, of databases are in the States. Right.
I don't actually have that stat, but the infrastructure companies, the cloud companies, are largely based in the US and in China. The information platforms on which a lot of data is collected — so Instagram, TikTok, you know, TikTok is not American, but all the rest are largely based in the US. And then you have other services like your email or enterprise services, you know, document services and...
All the apps that you keep on your phone for...
All the apps you keep on your phone, and all of these collect data, and all of that data can be used to make meaning about you, to say you're this kind of person. Our algorithm says you deserve these kind of resources. Our hiring algorithm says that you might not be a good employee. Our medical system uses this data to determine that you do or don't get coverage. And so people are recognizing that.
So in fact, it's a form of bias. It creates a form of bias.
It could create a form of bias. It certainly creates a powerful single point of failure for decisions that are shaping our access to resources and opportunities. And that's often very unaccountable — that these systems are not in the public domain. They are not governed by democratic control. They are not always scrutable. We can't look at them because they're hidden behind corporate secrecy. And of course, the interests of the organizations that are running them are not always aligned with the social benefit or the public good. And this is one of the reasons that Signal, as the gold standard in private communications, the only mass-scale platform that is actually upholding this high standard of real privacy, is a nonprofit.
So that takes me to my next question. Please tell us more about how is Signal actually different from other apps for communication, that we see such a move of people, such a shift when it comes to users who are choosing Signal instead of other communication channels.
Well, I love this question because it lets me talk about one of my favorite subjects, which is, you know, why is Signal different? And I think Signal is different in some sense by what we don't do. We collect as close to no data as possible. We have rewritten the tech stack in a number of different ways to enable a mass communication service that looks and feels and acts like any other, but to do that privately, so that none of your data is exposed. So that if you and I are communicating on Signal, Signal doesn't know. The government doesn't know. No one else knows what we are saying or even that we're communicating, because we have written the tech in such a way that it truly upholds that right to privacy. And we're open source. And open source may not mean that much to a lot of viewers, but basically open source means that anyone can look at our code, and they don't have to trust me. They don't have to say, 'Oh, Meredith, she seems nice. I'll believe her.' No, they can look and verify what we say. And so we really want to raise the bar for the entire ecosystem and to say if something is critical infrastructure for communications, for upholding a fundamental human right like privacy, it needs to be verifiable. We need to recognize that this is in the public interest, and that in an age of mass surveillance where we've seen so many harms come from the information asymmetry that tech companies and governments are able to precipitate based on these, you know, the way tech is structured now, we need alternatives, and we need alternatives that uphold rights without flinching. And that's why I'm so proud to lead Signal.
But do you think at any point in time, as there is more pressure to do surveillance and to just gather people's data without them actually sometimes realizing, do you think that there might be a push on Signal? There might be pressure put on Signal to try and start collecting data at any point in time? Is that a danger that you could be potentially facing?
