knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu Open in urlscan Pro
2620:12a:8000::4  Public Scan

Form analysis
0 forms found in the DOM

Text Content

Knowledge at Wharton logoKnowledge at Wharton logoWharton Business Daily logoThe
Wharton School logo
Skip to content Skip to main menu

A business journal from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania

Mobile menu toggle
Subscribe
Menu
Go to site search Mobile menu toggle
 * TopicsToggle submenu
    * View All Topics »
    * Analytics
    * Entrepreneurship
    * ESG
    * Finance & Accounting
    * Innovation
    * Leadership
    * Management
    * Marketing
    * Markets & The Economy
    * Public Policy
    * Technology
    * Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    * COVID-19
    * Fintech
    * Inflation
    * Opinion

 * SeriesToggle submenu
    * View All Series »
    * Beyond Business Series
    * Dollars and Change Series
    * Great Question Series
    * Leading Diversity at Work Series
    * Meet the Authors Series
    * Nano Tools for Leaders Series

 * Articles
 * Podcasts
 * Videos
 * Faculty
 * Bookstore


Skip NavigationMenu
 * Topics
   *  * View All Topics »
     
      * * Analytics
        * Entrepreneurship
        * ESG
        * Finance & Accounting
      * * Innovation
        * Leadership
        * Management
        * Marketing
      * * Markets & The Economy
        * Public Policy
        * Technology
   
   * * What's Trending
     * Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
     * COVID-19
     * Fintech
     * Inflation
     * Opinion
 * Series
   * View All Series »
     
   * * Beyond Business Series
         
       * How Analytics Can Boost Competitiveness in SportsJanuary 31, 2023
       * How Data Analytics Can Help Deliver Social GoodDecember 20, 2022
       * How Analytics Is Changing FinanceNovember 29, 2022
       * Beyond Business: Humanizing ESGDecember 13, 2021
         
     * Dollars and Change Series
         
       * Why Employee-owned Companies Are Better at Building Worker
         WealthNovember 11, 2022
       * Investing in Refugee Entrepreneurs in East AfricaAugust 8, 2022
       * How Companies and Capital Can Be Forces for GoodJune 21, 2022
       * Making the Business Case for ESGMay 3, 2022
         
     * Great Question Series
         
       * Great Question: Witold Henisz on ESG InitiativesNovember 17, 2021
       * Great Question: Wendy De La Rosa on Personal FinanceOctober 15, 2021
       * Great Question: Dean Erika James on Crisis ManagementAugust 16, 2021
       * Great Question: Kevin Werbach on Cryptocurrency and FintechJuly 21,
         2021
         
     * Leading Diversity at Work Series
         
       * Improving Accessibility in the Workplace — and in SpaceMay 16, 2023
       * Diversity at Work: Why Inclusive Storytelling MattersApril 4, 2023
       * How National Politics Are Impacting DEI in the WorkplaceFebruary 7,
         2023
       * Navigating Microaggressions at WorkNovember 1, 2022
         
     * Meet the Authors Series
         
       * Meet the Authors: Erika James and Lynn Perry Wooten on The Prepared
         LeaderOctober 3, 2022
       * Meet the Authors: Wharton’s Peter Cappelli on The Future of the
         OfficeNovember 4, 2021
       * Meet the Authors: Mauro Guillén on How Businesses Succeed in a Global
         MarketplaceJune 21, 2021
       * Meet the Authors: Wharton’s Katy Milkman on How to ChangeMay 14, 2021
         
     * Nano Tools for Leaders Series
         
       * Speak With Confidence: Four Fixes That WorkApril 11, 2023
       * Choosing a New Board Leader: Eight QuestionsMarch 7, 2023
       * Crisis Leadership: Harness the Experience of OthersFebruary 14, 2023
       * How to Use Neuroscience to Build Team ChemistryJanuary 23, 2023
         
     
 * Articles
 * Podcasts
 * Videos
 * Faculty
 * Bookstore

Go to site search


YOUR DATA IS SHARED AND SOLD… WHAT’S BEING DONE ABOUT IT?

OCTOBER 28, 2019 • 23 MIN READ

You are tracked more often, and in more meaningful ways, than you think. Wharton
and Penn experts reveal exactly how your data is sold, shared and leaked.


 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 

 * Technology

WRITTEN BY

Knowledge at Wharton Staff

Earlier this month, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law amendments to
the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), the most sweeping state data privacy
regulations in the country. The law, which takes effect on Jan. 1, regulates how
data is collected, managed, shared and sold by companies and entities doing
business with or compiling information about California residents. Some
observers contend that because no business would want to exclude selling to
Californians, the CCPA is de facto a national law on data privacy, absent an
overarching federal regulation protecting consumer information.

“The new privacy law is a big win for data privacy,” says Joseph Turow, a
privacy scholar and professor of communication at the Annenberg School for
Communication at the University of Pennsylvania. “Though it could be even
stronger, the California law is stronger than anything that exists at the
federal level.” Among other stipulations, the CCPA requires businesses to inform
consumers regarding the types of personal data they’ll collect at the time they
collect it and also how the information will be used. Consumers have the right
to ask firms to disclose with whom they share the data and also opt out of their
data being sold.

The CCPA comes on the heels of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation
(GDPR), which took effect in May 2018. According to the United Nations
Conference on Trade and Development, 107 countries have data privacy rules in
place including 66 developing nations. In the U.S., there was a “significant”
increase in data privacy bills being introduced this year, with at least 25
states and Puerto Rico starting such legislation, according to the National
Conference of State Legislatures. Notably, this bill count doesn’t include
related legislation on topics such as cybersecurity.

Meanwhile, the increase in data privacy regulations has companies worried about
how they are to comply and how much it would cost. According to a 2019 survey of
senior executives by Gartner, the acceleration of privacy regulation and related
regulatory burdens is the top emerging risk faced by companies globally.
Sixty-four percent of executives identified it as a key risk, especially those
from the banking, financial services, technology, telecommunications, and food,
beverage and consumer goods sectors. Moreover, they view this regulatory risk as
having “very rapid velocity” — meaning it could bring potentially large fines
and brand damage if firms violate the rules.

In part to head off more stringent laws, companies and computer scientists are
collaborating to provide computational and business solutions to strengthen data
protections while not hampering innovation and operational efficiency. Google,
Facebook, Amazon, Apple and others have come forward with changes that give
users more control over how they are being tracked and how their data is being
used. “Privacy is personal, which makes it even more vital for companies to give
people clear, individual choices around how their data is used,” wrote Google
CEO Sundar Pichai in a May 2019 opinion piece for The New York Times.

> “The new privacy law is a big win for data privacy.”— Joseph Turow

Some recent changes include the following: Google users can now choose to opt in
to save their audio data collected by Google Assistant, which uses it to better
recognize their voices over time. They can also delete their interactions at any
time and agree to a human reviewer of the audio. This month, Facebook’s
Instagram rolled out a new feature that lets users manage which third-party apps
have access to their data. In September, Facebook said it has suspended tens of
thousands of sketchy apps from 400 developers. Amazon also is cracking down on
third-party apps for breaking its privacy rules while Apple said it will no
longer retain audio recordings that Siri collects by default, among other
things.

But even as businesses seek to self-regulate, data privacy laws remain necessary
because companies have to be prodded to adopt them, says Michael Kearns,
computer and information science professor at Penn Engineering and a founding
director of the Warren Center for Network and Data Sciences, a research center
of Penn faculty who study innovation in interconnected social, economic and
technological systems. That’s because these changes “come at a cost,” notes
Kearns, who is co-author of The Ethical Algorithm. Not only will companies have
to change the way they operate, but their data analyses will be less accurate as
well, which can affect their bottom line. Targeted ads could miss hitting the
most lucrative customers, for example, leading to lost sales.

What Companies Collect

Most people don’t know how much of their activities are being tracked. “Most
companies are collecting data these days on all the interactions, on all the
places that they touch customers in the normal course of doing business,” says
Elea Feit, senior fellow at Wharton Customer Analytics and a Drexel marketing
professor. For example, a retailer would be keeping track of all the emails it
sends you and whether you click on any of the links inside the email; it tracks
your visits to its site and any purchases in a store if the retailer, say, has a
loyalty card program. “Every time you interact with the company, you should
expect that the company is recording that information and connecting it to you,”
she notes.

Whether it’s a mom and pop shop — the corner tailor keeps track of clients’
shirt sizes and preferences — or a big corporation like Walmart, companies track
their customers to give them a better customer experience and provide relevant
goods and services. “They want to look at a customer’s purchasing pattern so
they can tailor experiences to that customer,” Feit says. “Companies are trying
to get to know their customers by collecting data on every interaction. … And
most companies see this as so vital to their business that this is something
they do internally.”

> “Every time you interact with the company, you should expect that the company
> is recording that information and connecting it to you.”— Elea Feit

Companies have legitimate business purposes for tracking consumers — and it
brings benefits. For example, a business that knows you’re a pet owner based on
your searches for cat food could send you coupons. Companies can also use your
data to improve product designs and performance, Feit says. Smartphone companies
monitor how devices are working on an ongoing basis to see how they can improve
upon the battery life, for instance. Carmakers also will often collect data on
driving performance for such things as improving a vehicle’s fuel economy, she
adds. Of course, algorithms do all the tracking, not human beings.

Using data helps a company’s bottom line as well, Feit explains. With more
information about a person, a business can send ads to people who are more
likely to buy or use the service. “You can actually reduce the cost of your
advertising spend,” she says. Or at the very least, annoy fewer people with
marketing emails because you’re targeting folks to whom these ads are relevant,
Feit adds. Also, by tracking what people buy, companies can do better inventory
management, which makes them more efficient.

It might surprise some to know that many major corporations also don’t actually
sell their consumer data because it is valuable, Feit notes. Also, it is not
standard practice to look at raw, individual data but rather they run queries on
datasets to get insights. For example, “when I’ve done joint research with
Google, I was never allowed to touch the data myself because I wasn’t using a
Google-owned computer system,” she explains. Also, most big companies have a
data governance policy that defines who can access this information and how it
will be used, Feit says. “If I worked at Target and I wanted to look up what my
best friend buys at Target, I wouldn’t be allowed to do that.”

But for companies that do sell their data, they work with third-party data
brokers, such as subsidiaries of the major credit rating agencies, Feit notes.
Buyers of this data gather information about a customer’s behavior across
multiple interactions with various entities — the credit card issuer, car
dealership, online shopping site and others. “You get a very rich sense of the
customer’s behavior,” Feit says. “It’s really a problem in my mind because the
consumer doesn’t necessarily know that their data is being sold to this
third-party broker” and to whom the broker sells it.

While many don’t sell their data, they often do share access to it. For example,
PayPal disclosed that it shares consumer data (such as name, address, phone
number, date of birth, IP address, bank account information, recent purchases)
with hundreds of entities around the world.

A sample of companies with which PayPal shares user data:



 

How You Are Tracked

The most common way a user is tracked is through the placement of ‘cookies,’ or
files that a website or web service places in your device. So when you return to
the website, you don’t have to re-enter your password to log on, for example,
because you’re recognized, according to Sebastian Angel, professor of computer
and information science at the University of Pennsylvania. “It’s for
convenience,” he says. “But because they’re putting these cookies in your
devices, it now allows, [say,] Facebook to know where you’re going on the
internet.”

If an online blog that you read has a Facebook ‘Like’ button on it, and you
click on it, “what your browser is doing under the covers is sending this
cookie, this file, to Facebook,” Angel notes. “Now, Facebook is able to learn
that you visited this blog, which has nothing to do with Facebook aside from
having a ‘Like’ button. Through this mechanism, large social networks and other
companies can track where you go on the internet and can get an idea of what
your interest are, what times of the day you’re active [and all sorts of other
data,] which they can transform into better understanding you and therefore give
you better ads.”

While text, voice or email messages are encrypted — meaning only the sender and
receiver can see or hear the content of the message — the metadata around it can
be revealing, Angel says. Metadata refers to the information around the content,
such as the identity of the sender and recipient, the time of day it was sent
and how often the communication occurred. Metadata might seem harmless, but it
can be privacy invasive. For example, if the metadata shows that you called an
oncologist, one could infer that you or someone you know has or might have
cancer.

Even when websites or web services offer a way to opt out of being tracked, it
has limited protection because other signals give a person’s identity away.
“There’s no real way to opt out,” Angel points out. For example, opening a
browser in ‘incognito mode’ deletes the cookies so you cannot be tracked in this
manner. However, algorithms can look at other signals. For example, they can
track the resolution of your computer screen, the size of the browser, how you
move your mouse around, and others. “All of this is very unique and it becomes a
unique fingerprint of who you are,” he says. “This is known as device
fingerprinting.”

> “There’s no real way to opt out.” –Sebastian Angel

Whether a company looks at aggregate or individual data depends on what they
want to do, Angel continues. If they want to find market trends, then grouped
data would work. But if they want to send customized services, then individual
information is key. When companies share data, they often don’t provide the raw
information but would do things like let folks run queries on it. For example,
one query could be finding out what were the top 10 purchases on a shopping site
over the last 12 days, he says.

Four Tactics and Seduction

Meanwhile, consumers are often not aware all of this tracking and analysis is
going on and thus don’t do anything about it. One way they are lulled into
complacency is by the presence of a privacy policy on a website, app or mobile
service. But these policies are an exercise in “obfuscation” because most people
don’t read them or don’t understand them, says Turow. Up to 73% of American
adults incorrectly believe that the existence of a privacy policy means a
website cannot share their data with other parties without their permission,
according to the paper, “Persistent Misperceptions: Americans’ Misplaced
Confidence in Privacy Policies, 2003-2015,” which Turow co-authored and is
updating.

Even the label itself — privacy policy — is misleading. “It’s a deceptive label
because most people misunderstand it,” says Turow, whose surveys over 12 years
prove the public’s misconception about these policies. Instead of protecting the
consumer’s privacy, “the purpose of a privacy policy is to protect the company.”
And within the policy itself, companies typically use language that is “often
very broad to the point that it will allow them to do a lot of things that you
don’t necessarily understand unless you can read between the lines,” he adds.

Furthermore, companies don’t make it easy for consumers to find out exactly how
their data is being used. Turow’s research revealed four commonly used corporate
strategies whose goal is to distract the consumer from questioning data privacy
practices.

The first tactic is placation. Companies seek to allay the fears of the consumer
by, say, putting out statements like, ‘Your trust is very important to us that’s
why we aim to be clear and transparent about why we collect information,’” Turow
says. The company could reinforce the statement with a video on its website
where a smiling employee repeats that data privacy is important. These two
assurances could be enough to placate most people, who are busy and don’t want
to spend an afternoon digging through the legalese of privacy policies. But if
they did read the policy, they could find such invasive practices as the
intention to share third-party cookies and collect personally identifiable
information like name and address, he notes.

The second tactic is diversion. “They put the link to the privacy policy all the
way at the bottom [of the web page],” Turow says. For a supermarket website,
that could mean “you have to go through the food pictures to get to the privacy
policy.” The third tactic is misnaming it as a privacy policy when a clearer
label would be, ‘What We Do With Your Information,’” he notes. The fourth is
using jargon — language specific to an industry — so people aren’t always sure
what the privacy policy is trying to say even if the sentences seem fairly
simple and straightforward.

> “The industry is actively figuring it out.”— Aaron Roth

For example, some privacy policies disclose that they gather information from
sources such as consumer search firms and public databases. So users know that
the company gets information about them from other places. But where exactly?
“Most people would have no idea what that means,” Turow says. “It seems
straightforward, but what do public databases [refer to?] … This really tells
you nothing under the guise of telling you what they’re doing.”

These four tactics — placation, diversion, misnaming and using jargon —
contribute to a feeling of resignation among consumers. Since they can’t fight
this data collection and tracking, they might as well give up, according to
another paper Turow co-authored, “The Corporate Cultivation of Digital
Resignation.” It was first published in March 2019 in the New Media & Society
journal. The research may explain why initial grassroots efforts to quit
Facebook — sparked by the Cambridge Analytica data privacy scandal — died out.

The reason is that users feel resigned. “What it does is make people throw their
hands up,” Turow says. It happens every day: An app, online service or a website
will not let consumers use their service or access their content until people
accept the terms of service, which most do. Throw in a freebie such as a 10%
discount to the consumer in exchange for data — like phone number or email — and
it becomes even harder to not share one’s information. Turow calls this
“seduction.” “The seduction [aspect] of it overwhelms the surveillance part.”

Finally, the last salvo is what Turow calls the “hidden curriculum,” which he
defines as “an education that people get without being told that they’re being
taught.” People are being trained to give up data to get something or fit in
with society, he says. “This is just the rehearsal for everything else. You get
used to giving up your data in stores, you get used to giving up your data
online,” Turow notes. “It becomes second nature.” And it’s going to get worse.
“All these kinds of things we’ve been talking about have been the product of the
last 15 years,” he says. “This is just the beginning of tracking and the
beginning of personalization.”

Privacy Solutions

A computational solution that’s been gaining ground is differential privacy,
according to Aaron Roth, computer and information science professor at Penn
Engineering and co-author with Kearns of The Ethical Algorithm. There are two
kinds of differential privacy. The centralized model is applied when there is
trust between the user and data collector (say, between a consumer and a
shopping site) while the local or ‘coin flip’ version is used when there’s less
trust, such as in cases where the data could be used for unstated purposes, says
Roth, who is on a Facebook privacy advisory committee and was a consultant to
Apple on differential privacy.

In general, differential privacy adds ‘noise’ in the form of positive and
negative numbers to mask the data being collected. That means individual data
becomes jumbled so it is not useful to the company. But on an aggregate level,
the random numbers added zero out so the trend is revealed. Apple uses the local
model of differential privacy when collecting usage data from iPhones, as does
Google Chrome, Roth points out. That means the data is mixed up before it is
sent to Apple. “The iPhone doesn’t send your data to Apple, but only noisy
answers,” he says. But it is less accurate than the centralized model, which
collects data from the individual first, puts it on company servers, and then
adds noise.

Differential privacy is gaining ground among the tech giants. “The industry is
actively figuring it out,” Roth says. While there aren’t any agreed upon
industry standards yet, “that work is ongoing.” The beauty of differential
privacy is that it “provides a means to extract generalizable, statistical facts
about the world to perform statistical analyses to train machine learning
algorithms in a way that offers a mathematical guarantee that it doesn’t reveal
too much about any particular individual.”

> “We don’t believe technology solves everything.” — Michael Kearns

Meanwhile, Angel and his colleagues are designing systems that “essentially
prevent a collection of this data [in the first place],” he says. “The system is
designed from the ground up not to leak information to external observers.” One
project they call PUNG will make instant messages more private. “We have
mechanisms that allow the message to be routed to the right person without the
provider knowing who the right person was in the first place.”

Here’s how it works. Typically, the content of messages is encrypted but what’s
revealed is the metadata: who is the caller, who is the recipient, when was the
call made, for example. Under PUNG, the metadata will be masked as well. How?
Imagine if you wanted to hide the identity of the person to whom you’re sending
a text message. One way to do it would be to send everyone in the world the
text. Only the right recipient would have a decoder to actually read the text.
PUNG simulates a way to do this without actually sending everyone a text, Angel
notes. PUNG can scale to tens or even hundreds of millions of users, but it
needs a lot of computing power, which he is working to reduce.

For law enforcement concerned about criminals being able to hide their
communication, there is a solution that Angel believes strikes the right balance
between privacy and justice. To get at the information, law enforcement has to
go through a procedure that basically tips off the people communicating that
they are under surveillance. “Personally, I think this is the right balance
because it allows them to figure out who communicated with whom, but at the same
time they can’t do it in the shadows.”

Last semester, Angel taught a computer science course on how to build tools for
anonymity and privacy. One idea was to build a version of Netflix that would
shield your movie choices from the company and yet gives you access to the full
roster of content. “We can build it,” he says. “It’s technologically feasible”
to find a way to stream it to millions or billions of people. But such a system
would be costly. For example, if Netflix needed 10,000 computers in their data
center to serve movies to everyone, under Angel’s version, it might need 10
times more, or 100,000. His team is working to reduce the number of computers to
two times more rather than 10. “Privacy has a cost,” he notes.

Regulatory and Societal Response

But it takes more than technology to protect data privacy. “We don’t believe
technology solves everything,” Kearns says. Differential privacy might be
promising, but computational solutions only come into play once companies have
decided what type of information they will gather from users. “Companies still
need internal policies about what kinds of data they are even going to collect
in the first place, for example,” he notes. Is it even kosher to collect that
type of data? And how long is it appropriate to retain the data? “There are
many, many things about the whole data pipeline … that are extra-scientific,”
Kearns adds.

For example, businesses can choose to throw away a user’s information after
serving a targeted ad, says Turow. “If you know I’m in New York, it would be
great to get an ad from a restaurant there. But don’t keep track of exactly
where I’m headed. Throw [the data] away after you use it.” Feit adds that
companies also could delete old data, which tend not to be relevant anymore
anyway. “Expunge older records about a customer so that my history of what I
bought at Target when I was 22 is not saved until I’m 72,” she says. “That’s
very old information about a customer and it’s not that informative about how
that customer is going to behave now.” Another tactic is to throw out the data
once an analysis is completed, Feit says.

Would companies do it? There are headwinds to voluntary deployment — it could
potentially lower profits, might be hard to implement, offer less accurate
analyses and could be costly. Regulators could force the issue, but to properly
monitor these tech giants, they have to be more equally matched, Kearns notes.
While regulators are more tech-savvy today than decades ago, they are still not
an equal counterweight to the tech armies employed by Google, Facebook, Amazon
and the like.

> “The seduction … overwhelms the surveillance part.” — Joseph Turow

So Kearns sees “a future in which regulators themselves start employing
algorithmic tools.” That’s because “when the companies you’re trying to regulate
are doing things with massive amounts of data and at a massive scale, and you’re
trying to spot misbehavior, you have to be ready to spot misbehavior at that
speed and scale also,” he says. Certainly, the government should hire more
doctorates in computer science, math and statistics. “I think regulators need
Ph.Ds. in machine learning these days,” he adds, noting that most government
Ph.Ds. are in economics.

Kearns points to a precedent in finance in which regulators already use tech
tools to enforce the law. “Wall Street, despite people’s impressions of it, is
one of the most heavily regulated industries already,” he says. “Many of the
regulators of the finance industry will use technological tools to spot
violations.” For example, regulators deploy algorithms to spot suspicious areas
of the market for violations such as ‘pump and dump’ schemes in which a stock is
inflated to lure other investors, only for the perpetrator to sell at a high
before the shares fall. This is possible because financial regulators have a
window into trades.

How could this work in tech? One example is to let regulators have “much more
direct, unfettered access” to Facebook’s ad platform, Kearns notes. Currently,
regulators can sign up as a Facebook advertiser to see whether, say, racial or
gender biases are at play. But they can’t see more deeply into the platform.
“Imagine a future where regulators are allowed to have a much more detailed view
of the real, underlying targeting algorithm that takes advertisers’
specifications and decides exactly where things are shown and furthermore,
measures empirically whether there’s racial discrimination resulting from that.”

As for consumer responsibility, Kearns believes that people can do little by
themselves to protect their data privacy. “Even following all your best
practices isn’t going to be enough if you want to use Google, you want to use
email, you want to use social media, you want to use navigation apps,” he says.
“If you really want to have true privacy and security, you have to go offline.”
Breaking up tech giants is not the solution. “Why would that magically cause the
resulting pieces to have better privacy?”

For Angel, the bottom line is that society must value privacy much more than it
does now — and spark a systemic change in the way companies collect, share, sell
and use data. “It’s really bizarre that we are unwilling to pay 50 cents for an
app in the app store but we are totally okay with paying $5 or $6 for a cup of
coffee,” he points out. “Because of this psychology, it’s really hard to ask
people to pay for electronic things they expect to be free.” It’s not even the
amount of money at issue here, he adds, it’s the idea of paying for things
people are used to getting gratis.

Since people are unwilling to pay, “companies have no choice but to monetize
these services through things like advertising,” Angel says. For meaningful data
privacy to take hold, society has to be ready to accept tradeoffs. “What are we
willing to pay for using these services? Currently, the answer seems to be
nothing. Until that changes, I don’t see that we can find a good balance
[between user privacy and companies’ need for data].… This is a problem that’s
[rooted] deep in the way we act as a society.”



RELATED ARTICLES

Technology


WHY WEB3 WON’T GO MAINSTREAM — YET

October 18, 2022 • 7 min read
Marketing


WHY LIVESTREAM COMMERCE IS ON THE RISE

August 31, 2022 • 7 min read

MORE FROM KNOWLEDGE AT WHARTON

Technology


RISE OF AI: ARE ROBOTS TAKING OUR JOBS? | LYNN WU

May 16, 2023 • 21 min listen
Technology


RISE OF AI: HOW DO WE COEXIST WITH ALGORITHMS? | KARTIK HOSANAGAR

May 9, 2023 • 25 min listen
Analytics


AS AI TRANSFORMS OUR LIVES, WE NEED TO BUILD TRUST IN THE TECHNOLOGY: HERE’S WHY

May 8, 2023 • 19 min listen
Back to top

A business journal from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania

ABOUT

 * Knowledge at Wharton
 * The Wharton School
 * Faculty
 * Contact Us

BOOKSTORE

 * Shop Books
 * About Wharton School Press
 * Contact Wharton School Press

RESOURCES

 * Special Reports
 * 简体中文
 * Report a Bug

 * Twitter
 * Facebook
 * LinkedIn
 * Instagram

©2023 Knowledge at Wharton. All rights reserved. Knowledge at Wharton is an
affiliate of the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.

 * Privacy Policy
 * Report Accessibility Issues and Get Help