—that continues to exist. Part of the solution is to say that everybody does need affordable access. That is the full stop of what we have to do, and we have to make the commitment to make sure that happens.
You've also essentially raised the question of what happens when data gets used for purposes that go well beyond what people would have otherwise expected or anticipated. On the private sector side, we would say that's a privacy violation. You collect the data. You tell me what you're going to use it for, and if you turn around and start using it for other purposes you haven't obtained appropriate consent for, then I, in theory, can try to take action against you or at least file a complaint.
Part of the shortcoming—and this comes back to even the exchange with Mr. Baylis—is that we still don't have good enough laws at the federal level to ensure that data isn't misused in certain ways. We have seen over many years, especially the years with debates around lawful access and the like, very often the notion that if we have the data, surely we need to use it. There is always going to be a reason for that. You need to establish both, I think, the rule sets and the frameworks to ensure there are the appropriate safeguards in place and there's the appropriate oversight on top of that. I think at the end of the day you need to ensure you have governments, just like companies, that recognize that where they become overly aggressive with using data, because they feel they can, they cause enormous harm to that information ecosystem, and ultimately undermine public confidence not only in them but also, I think, in governments more broadly.
