logoalt Hacker News

shiandowyesterday at 6:48 PM1 replyview on HN

Not really, it has to be random in a predetermined fashion to be considered differential privacy. It is reversible in the way that someone shouting over an aicraft producing white noise is intelligible.

I guess someone could fiddle with the noise, but then why not nudge the originals? Or more insidiously, control what is published?


Replies

sherburt3yesterday at 9:26 PM

If someone modified the original dataset and it was discovered they would be held accountable. However if you have a departmental policy of modifying the data for "privacy reasons" and it just so happened to surrepititiously affect some sort of political outcome then ah geez that just a wacky coincidence not any individuals fault.

show 1 reply