I, argue, it is the exact opposite. Ethnographic is defined as: "relating to the scientific description of peoples and cultures with their customs, habits, and mutual differences." The very DEFINITION displays the large importance of people in ethnographic knowledge, and to do this, we have to risk confidentiality with consent, of course. I feel like there is not a big issue as long as there is consent, by I understand the view that keeping things hush hush IS necessary for data collection. To me, you can't really ever have a stalemate or in-between with this type of collection and time period, there will only ever be two polarizing extremes.

This reminds me of the "Atlas of AI" reading, as well as answering my question of when is too much. The inhumane nature of this collection and it being on a mass scale is very reminiscent of "Atlas of AI".

The question of ethics also comes into play when, again, asking how this data is collected. I refuse to believe this data is always voluntary.

I feel like this also provides to how early one can do a critical data study, with infants, although the availability for any type of data will be limited.

Before even starting, as I read the abstract, I'm curious how this data was collected, willingly or otherwise. On top of this, it is a very odd question for companies, that are in no way scientific, to ask such personal questions. I feel like this, in a way, set the expectation for what I should expect from this article.