Bramson Group Home Analysis

As human beings and citizens of the world, everyone values their privacy. It is a right that is often looked over and taken for granted by most. Since the beginning of time, there have been concerns about individuals’ rights to privacy and their personal information remaining confidential. Our founding fathers had concerns about this which is why, “…this right has developed into

In support of privacy, Daniel J. Solove wrote, Why Privacy Matters Even If You Have ‘Nothing to Hide.’ Solove begins his argument by introducing the nothing-to-hide argument. In general, the argument for surveillance is ‘if you’ve got nothing to hide, you’ve got nothing to fear:’ hence people’s support for government efforts and regulations to ‘protect’ citizens by decreasing privacy. Those who object this argument target its most extreme cases. For example, if you have nothing to hide, could I take a nude picture of you, own all entitlements to the photo, and share it with anyone? Absolutely not, most would say, but this objection is not exceptionally compelling according to Solove. In order to understand privacy, we must not reduce it to one single definition. Privacy is extremely complex and involves a range of different things that share common characteristics. For instance, one’s privacy can be invaded by the expose of your innermost secrets, but it may also be invaded if a peeping Tom (without the reveal of any secrets) is observing you. Your privacy may also be invaded if the government seeks extensive information about you. All of these examples cause harm related to an invasion of privacy, thus making the definition of privacy not applicable for a “one size fits all” conclusion. The underlying and most significant harm that comes from surveillance is the problem of information processing. Solove uses The Trial example to demonstrate this effect. Here, the

Privacy is what allows people to feel secure in their surroundings. With privacy, one is allowed to withhold or distribute the information they want by choice, but the ability to have that choice is being violated in today’s society. Benjamin Franklin once said, “He who sacrifices freedom or liberty will eventually have neither.” And that’s the unfortunate truth that is and has occurred in recent years. Privacy, especially in such a fast paced moving world, is extremely vital yet is extremely violated, as recently discovered the NSA has been spying on U.S. citizens for quite a while now; based on the Fourth Amendment, the risk of leaked and distorted individual information, as well as vulnerability to lack of anonymity.

As a growing topic of discussion, privacy in our society has stirred quite some concern. With the increase of technology and social networking our standards for privacy have been altered and the boundary between privacy and government has been blurred. In the article, Visible Man: Ethics in a World Without Secrets, Peter Singer addresses the different aspects of privacy that are being affected through the use of technology. The role of privacy in a democratic society is a tricky endeavor, however, each individual has a right to privacy. In our society, surveillance undermines privacy and without privacy there can be no democracy.

Government surveillance in the past was not a big threat due to the limitations on technology; however, in the current day, it has become an immense power for the government. Taylor, author of a book on Electronic Surveillance supports, "A generation ago, when records were tucked away on paper in manila folders, there was some assurance that such information wouldn 't be spread everywhere. Now, however, our life stories are available at the push of a button" (Taylor 111). With more and more Americans logging into social media cites and using text-messaging devices, the more providers of metadata the government has. In her journal “The Virtuous Spy: Privacy as an Ethical Limit”, Anita L. Allen, an expert on privacy law, writes, “Contemporary technologies of data collection make secret, privacy invading surveillance easy and nearly irresistible. For every technology of confidential personal communication…there are one or more counter-technologies of eavesdropping” (Allen 1). Being in the middle of the Digital Age, we have to be much more careful of the kinds of information we put in our digital devices.

In Peter Singer’s “Visible Man: Ethics in a World without Secrets,” one main word drives the article: privacy. Singer addresses privacy thoroughly in the passage and provides an objective view of the topic. One question that appears prevalent is how much information disrupts one’s privacy and how much can truly be shared. Some people argue that ignorance is bliss, and that the world is a better place being unaware of all the tragedy happening around it. However, being knowledgeable is important and a person should know what is occurring around them. To better society and keep people informed, one should be ethical and share pertinent information using tools such as WikiLeaks and “sousveillance.”

It states the difficulties in the senior homes with little staff and the many complaints received. The complaints are said to be hard to distinguish between serious complaints or just small problems. An example was given like Nancy Hardman who stated that she is removing her mother from the nursing home because it is dangerous and unhealthy to live in.

In the article Teenagers’ Work Can Have Downsides”by Jerald G Bachman describe how teens who are in high school that have jobs developed poor academic performances “ they're more likely to be involved in a variety of problems ” Jerald began the “Monitoring the Future “ project that monitored teens in high school and from college who had jobs and discovered a drop in the high school teens academics and made connections between long hours and problems behaviors are symptoms of issue like poor adjustments to school and greater interest in short term gratification .They encouraged for student to follow what they call a sweet spot a job that requires relatively few hours per week during the school year fewer hours the better.Student that have

In Helen Nissenbaum's introduction chapter of Privacy in Context, she is mentioning how social issues have changed since technology has increased. In the 1960's, technology was a concern because of the databases of the government and others are being stored in the computers memory. This then began questions and the worries of peoples' privacy. Soon privacy became a big topic of concern on everyone's minds when "...books, articles and commentaries..." came out. From many saying that protecting our privacy means we are limiting ourselves and disclosing personal information. But people really should be able to control what information and how much of it is allowed to be pubic at a certain time. Some people have even said that privacy is "deeply

The words, “Arguing that you don’t care about privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don’t care about free speech because you have nothing to say” were said by Edward Snowden who is a computer professional in America. Similarly, the essays “Tracking Is an Assault on Liberty,” “Web Users Get as Much as They Give,” and “Facebook Is Using You” from Nicholas Carr, Jim Harper, and Lori Andrews respectively points out that the internet privacy is good and bad. However, the articles by Carr and Andrews are based on the negative side of the internet privacy, which means that the internet privacy is not good. On the other hand, Harper’s article is based on the positive side of the internet privacy, which means that the internet privacy is good and scary, but people need to be careful of their own information and browsing histories, and websites. Jim Harper’s essay is more relevant and reasonable than the Nicholas Carr and Lori Andrews’s essays. However, Harper seems more persuasive to readers because he believes that the internet is good if people use it in a right way, whereas Carr and Andrews believe that the internet is not good at all.

Hoogerheide, V., Loyens, S. M., & van Gog, T. (2014). Comparing the effects of worked

Today, individuals are sacrificing privacy in order to feel safe. These sacrifices have made a significant impact on the current meaning of privacy, but may have greater consequences in the future. According to Debbie Kasper in her journal, “The Evolution (Or Devolution) of Privacy,” privacy is a struggling dilemma in America. Kasper asks, “If it is gone, when did it disappear, and why?”(Kasper 69). Our past generation has experienced the baby boom, and the world today is witnessing a technological boom. Technology is growing at an exponential rate, thus making information easier to access and share than ever before. The rapid diminishing of privacy is leaving Americans desperate for change.

Privacy either encourages or is a necessary factor of human securities and fundamental value such as human embarrassment, independence, distinctiveness, freedom, and public affection. Being completely subject to mutual scrutiny will begin to lose self-respect, independence, distinctiveness, and freedom as a result of the sometimes strong burden to conform to public outlooks.

Critiques don’t argue that privacy isn’t valuable but disagree with Lippke and believe isn 't is a relation to autonomy but it does have relations. Privacy can be complex but according to Lippke; Privacy is defined as “control over someone information” and control who can experience or observe us.”(467) It is important because people want to make certain decisions autonomously and we want to control our own information. Everyday

Throughout the years one started to hear more and more about the mass surveillance in the United States. When people heard they were being watched they were unhappy. An example of this is seen in the essay written by George Danezis and Bettina Wittneben named, “The Economics of Mass Surveillance and the Questionable Value of Anonymous Communications.” They state that their examination on surveillance, “allowed them to draw interesting policy conclusions from published interception figures, and get a better estimate of the amount of privacy invasion and the actual volume of surveillance taking place.” In other words their conclusion wasn’t good. Their privacy was getting invaded. They knew, “that if one member of a space is under surveillance all relationships associated with that space become known to an observer.” An example of this is