Moore’s law dictates that approximately every two years, hardware computer processing power and memory capacity doubles. Through the ordinary lens, this exponential trend might be viewed as a blessing, endlessly increasing the capabilities of technology and science. However, perhaps when examined in a social context, such a trend unveils perverse possibilities. Every two years, the potential for government surveillance increases by an order of magnitude. And although the Bankston-Soltani principle described in Snowden’s TED talk, “Here’s How We Take Back the Internet”, asserts that every time this occurs the public must revisit and rebalance their rights to privacy, it seems as though such discussions have seldom been on the headlines …show more content…
In addition, the article also describes the profiling system of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection which assigns a terrorist risk-assessment score to all citizens entering or leaving America. However, although individuals can never discover their score, it may hinder their ability to obtain a visa, student grant, or state job. Such are disconcerting examples of bureaucratic influence unethically hindering individuals’ function in theoretically democratic countries. These exemplify that individuals’ rarely contemplate the possibly malignant nature of such activities if they exist in ‘democratic’ countries but immediately criticize similar activities, such as Chinese residency cards, in countries more authoritarian in shape or form.
Although the mere presence of security cameras and profiling systems is hardly considered distressing to most, more malevolent creatures assuredly lie underneath the superficial surface. The PRISM program, launched by the National Security Agency and leaked by NSA contractor Edward Snowden, is such a creature. According to the Washington Post article “NSA Slides Explain the PRISM Data-Collection Program”, it is a clandestine mass surveillance program that essentially deputizes server-providing corporations such as Microsoft, Apple, and Google among many others, to amass data for data mining purposes. Furthermore, the packets of data garnered
The NSA PRISM program allowed US Intelligence Services to collect private information of users utilising services such as Facebook and Gmail in order to guard its countries interests.
It’s a bright Sunday morning; the birds are chirping, the smell of fresh coffee is in the air and you turn on the tv; “Another Leak Of All Verizon Users Personal Information Out On The Web” is today's headline on the news. In our society right now; the government has the utmost power; yet they might not be using their powers in ways you’d expect. If you're a daily electronic users at Urbandale High School who spends at least 30 hours a week using online functions for entertainment or work; then you might not have heard or seen what the government's been doing recently. In an in depth analysis shows that our life we’re living right now could be seen as a dystopian universe over 50 years ago. Yet as our nation advances, its being advanced in
What is PRISM? A secret program that advance "direct access" to the servers of Internet providers like Yahoo, Google, Apple and Facebook (Three secret programs no longer secret). Why PRISM NSA program was was created? PRISMS happen in 2007 when the Protect America Act of 2007. According to Verge this led to the creation of a secret NSA program called US-984XN known as PRISM. The program said to be a
On June 6, 2013 the details of the National Security Agency’s (NSA) surveillance activities where given by Edward Snowden to the public; raising concerns of Americans about their privacy. Edward Snowden, a former employee of the NSA, gave the alarming details of surveillance programs in his interview on how the NSA accesses our emails, calls, internet activity, and anything else that is related to technology. In this system of surveillance the NSA can gather data from companies and tap the cables that are vital for moving around information from technological devices, they may also use their relationships with technology companies to get emails or information straight from U.S. servers. (Cawley, Kiss, Boyd, Ball) Nevertheless, the claim is
The quest for privacy and security has always been a long and arduous one, as America’s citizens “no longer care” about the lack of integrity which the American government is showing towards its citizens (Sullivan). “When you have it, you don’t notice it. Only when it’s gone do you wish you’d done more to protect it.” Sullivan explains in Privacy under attack, but does anybody care?. After the National Security Agency was accused of “systematically collecting information” on citizens’ phone calls, emails, and countless other sources, “the news media treated it as a complete revelation” (Whitehead). People throughout the country protested and condemned the government—all while they failed to realize that we have consciously permitted the government to collect and secure our private information by “giving our personal information” to companies who ask for it, and by “allowing our personal lives to be posted on media sources such as Facebook and Twitter” (Washington). Ironically enough, we ourselves have
Lately, in the United States, the controversial topic of privacy has been rekindled by several occurrences, including the recent NSA surveillance scandal. When government actions are questioned, the
Ever since the American public was made aware of the United States government’s surveillance policies, it has been a hotly debated issue across the nation. In 2013, it was revealed that the NSA had, for some time, been collecting data on American citizens, in terms of everything from their Internet history to their phone records. When the story broke, it was a huge talking point, not only across the country, but also throughout the world. The man who introduced Americans to this idea was Edward Snowden.
Since September 11th, due to the use of powerful cryptography to hide the planning the terrorist actions, America has dropped its views of privacy technology as a defense against an intrusive government. Instead, it appears that all of American society is now ready to allow many infringements of civil liberties in order to create a false sense of security.
Dingwen Zhang English 3 12 August 2016 NSA Surveillance NSA Surveillance: Is safety worth losing freedom? Recently there is debate about if it is okay for the United States government to spy on citizens using NSA and FBI. This became common knowledge when Edward Snowden leaked millions of documents that show the government is spying on the public. The United States government should not keep the NSA surveillance going because it hurts the public more than it keeps the public safe.
The National Security Agency (NSA) is an United States intelligence organization that is responsible for global monitoring and collecting foreign data intelligence. Within the NSA, existed what was called the “PRISM”. PRISM was created to collect private electronic data belonging to users of major internet services like Gmail, Facebook, Yahoo, and so on(Stroud). A successful example of the NSA’s efforts with government surveillance was present in the case of Najibullah Zazi. Zazi’s plan to bomb Times Square and New York’s subway systems, was arguably the most serious threat on American soil since the September 11th, 2001 attacks. The NSA had helped to disrupt Najibullah Zazi’s plot to bomb New York’s Times Square and subways in 2009. Thanks to PRISM, law enforcement were monitoring an e-mail address known to belong to an existing member of Al Qaeda. Zazi e-mailed that email address and unintentionally revealed himself and his plans to the authorities. He was arrested and faced a life sentence in prison. Without this type of surveillance, Zazi could have successfully murdered thousands of American citizens(Sullivan). The NSA proved to the United States that without monitoring, America would have encountered another national catastrophe. Subsequently, government surveillance was immeasurably acknowledged among U.S
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.
With the release of the NSA secret documents by Edward Snowden in 2013, a once dystopian concept came to the forefront of American politics: government surveillance. Snowden unveiled the existence of PRISM, a program which allowed the US government to read massive volumes of private information shared between citizens. The government exploited legislation meant to combat terrorism in the post-September 11th era. The media’s immediate reaction in discussing the National Security Agency was to compare it with 1984’s “Big Brother.” This term, originates from the 1949 novel by George Orwell. 1984, his most well read novel has a similar system in place in which the government of Oceania knows every moment of its citizens’ lives: “‘Smith!’
To begin, the PRISM program should be shut down because it invades privacy. Through metadata, data that gives off information, but it basically gives them a perception of our life. In our country we send sixty billion texts each day and NSA happens to have access and can view it all they want whether we like it or not. The second fact about this part of the subject, NSA
“The consciousness of being at war, and therefore in danger, makes the handing-over of all power to a small caste seem the natural, unavoidable condition of survival” (Orwell). The world today is full of many dangers domestic and abroad. It has become a routine in the news to report on the daily mass shooting or update with the war on terror. We live in a world where being worried is justified; however, we should not give up our constitutional rights in the face of fear. The NSA’s dragnet surveillance programs, such as PRISM, are both ineffective and are surpassed by less questionable national security programs. The FISA court's’ approval of NSA actions are not only illegal, but exist as an embarrassing formality. Surveillance is a necessary
The question of whether the government has a right to access unlimited amounts of information without public knowledge, has been a popular topic of debate among not only our nation, but others as well. This all started when Edward Snowden, a former National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance analyst, told the world that the NSA had a program that was using the servers of U.S internet companies to gather information. Snowden leaked a document, detailing his findings about the NSA’s PRISM program retrieving information from prominent tech companies. (“What is the NSA Controversy and what did Edward Snowden leak?”) PRISM or "Planning Tool for Resource Integration, Synchronization, and Management," is a government program which collects data from U.S. phone call records to search for possible links to terrorists abroad, and works on surveillance of online communications to and from foreign targets to detect suspicious behavior. (“What is the NSA Controversy…”) Many people were outraged with the government for keeping this a secret, while others thought that this technology could be useful. Regardless, mass surveillance is a problem in our society because it is a clear invasion of privacy, and it can be very dangerous if abused. Even though it may be for the best interest of our country, the invasion of personal privacy is borderline on infringing the right to free speech and privacy.