Privacy Vs Privacy

Surveillance is not a new thing. In fact, espionage, tracking, and sleuthing were part of society ever since 5000 B.C. But in the rise of the modern era, the idea of surveillance in the public eye serves as a controversial topic of discussion. People everywhere complain about the existence of security cameras, government tracking, and the right to privacy. Such problems, however, are not due to the sudden discovery of surveillance, but the modern abuse of it. Seeing the disastrous effects of over surveillance from George Orwell’s 1984, the public rightfully fears societal deterioration through modern surveillance abuse portrayed in Matthew Hutson’s “Even Bugs Will Be Bugged” and the effects of such in Jennifer Golbeck’s “All Eyes On You”. The abuse of surveillance induces the fear of discovery through the invasion of privacy, and ensures the omnipresence of one’s past that haunt future endeavors, to ultimately obstruct human development and the progress of society overall.

One main factor of privacy is that it allows individuals to further explore their independence and individuality. People define themselves by exercising power over information about themselves, being that the United States is a country for the people whether you're Republican, Democratic or Independent. Having the government file and organize personal information is a violation. A free country does not ask people to answer for the choices made and do not have to choose what is shared and what is hidden. What if the government doesn’t protect your information with adequate security, and an identity thief obtains it and uses it to defraud you? Even if you have nothing to hide, the government can cause you a lot of harm (Solove

People’s phones are being monitored by the government. Privacy and unmonitored spaces are not existent in today's world. One good example in today's world is the “Hello Barbie” by Mattel. This “smart toy” retails at 75 dollars and has features such as microphone to listen into little children's lives. The sound bites of the child are sent back to Mattel's headquarters to bexamined so the Barbie can give appropriate responses. Mattel could use this feature for advertisement. They could relentlessly pressure the children to ask their parents for the newest Barbie toy. One hacker named “Matt Jakubowski was able to get into the toy’s system to access users’ system information, Wi-Fi network names, internal MAC addresses, account IDs and MP3 files, he told NBC Chicago. He added that he would be able to use this data to find someone’s house and personal information, and could access their home network and listen to everything Barbie records” (***). This is a serious invasion of privacy and he was only able to do this with his laptop. Anyone can hack into a “Hello Barbie” and find out somebody's personal information. One other example in today's world is the NSA monitoring people. Edward Snowden was a NSA agent who exposed what the government was doing. This can be related to an section of the book Fahrenheit 451 when Montag realizes the hound is tracking him, “Outside the door, in the rain, a

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

Many Americans do not see these new technological developments as liberties, they should. Privacy is a base principle in freedom and liberties. Internet traffic and tracking will be a 21st century liberty worth fighting for. In the past, American liberties have not come easy. In fact, liberties for many are liberties in name alone. Freedom of religion has been terrorized. By those who choose to use religion in the named politics, and to incite powerful emotional differences. So much, that being in a Muslim in America is almost a burden. The god you love a burden in America, the land of the free. Religion in has always been tricky. It claims separation of church, state yet views on issues, like abortion, the death penalty, euthanasia, and gay and lesbian marriage has always been aligned with religious views. America was founded on Christian ideals, and has made this abundantly clear throughout entire history that anything that does not fall in line with those views will be

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.

Technology is taking over the world as we know it. Orwell predicted that technology would take control of citizen’s lives and make them have no privacy, and honestly that is not so far off. Governments can access these devices and look at what people learning, looking at, and who they are talking to. There is not much that a citizen can hide from their government. Citizens do not have as much privacy as they did even just twenty years ago. With technological advances, the world could follow the story of George Orwell’s 1984. Video surveillance is something that the government uses also, although it is not as harsh as in George Orwell’s story, but still citizen’s privacies are being invaded. According to Alex Abdo, there is a United States owned database filled with every Americans information and every one of his or her associations (Abdo). Even the United States, which is considered a country built upon freedom, is monitoring its people. The American government even tries to follow everything that its citizens do. Governments even have 64 federal websites that are helping them follow their people’s browsing and buying habits (Zuckerbrod). Governments are using their websites to monitor what people are doing. This way the government can know everything from their people’s hobbies to who their best friend is. Technology is helping the government take away their citizens privacy.

Collecting data off of individual devices from specific citizens of the United States is not an illegal act, as long as the data was retrieved with the permission of a judge. It’s easy to compare a search through your phone with a government official or agent going through your car or even your home. It is not legally allowed unless the person being investigated gives explicit consent, or the agency going through your personal property has reasonable grounds to investigate, otherwise known as probable cause. Often when someone 's data is analyzed they are under a criminal

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.

“A Surveillance Society,” written by William E. Thompson and Joseph V. Hickey makes you conscious to the fact that in the society we live in today, you and your personal information are almost always being recorded, analyzed, and stored. Most people are aware of cameras in public places, but cease to see that they are being monitored in places such as banking accounts and health records. After the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the USA PATRIOT Act was passed to give the government permission to go increase their accessibility to citizens private records. There is many citizens that were compliant with exchanging privacy for the extra protection against terrorist and criminals. There is an abundance of citizens that are against the act as well, because

Trying to avoid a totalitarian, propaganda-based regime like Orwell wrote about, policy-makers still have to find a way to monitor technology and protect national security. The answer is not simple, but the key is finding the right point in the gray area that lies between complete and no privacy. American citizens have a right to privacy. They have the right to do what they choose without the government monitoring their every move. As Henry David Thoreau wrote, “That government is best which governs least.”

In today’s society, the word “privacy” has become ubiquitous. When discussing whether government surveillance and data collection pose a threat to privacy, the most common retort against privacy advocates – by those in favor of databases, video surveillance, spyware, data mining and other modern surveillance measures – is this line: "If I’m not doing anything wrong, what would I have to hide?" The allowance of the government’s gathering and analysis of our personal information stems from an inadequate definition of what privacy is and the eternal value that privacy possesses. The adherents of the “nothing-to-hide” argument say that because the information will never be disclosed to the public, the “privacy interest is minimal, and the security interest in preventing terrorism is much more important.” 1 In an era where the patterns we leave behind will inevitably become the focus for whatever authority, the issue of privacy affects more than just individuals hiding a wrong. In this essay, I will explore the state of online privacy in wake of the government’s warrantless data collection. Respectively, the nothing-to-hide argument and its key variants in more depth.

Given the nature of the case, there are two primary options available in the situation: support the FBI to force Apple to create a “backdoor key” version of iOS to be installed on the phone in question or support Apple and the lack of a legal basis for requiring them to hack their own software. A third option that may occur despite the outcome of the legal case would be for US lawmakers to draft and sign laws that clearly define what powers over electronic devices the government has in investigations of any nature, be they for national security or criminal investigations. Whether or not a legal basis is set by law,

As consumers of these smartphone products which have become embedded into our everyday lives we often overlook the idea that a higher up official can be looking into our personal day to day information. Furthermore, the possibility that may be staring into our eyes from the iPhone’s front facing camera. Our trust of personal privacy lands in the hands of the company for which we purchase our products from. Thus the iPhone has become a symbol of data privacy vs. national security (Preimesberger, 2016). Creating two sides of the argument, one side being those who value their privacy, and the other side being individuals such as the government who want to protect our nation from any threat. As consumers we have to trust the companies such as Apple

The tech company Apple denied assistance which would include creating a system that would overhaul the feature that deletes all information on the phones after ten failed password attempts. The chief executive of Apple, Tim Cook, called the order “chilling” and declined assistance. His reason for denying assistance is that if the FBI has the ability to do this to one phone, nothing stops the government from doing it to every other phone (Kharpal). This case is just the beginning of a series of pending legal battles between technology companies and the United States government. Law enforcement agencies argued that the encryption used by Apple and companies alike, have made identifying accomplices in terrorist attacks more difficult. The tech companies countered that the encryption key used by Apple is to protect data of Apple customers from outside hackers (Kharpal). The problem with trying a case of this caliber is that the answer is not a black and white