The Privacy Invasion of Consumers Through the Internet and Bluetooth Devices

In addition to this massive information highway, there are many different tools that can be utilized on this global network.Using the Internet, people find jobs, send electronic cards, shop, make airline and hotel reservations, execute stock trades, and even pay bills online!With the increasing popularity of people shopping and purchasing goods online, the Internet has created new ways of doing business. Realizing the potential of the Internet, many companies have started to advertise their products and services online. However, consumers are becoming hesitant as it relates to purchases over the Internet because of the fear of being deceived by online retailers. The research study will examine a prosperous component of the Internet, Internet

Companies have an obligation to protect their customer’s information, which goes beyond that of complying with state and federal regulations. If the company loses the trust of their customers, they risk the chance of damaging

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has been in protecting consumer privacy on the internet by targeting deceptive and unfair trade practices since the act was establish in 1914( Halbert & Ingulli, 2012, p. 253). According to Halbert & Ingulli (2012) the FTC banned

INC.com released an article weighing the sides of the case. The article embraced the Federal Trade Commission V. Twitter Case to be held to FTC’s advantage. The article states the FTC’s regulations for online data management and intent of use of the data. The FTC is crossing major boundaries in security control as, “[the] case was the FTC's 30th over poor data security, but the first against a social networking service” (Rubin). Rubin believes the commissioner is pushing far too hard with the branching from data security to social networking services. The regulation being practiced is exceeding the limits previously intended for the commission's authority over privacy matters. Rubin states the progression of the involvement of the FTC and concludes “[the] case against Twitter is the FTC's attempt to codify laws and regulations that don't otherwise exist on the books," (Rubin). The involvement and authority of the Federal Trade Commision with privacy laws in this article correlates with the big brother privacy metaphor. The FTC is seen as the dominant figure in privacy regulation. The data and means of what can be done with data is controlled by the powerful authority of the FTC, giving readers a sense of continuous lurking and

How far is too far when it comes to privacy? In a rapidly developing digital age, the boundaries are constantly expanding as new technology emerges. Data mining is not going away, so the debate on privacy becomes increasingly relevant. The line between what is ethical and unethical quickly become blurred, and certain entities are bound to take advantage of that gray area. Corporations claim they are collecting private data for marketing research to serve more relevant advertising and increase profits. Despite the marketing benefits of digital data collection, it is unethical for corporations to collect private digital data without taking proper measures to protect privacy.

Behind E-commerce, the driving force is linked with the arrival of commercial Internet technology use, particularly the World Wide Web (WWW). The privacy issues bring forth much needed attention, especially for developed countries. Evolution of technology to the point that has comprehensive profiles of people can be created and disseminated at exceptional levels. Technology has considerably changed the link between merchants and customers, and tipped the balance favouring online merchants’ commercial interest against privacy interest of the customers. This alteration has left the online consumers especially vulnerable, subject to harm, and their rights to privacy are

We have all experienced it. The tingles down your spine while your sixth sense picks up someone’s harsh eyes scanning you. You are being watched. As the little hairs stand up on your neck and the chill of judgment floods your body, you choke on the insecurity that comes over you. Some break out in a nervous sweat and drown themselves in doubt; others do not hesitate to send beams of criticism back. Many stare with innocent intentions while others purposely hope to provoke anxiety. However, if you did not know that someone’s cruel eyes were on you, would it be just as bothersome? Since 2000, internet security has been an issue that many feel is a violation of their privacy. This controversial topic has hit almost all newspapers with

Q.1. We use many free Internet services (browsers, emails, search engines, news, blogs, etc.) that are supported by commercial advertisements. The users were exposed to more and more "targeted" ads recently. By "targeted" ads, we mean the ads are geared toward your personal Internet habits such as your location, your search topics, your browsing habits and interests, etc. Do you welcome targeted ads that might just what you needed? What are your views or concerns? What would you suggest to solve the issues of privacy invasion? Post your answer also on the "Discussions" board. Ref: To block ads from YouTube, Facebook, etc., you could use browser extensions as described in this article: 10 Ad Blocking Extensions Tested for Best Performance https://www.raymond.cc/blog/10-ad-blocking-extensions-tested-for-best-performance/

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.

The privacy act 1974 was created as a response to the concerns on how the use of computerized files might impact individual’s privacy rights. The Privacy Act of 1974 created a code of fair information practices that governs the collection, maintenance, and distribution of information about individuals that is maintained in systems of records by federal agencies. This is implemented by Cadbury in a way which disallows anyone in having access to individuals personal information without access.

In discussion of technology being used for a lot of purposes, one controversial issue has been being watched by technology which now smartphones tracks us on everything we do. One the one hand, they mention having our information can help us with the search and common stuff we like from the use of our phones.On the other hand, they argue about its violating our privacy which in my opinion it does because they see what we do etc. Other even believe it's okay for our phones to see our activity for security reasons for example if the phone is stolen we can track the phone down and its activities that been going

Today’s society is ruled by technology. Technology that quite often invades our privacy. The invasion of privacy is known all too well to the citizens of Oceania from the novel 1984 by George Orwell. The telescreens in the novel 1984 resemble televisions but they have greater capabilities which allow it to capture every move, every facial expression, and every conversation of a party member and this is so that Big Brother has the reassurance that the party members are not involved in thoughtcrimes. Additionally, the technology we have today, such as our smartphones, computers, and tablets are fairly similar to the telescreens. While these devices indeed allow many people the opportunity of communicating with others easily, it also allows third party users to gain access to our conversations and, but not limited to, tracking our location as well. We live in the 21st century where technology is accessible to anyone, our privacy can be easily intruded. The articles, “That’s No

The Fourth Amendment protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures unless with probable cause, yet the government is finding loop holes to still spy on its citizens unknowingly.

The FTC Privacy Rule and the GLB Act contain a series of lengthy and technical definitions, confusing

In the United States data privacy is not highly regulated or legislated, for instance, the Health, and Information Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPPA), the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998 (COPPA), and the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003 (FACTA) are indicators of how the United States federal laws tend to favor