Unwind Research Paper

Is anyone’s private information contained in their cell phone actually private? Are appointments, bank information, conversations, the user’s location or other sensitive personal information truly confidential? Is there a Big Brother watching? There is no definitive answer to any of these questions. From the beginning of time to now, privacy has become more and more scarce. Through new developments in technology, it is hard to believe that someone is not watching your move at any given moment. The government’s job is to keep Americans safe, but where is the line drawn? Where is the difference between having a reasonable doubt and accessing information solely because these government officials have the power to do so? The government has infringed upon the rights of the American people when it comes to this topic.

Over the last four decades, mobile devices have become the trademark of our society.cell phones and other mobile devices have inundated our society At any given time; we can see drivers talking or texting in a moving vehicle. According to Brenner (2013), 87% of American adults and 78% of teenagers own a cell phone. The scary part is that almost two-thirds of

What kind of people would want to have their kid unwound? I know I was not always the best kid, but how could you want to have your son unwound? I do not think I ever did something bad enough to deserve to be unwound. Why did you think to have me unwound in the first place? How could you not tell me I was going to be unwound? You two obviously did not love me if you wanted to have me unwound. This is the biggest betrayal that could ever happen to me. You did not want me like how you did not want the storked baby. Did you have fun in the Bahamas with your favorite son?

Nowadays we see the tracking of people's thoughts, like pulses and heart rate. Considering what you're phone's does and doesn't do, the Government sees you from free phones given to you also. The article by Peter Masses “that's no cell phone, that's my tracker” he says “The United States court of appeals for the District of Columbia circuit, ruling on the use of tracking devices by the police, noted that GPS data can reveal whether a person is a weekly church goer, a heavy drinker, a regular at the gym, unfaithful husband” (Maass). This reflection of just the GPS is why we are falling into a network of stored data about individuals. Even Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, etc can see what you're doing right

While Swartz and Allen agree that the use cell phone tracking logs must be monitored and used cautiously, they strongly disagree on the role cell phone companies, law enforcement and government are playing in monitoring the use of the technology. I find Swartz’s view to be based in logic and not emotion. The view that Swartz presents is more balanced. She believes that the government and judicial system are working diligently to ensure that the rights of citizens are protected. In this article Swartz does not seem to recognize the invasion of privacy that this technology poses, she also seems to ignore the way that police and state could abuse the technology.

But, if the suspect has a history of being a trouble maker, they should be allowed to search their phone. Having police search your phone could be embarrassing. They could find something that is legal if you are of age, but it could also embarrass you. You have personal things on your phone and you don't want others to see. However, if there is a suspect that has a history of getting in trouble with the law, I believe the police should be able to search the phone without a warrant. There could be something on the phone that could help them solve the crime. If they waste time trying to get a warrant, the suspect might break the phone or delete anything against the law." - said Kelsey Hanna from Stroudsburg, Pennsylvanian on November 13th 2014. I think that police should be able to search your phones without a warrant, but with very specific restrictions on when, and why, they

During the early 1900s, people had to walk and travel extended distances just to communicate and interact with other people. Now in the present, we can easily contact someone and see what they are doing with a few movements of our thumbs. This is all thanks to the revolutionary invention of the phone and the evolution of our phones throughout time. Yes, the phone provides us with countless benefits but there are also some slight disadvantages to the phone such as the lack of privacy that comes from using the phone. Fortunate for us, there are ways that we can prevent this loss of privacy and keep our privacy tight and secured. Ways such as keeping your passwords at a high level of difficulty, keep track of everything on your phone, and protecting your social security number.

have many similarities in the way of tracking their citizens as stated before. For example the article “That’s no Phone. That’s me Tracker” the authors, Peter Maass and Megha Rajagopalan, talk about how cell phone companies gather information through GPS technology and smartphone apps, “Every year, private companies spend millions of dollars developing new services that track,store, and share the words, movements and even the thoughts of their customers” (paragraph six, quote used by author, stated by Paul Ohm). This implies that data is constantly being recorded for the companies. Not only is this information beneficial for the government as a tactic for crime prevention/solving but also for advertisers. Apps like snapchat, instagram, facebook, twitter are all free because the companies want to be able to see the kind of things that people are interested in to advertise merchandise and other things. In the article the authors inform their audience by stating that cell phones are losing their purpose, the purpose of making phone calls. “...showed that making calls is the fifth-most-popular activity for smartphones; more popular uses are showing that social networks, playing games and listening to music. The smartphone is taking over the functions that laptops, cameras, credit cards, and watches once performed” (paragraph

Breakups are difficult there's not doubt about it. It hurts when someone that was such a big part of one's life is suddenly gone. Even if both parties agree that the breakup is for the best, it's still hard. It's even worse if one of the parties still wants the other one back. While there are no guarantees that getting back together is a possibility, or that things will be better if the couple does get back together, there are some things that you can do to help maximize the chances of a great reconciliation. To learn a lot about getting an ex back visit www.ExBoyfriendInsight.com. This website is loaded with helpful hints and tips.

The Fourth Amendment guarantees you the rights to your privacy and reasonable searches and seizures. There are many people who strongly believe that the government should be allowed to search phones history and computer history to keep in check and see if the person is not committing a crime. The majority of people believe that it is acceptable for the government to look through someone 's technology for the cause of protection and making sure there 's no terrorism, threats toward someone 's life, bullying, or pedophiles trying to hurt innocent children over the internet. They believe it is necessary for the government to be able to supervise the technology of the people due to the fact that the most targeted are the younger generation because they are the most vulnerable online.

Authors Maass & Rajagopalan talk about trackers on the devices we have, in their article “That's No Phone, That's My Tracker.” The authors are informing the readers about what's going on with our devices and how technology is not only our friends, but something like an enemy as well because, what citizens are failing to realize is that in today's society we are being watched whether we like it or not. We could just simply walk into a liquor store, supermarket, or mall and are being watched by store clerks, and security cameras. There are even undercover police cars, and policemen that secretly are watching. This topic always ends in debate because some feel that surveillance is an invasion of privacy, when others feel it's for our protection and safety. Even though I am a person that values privacy, I agree with surveillance as long as it is used for good

As technology becomes more and more popular throughout all parts of the world there is an ever growing concern for individuals safety. With everyone carrying around a smartphone nowadays it is much easier to access everyone's location, especially the government. In fact there are many cases in which data was used from cell phone companies to capture criminals. Some people may argue that this is helpful to bring many criminals to justice but is also a huge invasion of privacy and should be looked into further.

Many cases have been brought to court and are continuing to be brought that say location tracking without a warrant should not be allowed. The argument most often used is that it is a violation of the right to privacy. A warrant is not the only way to obtain these records nor should it be. There are valid reasons that data can be obtained through other methods. The issue is across many platforms of digital communication but the most prominent and easiest to explain is with cell phones. The use of historical location tracking data is not a violation of privacy, in fact there is no right to privacy as most understand the term.

In the case of Riley v. California, the defendant was not even convicted before his phone was entered into evidence and connected him to the crimes he was accused of (Riley v. California). Why then are charged terrorist receiving privileges of privacy when the Supreme Court of the United States had ruled in the governments favor? Apple refusing to unlock a suspected terrorists phone violates the protection that the American people deserve and the courts previous rulings. A phone is a part of a person’s property. When a person is charged with a crime, their property becomes searchable. When Apple denies helping the government obtain evidence that could prevent terrorist attacks or help find others responsible it is a blatant obstruction of justice. A question posed by self-proclaimed civil libertarian, Bruce Shapiro, sums up the overwhelming thought of this case perfectly when he questions “Since when does a single company get to write the rules for transparency and availability of individual, government, and corporate records? Since when does a single corporation get to decide which records and data are beyond reach of warrant or subpoena?” (Shapiro). It is not for a company to decide, but those who have made our laws, are making our laws, and will make our laws in the future. Those who make our laws proved that in Riley v. California, a

Current mobile devices cannot be tracked in case of theft or mere lose. These modern phones can be tracked, and culprits brought to book. This effectively ensures cost effectiveness of sustaining the initiative after the initial purchase of the gadgets. It also helps detect staffs that do assume their marketing duties and engage in their own personal activities. This is because these phones help in locating where an employee is going and where he or she has been.