Internet Privacy, A Matter of National Security? – Mike Zang

Despite more recent attempts to inform Internet users of issues with safety and privacy, there are many people who still believe that while sitting behind a computer screen in the comfort of their own homes, or anywhere for that matter, they are conducting business with anonymity; unfortunately, what most fail to realize is that every click, every file download, and every purchase made on the Internet is recorded or saved somewhere for purposes such as data for future marketing, research and development, and even prosecution of criminal matters.

Occupy.com
Occupy.com

While this may not appear to be significant to all web surfers out there, as the Internet appears to offer more pros than cons, it is for these exact reasons that the Internet needs to be navigated more carefully, and people’s propensity to offer information about their personal lives should be given a second look.

John Barlow’s “A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace,” offers a satirical approach to many people’s points of view on the Internet and emphasizes the point that it is a place virtually impossible to control; for these reasons, it needs to be respected as its own world.  Barlow elaborates by implying all the new laws that are passed to control and censor the Internet are only going against what the founding fathers wanted in regards to free speech and are leaving power to an individual to make his or her own decisions; however, just because the Internet isn’t able to physically restrain us for unjust actions and words, it doesn’t mean that we aren’t responsible for them in the real world; this raises issues about privacy and what rights we do truly have as digital citizens of this world.

The “Naked in the Sunlight” chapter brings up several points regarding privacy concerns.  With objects such as black boxes in cars, radio frequency ID tags in items such as key fobs, Global Positioning Systems (GPS) that are able to track one’s location in real-time, cookies in browsing data, IP addresses specific to a person’s computer, and surveillance cameras that use facial recognition software, which are all Internet based, it’s safe to say that privacy is a element of the past.  Despite this, though, some precautions can be considered; the safest rule to abide by while conducting business on the Internet is don’t put anything out there that you aren’t worried about people getting ahold of.  Information such as home addresses, birthdates, and the names of loved ones is all a criminal needs to wreak havoc on one’s life. Unfortunately, the range of crimes related to privacy on the Internet span minor infractions to those that threaten national security.  For instance, many international and domestic terrorist organizations use the Internet for transmitting data, which offers a lot of detail regarding possible attacks. Anyone who has turned on the television or read a newspaper in the last couple of days is well aware of the devastating toll terrorism can have on not only our nation but our entire world. Events like those that just tragically transpired in France raise many questions, one of which is directly connected to security. In regards to national safety and the right to free speech in mind, just how much freedom does the U.S. extend to people before they are investigated in order to deem if they are an actual threat or not?

Advertisements

25 thoughts on “Internet Privacy, A Matter of National Security? – Mike Zang

  1. Carly Hernandez January 13, 2015 / 8:22 pm

    In regards to deeming whether a person/group is actually a threat or not based on using the freedom they are given, if they abuse this freedom and use it to harm or destruct they must be investigated from the start. National safety and the safety of each individual should be a main priority. But how can we give people as much freedom as they want and not have any consequences or problems with it? Of course problems are going to arise but that’s what happens when we are willing to put our information out there on the internet. I think now people understand that we really don’t have any privacy on the internet but we’ve chosen as a nation to continue with it anyways. And no matter if we put laws into place that prevent criminals and terrorists from accessing our information or websites, they will find a way around it. Recently, I learned about a group called ‘Anonymous’ which is a hacking group that is aimed at punishing governments for policies of which the hackers disapprove. They are able to take down websites, hack users, and organize cyber-attacks all the while remaining anonymous. They want to do what they think is best for the general public, only attacking those who do harm to others. After reading the article you linked to, “Morning Bell: The Unintended Consequences of Internet Regulation”, it put the laws that are being processed right now in perspective for me. While I do agree that preventing criminals from accessing private information is a good thing, it is also a threat to our first amendment, Freedom of Speech. These new laws could result in security concerns as well and raise questions as to what access the government has on our information.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. spgregor January 15, 2015 / 11:00 pm

    How much freedom are we extended before we are investigated? That is a good question. I have heard of people being questioned after doing online searches for certain cookware/school supplies on the internet. (And not the same person doing both searches) One would think it would take more than just internet searches for a certain type of cookware before we pop up on a watch list. When we give up some of our basic rights, we must understand that there is the possibility of misuse. To quote Benjamin Franklin, those that “can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

    Who truly benefits from all cars having black boxes in them or key fobs having radio frequency in them? Can these things be disabled if we choose not to have these options? Shouldn’t this be a right to us as consumers? The majority of people are not terrorists or criminals and to have our rights violated “to track those who are” is wrong.

    Understandably we live in a completely different world with the inception of all this technology. However, does this require us to give up certain rights we are entitled to or should it require law enforcement to step up their game without infringing on our rights? This may sound harsh, but we must be careful what rights we unknowingly allow ourselves to give up.

    Like

    • Brandon Coulter January 17, 2015 / 5:38 pm

      The heaviest rebuttal to every discussion involving the legality and legitimacy of our lack of privacy on the web and even within the public sphere consistently involves referencing our Declaration of Independence. In terms of how “good” or useful the techniques established by the government for tracking harmful individuals are, the Declaration and the Bill of Rights are referenced as being violated constantly, with are basic rights as citizens and Americans all but being thrown away by the privacy-violating techniques.

      Here’s the thing: those pieces of paper that were signed by slave-owning, wealthy, upper-class, white males were created two-hundred and thirty-nine years ago. In this two-and-a half century-long span, the largest and most extensive advancements in technology and human thinking occurred, almost all of which occurred within the 20th century. None of what the United States has become today can be explained or represented by these out-of-date and obsolete pieces of writing. Of course, they are fantastic bases for a thoroughly Democratic and equal society, but they must be amended if they are to completely apply to life as it is today, especially with an entire second-world we live in on a daily basis that is known as the Internet.

      But to say that the government violates our basic rights is to admit that we have not advanced as a society for over two-hundred years, a laughable statement at best. I am not going to attempt to amend our basis for rights, but I will leave you with a quote to consider as to what our rights truly are:

      “That which has no existence cannot be destroyed — that which cannot be destroyed cannot require anything to preserve it from destruction. Natural rights is simple nonsense: natural and imprescriptible rights, rhetorical nonsense — nonsense upon stilts.” — Jeremy Bentham, 1843.

      Rights are an intangible concept. Nothing can truly guarantee them.

      Like

  3. bubbastinx January 17, 2015 / 5:39 pm

    This post was very insightful, and I thought John Barlow’s satirical approach of many of the viewpoints were spot on. We see now that many laws being passed have little do about empowering citizens, but more so censorship and control. And, in some cases big business benefit from the increased censorship.

    I liked this idea:

    “National safety and the safety of each individual should be a main priority. But how can we give people as much freedom as they want and not have any consequences or problems with it? “

    Unfortunately, in America the business of the government is business. That’s the number one priority, and always will be. Also, this has been the priority of many empires throughout history. Unfortunately, a dumbed down education system has allowed many citizens today to forget this.

    If people/humans were the primary concerns with many legislative bills. We might not have as much bad things happen. WallStreet/Civil Rights/Women’s Rights/Egyptian Spring etc..

    We should definitely embrace technology, but also be vigilante on its vulnerability, and its use upon humanity.

    .

    Like

  4. Ms.McCollum January 17, 2015 / 9:02 pm

    With the recent uproar of the film, The Interview, I hope people realize how unsecure their information is online. With it being made more aware that people are trained to cyberhack it’s time to be more aware of what you’re posting. I agree that people need to be more cautious when it comes to the information they are sharing. I think people don’t give real thought to what may come from sharing personal information because they have private social media accounts. “Think about a conversation that you may have with a close friend. You may think about that conversation as private, but there is nothing stopping your friend from telling someone else what was said, except for your trust in your friend.” Not only can a Facebook friend go tell others your personal business you decided to share, but this doesn’t mean that your information in unattainable, it just means there is one more step to getting it.

    If we are “creating a world that all may enter without privilege or prejudice and a world where anyone, anywhere may express his or her beliefs, no matter how singular, without fear of being coerced into silence or conformity, then we must assume that, literally, everyone has access to our information. With a world created for everyone to exist based on these principles then we may believe that they would respect our privacy. We are all there for a purpose and that should be respected.

    Like

  5. hessaj January 17, 2015 / 10:07 pm

    Business is business, clear as day. The internet is a free world where any of us can say what we want and so on. Despite this, we are being monitored on a daily basis, kind of feels like we’re guinea pigs used for testing. What we do on the internet is used for business, specifically Personalized retargeting. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personalized_retargeting) What we browse, we’re fed. Just another way to do business, so I agree with you all the way.

    Pertaining to privacy involving business, I like that you said that we should take precautions, because it is us who send out information, it is our fault if something goes wrong. That is the risk of the internet. The events in France is truly tragic and can show consequences of trusting the internet. To me, the Internet is still a work in progress, that it’s only a matter of time until it gets better as a tool of society.

    Like

  6. asibo January 18, 2015 / 3:50 pm

    One of the things that has always surprised me about people’s use of the internet is how careless people are in keeping their activity secure, particularly when doing something illicit, or meditating on or researching doing things which are clearly illegal. However, there seem to be quite a few cases where such guilty online activities aren’t recognized until after the crimes are already committed, or cases in which there is a clear overreaction by government agencies to completely benign online activity. SPGregor, has already cited an example of the latter with the cookware searches. An example of the former would include the Casey Anthony murder case, in which the search query “foolproof suffocation” apparently did not register with internet surveillance until well after the alleged murder had taken place. It seems that the approach of surveillance security is rather haphazard and ineffective in light of these cases, especially considering that both of these examples of online search behavior was out in the open.
    With private browsers that most web browsers support, such as a Google Chrome’s “incognito mode,” it is pretty easy for internet users to keep relatively secure with their personal information and behavior online, though apparently the NSA is still capable of tracking information and behavior in private browsers. The problem of course is that if government surveillance can’t catch suspicious search queries in public browsing modes, how likely are they to catch suspicious search queries in private browsing modes? Or, is a premium put on watching private browsing, knowing that illicit and questionable activity is most likely to take place on these modes, with the mistaken belief that they aren’t trackable?

    Like

  7. seananthony3 January 18, 2015 / 4:09 pm

    Unless there are some tools I am unaware of, it is not necessarily as easy to get everyone’s information as one would think. Last semester, I was given an assignment in my Investigative Journalism class that required me to use various websites, social media sites, records, to find information on a person. I chose my city’s mayor. This man had a Twitter, Facebook and an Instagram, but the amount of information hidden from me was astounding. I was unable to even find out how old he was. However, I was able to figure out that he had a grand daughter based on what others posted. Perhaps, if we are so worried about privacy, we should focus on asking others to keep your information low-key, too?

    This information is used by marketers to help advertise products to you and I’ve heard several times that some have a problem with this, but I’d really prefer it. Although, I’ve never actually clicked on any of these ads because of my distrust with them, growing up at the dawn of the internet where every interactive pop-up opened up a wormhole of viruses, but there have been some interesting games advertised towards me.

    Like

  8. thegradytrain January 18, 2015 / 7:26 pm

    Ideally you get the freedoms that every American citizen gets in America receives. You get as much freedoms that you can take full advantage of unless you harm someone else’s rights or display a strong will to harm someone’s rights. So with free speech, you can say whatever you want as long as it is not deemed libelous or slanderous to someone else, and does not seem like a threat to their well being e.g. death threats and threats of harm. If you do commit one of these acts, the government can use any one of those technologies you described to find you and do whatever they deem necessary to bring you to justice. I think of the film Enemy of the State whenever I think of government tracking of national security threats. Which brings up the issue that if you are implicated for a national security threat but in reality you are not involved, what can you really do? In the case of the movie, the main protagonists life is completely turned upside because of a dark turn of events and essentially being at the wrong place at the wrong time. He is then flagged as a threat to “national security” and is chased throughout the rest of the movie. While this is a work of fiction, the film was released in 1998 and was almost prophetic to the Patriot Act. I also believe that even through the presentation of the technology in the film is also fictional, a lot of the techniques the government uses to find and track flagged citizens are very real and have even gotten more sophisticated.

    Like

  9. Miles Storms January 18, 2015 / 8:02 pm

    In regards to national safety and the right to free speech in mind, just how much freedom does the U.S. extend to people before they are investigated in order to deem if they are an actual threat or not?

    In regards to national safety and with free speech in mind, I believe that the limitation of one’s freedom is limited to the point of creation of an actual threat. This is by far not a black and white situation though. I believe an example would be of the stories we all here of teen bullying/joking. Even though they believe it is a joke at the time, each situation must be taken seriously. With that being said, the government handles threats towards national safety/security in the same manner.

    In relation though of:
    “objects such as black boxes in cars, radio frequency ID tags in items such as key fobs, Global Positioning Systems (GPS) that are able to track one’s location in real-time, cookies in browsing data, IP addresses specific to a person’s computer, and surveillance cameras that use facial recognition software”

    These devices are made to keep us safe. Black boxes in cars are used not only for investigation work of accidents, the data is also returned back to manufacturers and companies like IIHS to better keep us safe. GPS systems are meant to assist an individual. The ability of the government using these as a solution to protect was just an advantage of the system and was not the original intent. I feel this is a great thing though. The use of GPS systems to save a person’s life that is being held hostage is a great tool. If it does not lead to the criminal, it at least gives a time stamp of where they were at what location and shows how far behind the government is in solving the issue at hand.

    With this all being said, I believe the U.S. should be able to use what ever is necessary to determine whether a threat is valid or not, without hesitation. Of course these actions should be followed in an ethical and moral manner, but as they say, If you do not go looking for trouble, you will probably not be in trouble.

    Like

  10. jaemillz411 January 18, 2015 / 8:25 pm

    I think that there are both pros and cons to having basically no anonymity online. First of all there should always be a form of accountability when something is published online. As we have seen over the past years cyber bullying has become more and more prevalent. And there have been legal debates because of it. They bring up things that laws have neglected for years like if privacy is a right and what that entails. Since everything is recorded with or without our knowledge we have become aware of holes or flaws in our laws. How we are and are not protected. We can use as an advantage. We can make better laws that can protect us. The Internet is constantly changing and progressing us as a nation, but it is also shows us how far we have to do. For instance, it is not everyday that people are being arrested being accused of being a threat to the United States. Therefore, they need access to information that we do not always offer willing to assess whether or not we are a danger. They watch the websites we look at, the people we contract, and can surveillance where we go. They check to all these sources to ensure our safety, but where do we draw the line.

    Like

  11. nebior January 18, 2015 / 10:21 pm

    I completely agree that people should only put out information that they expect to go public. I wrote a little bit about that on the post before this so I won’t echo you here.
    I am not sure how many people may agree or disagree with me on this, but I feel that everything done on the internet should be monitored. If I have to lose some internet privacy and have someone watching what I do on the internet and by doing this the government protects even one person then I do not mind. I already assume that everything I do on the internet will be tracked, recorded, or made public. I would sacrifice privacy for protection any day. It does not bother me if somebody knows what I am doing online and if by tracking myself and others the government can better protect us then I feel that is the right thing to do. I may have this mindset since I have grown up on the internet. Social media, online gaming, and online communication have all been a part of my life once I was old enough to partake in them. Growing up on the internet may have desensitized me to having my information exposed to strangers even if it was chatting with a random person in an online game and telling them my name or the state I live in. Privacy has its place, but people really just need to post responsibly!

    –Ben Walker

    Like

  12. blcarr January 18, 2015 / 10:26 pm

    “America was a bastard! The illegitimate daughter of the mother country whose legs were then spread around the world. And a rapist known as freedom: free doomed.” This is a quote from famous black activist (Gill Scott Heron.) To answer your question, there is no such thing as being free in America. Our country was brought up on violence taken from Great Britain all for this thing called freedom. We think we are free but we are not. We don’t have the freedom to walk nude in public. We are walking around in the land of the free but we are followed by surveillance. To answer your question, yes we are free but it’s controlled by a higher power.

    Like

  13. bjuhasz10 January 18, 2015 / 10:51 pm

    Obviously balancing freedom and privacy is one of the most complex issues in our country today. You can turn on a news channel and it seems this issue is debated nearly every day. Obviously the Edward Snowden situation really helped propel this issue to a new level. For those unfamiliar with the situation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Snowden

    Snowden was a computer specialist working for the NSA (National Security Agency). He illegally disclosed thousands of documents to media outlets revealing “numerous global surveillance programs, many of them run by the NSA and the Five Eyes with the cooperation of telecommunication companies and European governments”.

    The most interesting part of the Snowden situation is the fact that depending on who you ask, he has been called a hero, a whistleblower, a dissident, a patriot, and even a traitor. Clearly, our country seems to be severely divided on the issue. Some argue that the government has no right spying on anything “private”, while others believe that government surveillance and monitoring is essential to a safe America.

    I tend to agree with those saying the government should do anything necessary to protect the well being of the country and safety of our citizens. The government doesn’t care about your Facebook pictures, twitter posts, or what you buy online. They are after terrorists and other dangerous threats. Ultimately, we have to sacrifice certain online and privacy freedoms to be able to retain the ultimate freedom: freedom of safety and life.

    Like

  14. elrader2015 January 18, 2015 / 10:53 pm

    Mike, I really like that you mentioned the fact that a lot of security stems from what one puts on the internet. In our society, almost everyone we come in contact with has social media of some kind. Due to this, it makes learning about people on the web extremely easy today. Because of these factors, it’s always important to conduct online accounts with some level of professionalism. You never know who is looking at your profiles online or who has the technology to simply bypass privacy aspects on accounts. According to this link: http://thenextweb.com/socialmedia/2012/04/18/survey-37-of-your-prospective-employers-are-looking-you-up-on-facebook/
    in 2012, a survey conducted showed that 37% of employers were checking up on their employees on Facebook. It’s been 3 years since then, so it may be safe to say that number has risen. Definitely something to consider when posting things online.

    Like

    • kevinpayton1 January 19, 2015 / 2:24 am

      In regards to how much freedom do we have before we are investigated? In my opinion, not much. I believe we are monitored much more closely than the general public is led to believe. There are programs and protocols in place to pick up key words or phrases that will alert specific agencies to either pay us a visit or take a closer look. They will monitor your spending, blogs, pictures, friends, etc to see if you have any connections to terrorist organizations. So I would not suggest posting in numerous blogs or talking on the phone about how much you hate the United States. As far as Internet privacy, I am convinced that the average the user has no idea on how to ensure that he is not sharing too much information nor how to use the Internet without leaving trace information. We don’t realize that almost 90% of our personal belongings have the ability for us to be monitored or tracked by another person or entity. We have Onstar in our cars that is active rather you pay the bill or not. As police detective have used that countless ties to recover lost children, stolen property, etc when the owners thought it was turned off. I have heard of web cams being turned on remotely, along with microphones. The entertainment industry has shown us in movies such as Hackers, Swordfish, Eagle Eye, and the new television show Scorpio shows us a vision of what computer hacking and government capabilities are capable of.

      Like

  15. smkiraco January 19, 2015 / 1:35 am

    I do not know how much freedom the US should extend to the people. There definitely needs to be a discussion though as views on privacy within the government need to be updated (Hah! Pun). However, I would like to give my opinion on other matters discussed here.

    One, I think it would be a good rule of thumb to treat the Internet as a whole as a public place. Be it under a pseudonym or your real name, you should treat it as if everything can be traced back to you, because it can. The power of anonymity over the Internet as surely faded to transparency.

    As for “A declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace” the final line stands out the most to me: “May it be more humane and fair than the world your governments have made before.” The irony in that statement is immense. To quote Abraham Lincoln: “Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power.” It turns out this includes the power of anonymity. To that point however, I believe that there should be some sort of regulation on the Internet in terms of security. Recently President Obama is starting to expand enforcement on DDoS attacks and hacking due to the North Korea hack of Sony and numerous DDoS attacks on businesses. Here information akin to your first paragraph is definitely needed.

    This issue on privacy vs. security has turned out to be one heck of a double-edged sword.

    Like

  16. mvzang January 19, 2015 / 1:53 am

    Hello everyone,

    Great comments so far. I really enjoy reading them. Many of you mentioned that there is no such thing as freedom in the United States, that no matter what we do, there is the possibility that were being watched. Many of you are right, and it’s mentioned like it’s a bad thing. We live in a different world today. Access to loads of inappropriate material is easier than ever. Communicating between criminals and terrorists is easier than ever, and pedophiles have easier access to naïve children. With all that being said, some restrictions on freedom is a necessary evil in the big picture in the interest of public safety. While I am not a fan of big government, I also realize there is a need for to keep track and find the criminal element that thrives in this global internet world.

    Like

  17. galaradi January 19, 2015 / 2:09 am

    Here’s the thing: Privacy or lack thereof can be a good and a bad thing. When suicides happen, or criminals are found, their social media accounts are publicized and any “strange” or “suspicious” tweets are shown to the public. These are clues into what the person was thinking. We catch a glimpse of why they did that act or what made them act this way. The Digital Age has allowed so many advances to our life, but at the same time, it has its consequences.

    I remember when everyone was going crazy when they found out Snapchat was saving everyone’s pictures. These pictures, which are only supposed to last 10 seconds or less, were stored somewhere. That means they are not deleted forever. This doesn’t surprise me because anything we put online, even if we delete it, stays there. That’s why people look at future employees’ social media pages. People get fired for posting something about their boss. Students are irresponsibly posting about their classes or professors. This can all lead to negative outcomes if not handled correctly.

    Like

  18. doniecew January 19, 2015 / 2:29 am

    It’s definitely say that privacy is a thing in the past. We’re living in an era where kids younger and younger are able to access social media, not having a sense of what they’re posting or even knowing how far it can go. If it’s easy accessible for children, imagine what or how adults feel. They’re just as bad as children as far as the knowledge about posting and tracking.

    Does the government actually have time to sit and monitor thousands of post from children and adults and separate the “real threats” or the “freedom of speech?”‘

    Like

  19. akuelbs January 19, 2015 / 3:10 am

    Everything we do on the internet leaves a footprint of everything we interact with on the internet. Because of this, the United States government is able to monitor potential threats to our nation by seeing what people are searching for or saying online. There are divisions of our government that is tasked with monitoring what chatter is going on around the world and works on decoding potential threats. If we think about it, the internet is still pretty new and there really isn’t much restriction regarding what people are capable of. I believe there should be more restrictions put in place because a lot of possibilities are out there and some people out there have a lot of potential regarding online attacks and communications while being incognito the entire time. The use of the internet for cyber terrorism is something we need to start to be more aware of, and this will start to break down some of the privacy allowed to people because the government will want to know who is doing and saying what if they are looked at as a potential threat. And with these potential privacy changes, the likes of freedom or speech will be limited and it actually wont be true freedom.

    Like

  20. stefaniedak January 19, 2015 / 3:30 am

    People should definitely be more careful while surfing and publishing private information over the internet. It seems to me that most people do not realize that once something is on the internet – whether you click delete or not – it is there forever. However, more and more people are becoming aware of their need to be responsible and the actual lack of anonymity they have on the internet. We should be able to embrace today’s technological advances such as social networking however, people still seem to forget that there are dangerous individuals lurking on the web. Identity thieves and even serial killers gain access to the personal lives of individuals through the easily accessible information he or she places online. The number of untraceable online hackers and thieves is continuously growing thus, people should be taking this as a sign to be more responsible and share less over the internet.

    In relation to the U.S, I don’t believe any large amount of freedom is extended to people before they are investigated. If you think about it, aren’t we all sort of already being investigated although we are not actual threats? Our phone data, website activity – basically all online activity – is already being collected and tracked. As you stated, “it’s safe to say that privacy is a element of the past.”

    Like

  21. lewenzel93 January 19, 2015 / 3:45 am

    What people put out on the internet will never go away. This is a fact. There will always be a way to see that snapchat again, or find that status you deleted, or even (we’re all adults here, right?) see that risqué picture you sent to your partner. So, no, there is really no such thing as anonymity online. The internet is a tool, but it can also be used like a weapon. I remember over the summer when all of those female celebrities were having their nude photos leaked. I remember just feeling so sorry for all of them. Many people argued “well, that’s what they get for being stupid enough to send those and put them on the internet.” But these women were victims. Someone hacked into their private emails and accounts and stole from them. Whatever their reasons for using the internet this way, can you blame them for someone else being so malicious as to steal their pictures and distribute them without their consent?

    In regards to your question about how much freedom the U.S. extends to people before they are investigated, I would have to honestly say I don’t know. Privacy and free speech are basic rights, but where would we draw the line to determine who’s a threat and who isn’t?

    Like

  22. cseejay January 19, 2015 / 4:37 am

    I think in the somewhat near future the internet will see “it’s police” do a better job of policing the situation of privacy and holding people accountable for what they say and do online. Free speech is something that’s through around anytime someone tries to hold an individual accountable for what they say and do regarding the Internet. I’m definitely in the camp that feel slow changes need to be made so, eventually people become use to the Internet being considered it’s own world where there are stricter laws and guidelines to what someone can say to one another. In many ways I think looking about what the Internet has become a decade after social media has become a serious part of everyone’s daily lives, I think an argument can be made that maybe VERY STICT guideline should be place on certain portions of the web. I personally feel as though these changes have started to be implemented (slowly) and as we see and study the effect people have on one another on the web I think those changes will speed up as more is discovered. Once right are established, then I think it become much easier to see whose harming someone else, but the web seems to still be the Wild West in sorts.

    Like

  23. rmpaulk January 19, 2015 / 4:47 am

    I feel that we have lost the motto “innocent until proven guilty.” We now live in a society where people are judged and investigated before being trusted. A great example is when you cross the border to Canada. Getting into Canada is easy, it’s getting back into the U.S. that is hard. You are asked the most ridiculous questions to try and be tripped up, and you feel afraid of these border officers. You get the sense that you have to prove yourself to your own country. I always find myself becoming angry in this situation. This is my country. This is my home. At the same time, though, they don’t know anything about me. They don’t trust me. I could be one of the bad guys and only I know I’m not. This kind of invasion of privacy bothers me, but yet I understand it and accept it.
    The invasion of privacy for marketing purposes is one I don’t understand and find kind of scary, honestly. A great example is Facebook. Facebook tracks everything you look at, both on their site and off. If you don’t believe me, take a look at the ads being featured to you on your newsfeed. Isn’t it weird that they all relate to pages you have liked, websites you have gone on, and things you’ve searched for? I will do some “window shopping” for clothes and then I will see an ad for an online clothing store on Facebook. I will say I work at Toys “R” Us and then will get ads featuring hoodies saying, “you think you know fear? Try working at Toys “R” during Christmas time.”

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s