Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
privacy issues on internet surveillance
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: privacy issues on internet surveillance
In May 2007, Google added an innovative feature to Google Maps, called Google Street View. Street View provides 360 degree views of addresses from street level. Google cites many possible uses for the technology, such as showing long-distance friends and family your house, checking out the handicapped accommodations at establishments in advance, or previewing potential vacation rentals. Street View is available for most major metropolitan areas in the United States as well as selected countries abroad. As with any project that has a scope as grand as Street View’s. Google’s new technology has some drawbacks. Google’s methodology to collect all of these images was to pay people to drive around in cars that had cameras mounted on their roofs. As a result, many of the images contain people going about their daily lives, unaware that they are being photographed. This causes some people concern over their privacy. These fears are unfounded, however, as Google has worked very hard to ease people’s concerns. Ultimately, the utility of the service outweighs the privacy concerns of a small group of people. This paper outlines the privacy rights of United States citizens regarding Street View, what Google has done to address privacy concerns, and then offers a recommendation on whether Google has done enough to address these privacy concerns.
Google has implemented a number of features to address the privacy concerns of the public. The company has worked very hard to ‘anonymize’ the available data using their face and license plate blurring technologies. These make it difficult to recognize people or their cars from photos in Street View. To check that this blurring technology is doing its job correctly, however, Google must keep the origi...
... middle of paper ...
...oogle just does this on a much larger and more permanent scale. Google has developed face and license plate blurring technology in addition to their ‘report problem’ feature to deal with privacy issues. The usefulness of Google Street View trumps the small percentage of images that may be offensive or an invasion of privacy, and with a vigilant community policing the images, these can be eliminated over time as well.
Works Cited http://www.google.com/press/streetview/ http://www.google.com/corporate
http://www.gstreetsightings.com
http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/2009/06/street-view-exploring-europes- streets.html
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,676616,00.html
http://www.photoattorney.com/2005/09/rights-of-privacy-concerns-for.html
https://ssd.eff.org/your-computer/govt/privacy
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10024294-93.html
Gibbs, S. (2015, February 8). Google Maps: a decade of transforming the mapping landscape. Retrieved from The Guardian Web Site: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/08/google-maps-10-anniversary-iphone-android-street-view
Have you ever heard of the idea of body-mounted cameras on police officers? If not, David Brooks will introduce you to the idea that was discussed in an article from New York Times called “The Lost Language of Privacy”. In this article, the author addressed both the positive and negative aspects of this topic but mostly concerned with privacy invasion for Americans. Although that is a valid concern but on a larger scale, he neglected to focus greatly on the significant benefits that we all desire.
If misused, body-cameras can be a violation of privacy. In order to prevent this, proper legislation needs to be enacted in order to ensure privacy rights are protected. The only policy related document regarding police body cameras is the “Guidance for the use of body-worn cameras by law enforcement authorities” which is issued by the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada. This document discusses that rules should not be enforced only by local police departments, but for Canada as a whole. As this is the only document related to police body cameras, it is undoubtable that there needs to be serious legislation created. As it is suggested that body cameras pose as a risk for privacy rights, it is evident in order to implement them effectively, there needs to be regulation constructed. Body cameras can be an effective and useful tool, but without legislation, they can cause problems. Bruce Chapman, president of the Police Association of Ontario expresses, “We want to do it right. We don’t want to do it fast” when asked about the implementation of body cameras. While body cameras, are important to have in today's society, it is also dire to have it done properly. By enforcing strict guidelines, and documents addressing body camera legislation, it will ensure the process is done correctly. In order to implement body cameras properly, privacy rights need to be assessed. This process takes time, and proves body cameras need to be implemented at a pace legislation can follow. Thomas K. Bud, discusses the worry that privacy will be violated with body cameras. Factors such as facial recognition, citizen consent of recording, and violations of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms all pose as risks. While legislation has not matched their guidelines with modern technology, it proves how important it is to create new documents, in order for changes to be made. Therefore body
The government is always watching to ensure safety of their country, including everything and everyone in it. Camera surveillance has become an accepted and almost expected addition to modern safety and crime prevention (“Where” para 1). Many people willingly give authorization to companies like Google and Facebook to make billions selling their personal preferences, interests, and data. Canada participates with the United States and other countries in monitoring national and even global communications (“Where” para 2). Many question the usefulness of this kind of surveillance (Hier, Let, and Walby 1).However, surveillance, used non-discriminatorily, is, arguably, the key technology to preventing terrorist plots (Eijkman 1). Government surveillance is a rising global controversy; and, although minimal coverage could possibly result in safer communities, too much surveillance will result in the violation of citizen’s privacy.
Current advancements in technology has given the government more tools for surveillance and thus leads to growing concerns for privacy. The two main categories of surveillance technologies are the ones that allow the government to gather information where previously unavailable or harder to obtain, and the ones that allow the government to process public information more quickly and efficiently (Simmons, 2007). The first category includes technologies like eavesdropping devices and hidden cameras. These are clear offenders of privacy because they are capable of gathering information while being largely unnoticed. The second category would include technologies that are used in a public space, like cameras in a public park. While these devices
Privacy is a complex concept with no universal definition as its meaning changes with society. Invasion of privacy occurs when there is an intrusion upon the reasonable expectation to be left alone. There has been a growing debate about the legitimacy of privacy in public
The personal connection Americans have with their phones, tablets, and computers; and the rising popularity of online shopping and social websites due to the massive influence the social media has on Americans, it is clear why this generation is called the Information Age, also known as Digital Age. With the Internet being a huge part of our lives, more and more personal data is being made available, because of our ever-increasing dependence and use of the Internet on our phones, tablets, and computers. Some corporations such as Google, Amazon, and Facebook; governments, and other third parties have been tracking our internet use and acquiring data in order to provide personalized services and advertisements for consumers. Many American such as Nicholas Carr who wrote the article “Tracking Is an Assault on Liberty, With Real Dangers,” Anil Dagar who wrote the article “Internet, Economy and Privacy,” and Grace Nasri who wrote the article “Why Consumers are Increasingly Willing to Trade Data for Personalization,” believe that the continuing loss of personal privacy may lead us as a society to devalue the concept of privacy and see privacy as outdated and unimportant. Privacy is dead and corporations, governments, and third parties murdered it for their personal gain not for the interest of the public as they claim. There are more disadvantages than advantages on letting corporations, governments, and third parties track and acquire data to personalized services and advertisements for us.
Scrolling through my Facebook feed on my iPhone, casually looking at my friend’s pictures statuses and updates, I came across a video with an amusing title. I tapped the play button expecting the video to load. Instead, I was redirected to an app asking permission to access my “public information, pictures and more.” I then realized; what I considered to be “private information” was not private anymore. Privacy is becoming slowly nonexistent, due to the invasion of advertising companies and the information we publicly post in the online world. In the essay “The Piracy of Privacy: Why Marketers Must Bare Our Souls” by Allen D. Kanner remarks, how major companies such as Google, Yahoo and Microsoft get billions of transmissions each year on
The past decade has seen a proliferation of law enforcement security cameras in public areas, with central London having more cameras than any other city. In cities like New York, Los Angeles, and central London, cameras can be found at almost every intersection. Terrorist attacks have been a major basis for this significant increase in law enforcement security cameras; however, privacy advocates, along with many of the public, feel that it’s an invasion of privacy. People are concerned that all this video surveillance, which is continuously expanding, has created a “Big Brother” society, where people are constantly watched. This creates paranoia and unease for people that just want to go about living there private lives, without feeling that their every move is being watched. The increased presence of surveillance cameras is almost compared to George Orwell’s novel from 1984, where he imagined a future in which people would be monitored and controlled by the government. One question that needs to be asked is: does the benefits of law enforcement security cameras outweigh the negative sides to it? Although the invasion of privacy is a serious argument against law enforcement cameras; nevertheless, it should be seen as a valuable tool to help fight crime. As long as surveillance cameras are in public places and not in people's homes, privacy advocates should not be concerned.
The word “privacy” has a different meaning in our society than it did in previous times. You can put on Privacy settings on Facebook, twitter, or any social media sights, however, nothing is truly personal and without others being able to view your information. You can get to know a person’s personal life simply by typing in their name in google. In the chronicle review, “Why Privacy Matters Even if You Have ‘Nothing to Hide,'" published on May 15th 2011, Professor Daniel J. Solove argues that the issue of privacy affects more than just individuals hiding a wrong. The nothing-to-hide argument pervades discussions about privacy. Solove starts talking about this argument right away in the article and discusses how the nothing-to-hide
While many people are all about autonomous cars and the benefits that they will bring to society, there are people who oppose driver less cars. Google has faced major censure from critics that are uneasy with the method that the automobile will u...
There are an estimated 30 million surveillance cameras in the United States, proving to be a normal feature in American lives (Vlahos). This is no surprise because in the past several years, events such as the 9/11 attack and the availability of cheaper cameras have accelerated this trend. But conflicts have come with this and have ignited, concerning the safety of the people versus the violation of privacy that surveillance has. Although camera surveillance systems are intended to provide safety to the public, the violation of privacy outweighs this, especially in a democratic country like America.
Richmond, Riva. "12 Ways Technology Threatens Your Privacy (and How to Protect Yourself)." Switched. N.p., 14 May 2009. Web. 11 Mar. 2014. .
Computers can also tie information together in an impersonal and systematic way that can lead to invasions of privacy. Take for example the situation wh...
Snyder, S.. "Google Maps: An Invasion of Privacy?." Time. Time Inc., 12 June 2007. Web. 15 Apr. 2014.