Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Surveillance technology
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Surveillance technology
Sharing Information in The Information Age
It is true that the world is no longer run by weapons. All over the world there is almost always a computer which controls, or participates in a daily task. Daily tasks which can range from the simple renting of a video, to controlling the systems of a Collins Class submarine. However, the extent of which society should rely on these machines and their information has often been debated. And with the spawn of the Internet comes the very sensitive issue of privacy. The “Big Brothers” of the world, who rely on information, seem to encroach on everyone’s privacy, yet the tolerance of such encroachments is left up to personal opinion.
But when exactly should people draw the line? The ideal is that all people will realise when they hand out their most intimate details, therefore only providing the information to secure locations. But while the responsibility is placed on the honest citizen never to reveal their information, the companies, organisations, and even governments are only trusted to “do the right thing”. In fact, the Freedom of Information Act created by the Australian government states that by law, statistics such as criminal records are free to be viewed by the general public. This not only removes privacy, but also adds an element of danger. On many occasions, vigilante groups have wreaked havoc on the lives of criminals (mostly pedophiles), simply because their criminal history had been publicly broadcast. In the past year alone, a British newspaper made the regrettable decision of printing names and addresses of known pedophiles in the local area, sparking numbers of acts of vandalism and assault on those who’s identities were revealed. Even a man, who was mistakenly labelled as a pedophile, was bashed and robbed as a result of the publications. While at the same time, police in Australia had already begun the launch of “Crimenet”, an internet-based database which provided once private criminal information to who ever was willing to pay for it. Fortunately, the database was removed from the Internet after it was found that members of juries were accessing information on the database, creating an unfair bias against the defendant.
But even though these issues have been dealt with, there is no way of policing the trade of information in places such as the Internet.
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
Edward Snowden is America’s most recent controversial figure. People can’t decide if he is their hero or traitor. Nevertheless, his leaks on the U.S. government surveillance program, PRISM, demand an explanation. Many American citizens have been enraged by the thought of the government tracing their telecommunication systems. According to factbrowser.com 54% of internet users would rather have more online privacy, even at the risk of security (Facts Tagged with Privacy). They say it is an infringement on their privacy rights of the constitution. However, some of them don’t mind; they believe it will help thwart the acts of terrorists. Both sides make a good point, but the inevitable future is one where the government is adapting as technology is changing. In order for us to continue living in the new digital decade, we must accept the government’s ability to surveil us.
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.
Computers, tablets, cellphones and all modern tenchnology has decrease our expectations of privacy in this digital age. People don't care anyone for their privacy, they only want the benefits that modern technology has brought to them. In the essay, “Privacy is Overrated” by David Plotz (2003), argues that it is sometimes good to be open and not be bother by privacy. In Jack Shafer's (2010) essay, “The Invasion of the Cookie Monster” he argues that we are the ones to be blame for the lost of our online privacy. The didgital age has created an extremely big problem of privacy for people.
The Information Age has emerged with speed, excitement, and great promise. The electronic eyes and ears of technology follow us everywhere. There are those enamored with the rush of technology, who b elieve that the best of worlds is one in which everyone can peer into everyone else's lives. In fact, we now live in a world consumed with "the ecstacy of communication" (Karaim 76). Americans line up to reveal their darkest secrets of their m ost intimate moments, or just "hang out their dirty laundry" on the numerous television talk shows. The more exposure, the better. So it may be absurd that we should worry that our privacy is being endangered, our personal life and even our se crets made public. The loss of privacy is on the fast track, and the high-tech Information Age is a willing conspirator. Somebody, somewhere, may know something about you that you'd prefer to keep private: how much you earn a year, what you paid for yo ur car or house, whether you've had certain diseases, what your job history is. Your medical, financial, consumer, and employment records are in computers and may be flying through cyberspace without your knowledge or consent.
Part of the allure of the Internet has always been the anonymity it offers its users. As the Internet has grown however, causing capitalists and governments to enter the picture, the old rules are changing fast. E-commerce firms employ the latest technologies to track minute details on customer behavior. The FBI's Carnivore email-tracking system is being increasingly used to infringe on the privacy of netizens. Corporations now monitor their employees' web and email usage. In addition to these privacy infringements, Internet users are also having their use censored, as governments, corporations, and other institutions block access to certain sites. However, as technology can be used to wage war on personal freedoms, it can also be employed in the fight against censorship and invasion of privacy.
When George Orwell’s epic novel 1984 was published in 1949 it opened the public’s imagination to a future world where privacy and freedom had no meaning. The year 1984 has come and gone and we generally believe ourselves to still live in “The Land of the Free;” however, as we now move into the 21st Century changes brought about by recent advances in technology have changed the way we live forever. Although these new developments have seamed to make everyday life more enjoyable, we must be cautious of the dangers that lie behind them for it is very possible that we are in fact living in a world more similar to that of 1984 than we would like to imagine.
Ever since day one, people have been developing and creating all sorts of new methods and machines to help better everyday life in one way or another. Who can forget the invention of the ever-wondrous telephone? And we can’t forget how innovative and life-changing computers have been. However, while all machines have their positive uses, there can also be many negatives depending on how one uses said machines, wiretapping in on phone conversations, using spyware to quietly survey every keystroke and click one makes, and many other methods of unwanted snooping have arisen. As a result, laws have been made to make sure these negative uses are not taken advantage of by anyone. But because of how often technology changes, how can it be known that the laws made so long ago can still uphold proper justice? With the laws that are in place now, it’s a constant struggle to balance security with privacy. Privacy laws should be revised completely in order to create a better happy medium between security and privacy. A common misconception of most is that a happy medium of privacy and security is impossible to achieve. However, as well-said by Daniel Solove, “Protecting privacy doesn’t need to mean scuttling a security measure. Most people concerned about the privacy implications of government surveillance aren’t arguing for no[sic] surveillance and absolute privacy. They’d be fine giving up some privacy as long as appropriate controls, limitations, oversight and accountability mechanisms were in place.”(“5 Myths about Privacy”)
In keeping within current legislation on the protection and respect of an individuals’ right of anonymity, (Clamp, Gough and Land 2004; Polit and Beck 2007), and to confidentiality, (Burns and G...
The world erupted in outrage following revelations by Edward Snowden regarding the extent of surveillance perform by the National Security Agency. Privacy becomes one of the hottest topic of 2013 and was chosen by the world’s most popular online dictionary, Dictionary.com, as the Word of the Year. However, the government is not the only one that conduct data gathering and surveillance. Employers often monitor their employees, and businesses collect data on theirs customer. The morality of these practices is a topic that generates heated debate.
As discussed, there are several ethical issues which are confronted by criminologist. However, researchers and criminologists may need to procure new methods to respond to them. Notably, Internet based research poses great problems in verifying the identities and status of participants (British Psychological Society, 2007). The Economic and Social Research Council states that information held in a public domain is not subject to scrutiny by research ethics committee. To enumerate, information gathered through public websites are not considered to be data collection. However, personal emails within a closed chat room or connection are likely to be interpreted as private. Furthermore, the use of data from such websites would generally require the informed consent of
As technology as advanced, so has our society. We are able to accomplish many tasks much easier, faster, and in effective ways. However, if looked at the harmful impact it has had on the society, one can realize that these are severe and really negative. One of the main concerns is privacy rights. Many people want that their information and personal data be kept in secrecy, however with today’s technology, privacy is almost impossible. No matter how hard one tries, information being leaked through technological advancements have become more and more common. With personal information being leaked, one does not know exactly how the information will be used, which validates the statement that privacy rights have been diminishing and should be brought to concern. Many people do not realize that their information is being used by third-parties and to consumer companies. In conclusion, technology has had a significant effect on privacy
As technology penetrates society through Internet sites, smartphones, social networks, and other modes of technology, questions are raised as the whether lines are being crossed. People spend a vast majority of their time spreading information about themselves and others through these various types of technology. The problem with all these variations is that there is no effective way of knowing what information is being collected and how it is used. The users of this revolutionary technology cannot control the fate of this information, but can only control their choice of releasing information into the cyber world. There is no denying that as technology becomes more and more integrated into one’s life, so does the sacrificing of that person’s privacy into the cyber world. The question being raised is today’s technology depleting the level of privacy that each member of society have? In today’s society technology has reduced our privacy due to the amount of personal information released on social networks, smartphones, and street view mapping by Google. All three of these aspects include societies tendency to provide other technology users with information about daily occurrences. The information that will be provided in this paper deals with assessing how technology impacts our privacy.
John C. Dvorak, author of “Privacy and Social Media”, argues about how many people are so unconcerned with their privacy. He states, “This amuses me because it seems as if the majority of Facebook users don't even know about or care about the privacy settings” (Dvorak). This argument of definition brings up the debate of the multiple definitions of privacy. For example, an individual who applies to Dvorak’s statement might have a definition of privacy as something very open and simple. However, someone else who may be applying for jobs may think of privacy as a much more serious concept. Therefore, the debate over what is “private” information means nothing due to the fact that everyone’s definition of privacy is different. Once everybody agrees on a worldwide definition of privacy then this issue can be debated and solved
Today is an era of information explosion. In the past few years, many newly invented technological devices and software are now tightly integrated with our everyday lives. Today, people can look up almost any kind of information, make friends, communicate with others, and express ourselves with the simple touch of a button on a device we usually keep within arm’s reach. “Widespread use of technology is changing the way we work, learn, and communicate – even the way we carry out our regular, daily activities.”(Seifer and Mihalynuk) These devices not only benefit our livelihoods and increase our happiness, but they are also integral in advancing education, technology, development, and, in general, human evolution. The children of today, who have been raised in this era of information explosion, will undoubtedly reap such benefits and, in turn, advance society towards a better generation.