Essay about Fighting Terrorism Without Invading Privacy

Technology has become very effective for a thriving generation, but it also possesses a handful of flaws that counter the benefits. Technologies help people post and deliver a message in a matter of seconds in order to get a message spread quickly. It also gives individuals the power to be the person they want to be by only showing one side of themselves. But sometimes information that had intentions of remaining protected gets out. That information is now open for all human eyes to see. This information, quite frankly, becomes everybody’s information and can be bought and sold without the individual being aware of it at all. However, this is no accident. Americans in the post 9/11 era have grown accustomed to being monitored. Government entities such as the NSA and laws such as the Patriot Act have received power to do so in order to protect security of Americans. However, the founding fathers wrote the fourth amendment to protect against violations of individual’s privacy without reason. In a rapidly growing technological world, civil liberties are increasingly being violated by privacy wiretapping from government entities such as the NSA, Patriot Act and the reduction of the Fourth Amendment.

As the late Frank Herbert once said, “Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.” Federal electronic wiretapping and supervision dates to the Wiretap Act of 1968, and has only increased in the following decades. Organizations such as the National Security Agency have been empowered by FISA (United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Courts) to bypass the authority of the Supreme Court in determining constitutional validity on searches. Government Surveillance is unjustified because it infringes upon personal freedoms, does not guarantee safety, and is not a vital necessity.

The integrity of one’s communications and privacy of online activities is the largest casualty of the National Security Agency’s (NSA) surveillance over digital lives. Years since September 11, 2009, the NSA’s mass surveillance has greatly expanded due to the heightened concern that new technology can be used by terrorists to plan and execute a terrorist attack. In today’s age of technology, there are easier ways of accessing information and communication as well as new ways of hacking and gathering personal information. The new surveillance programs and regulations are enabled by the Patriot Act and post 9/11 paranoia, but it has been over fourteen years since the incident. After whistleblower, Edward Snowden, it was revealed that the government’s mass surveillance went beyond what many considered acceptable. It can be predicted that unless the U.S Government reins in NSA mass surveillance, the

the August of 2005, the F.C.C. adopted a very important policy statement regarding net neutrality. This policy statement protects several things that are essential to anyone who frequently uses the Internet. It gives consumers the freedom to access any content and to use any application within the law. In early December, 2017, the F.C.C. voted to repeal it. However, just over half of the US states have made attempts to pass legislation that reinforces net neutrality. Net Neutrality protects American “internet freedom”, ensuring that the people can make full use of the internet and prevents Internet Service Providers from having too much control.

The article “Net neutrality is here. What it means for you” briefly describes what net neutrality is and the changes net neutrality has offered to many individuals. Net neutrality also known as network neutrality, means that many individuals are not restricted to having slower internet speeds or unauthorized access to certain applications, websites, or services meaning that the internet is open. The article describes the changes that net neutrality has brought. However, for the most part not a lot changed, many services that had been blocked before by large telephone and cable providers (ISPs) will now allow individuals to regain or gain access to blocked applications and services. Large internet services and websites like AOL, Facebook, Netflix,

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

Network Neutrality is a controversial topic that speaks about free, and open internet. Net Neutrality enables access and transparency of internet offerings and free access to services to applications, and content. Some I.S.P. companies and internet sites want to gain profit for the information they release. However, the other side of the issue focuses on title one and two of the communications act of 1994, this prohibits I.S.P. companies from showing certain websites and not at an equal speed, while having to pay for the access to information(Net Neutrality). This whole issue started in 1996, when The Telecommunications Act of 1996 inverted the original Telecommunications Act, this new act allowed for anyone to enter the communications business

Throughout the last decade, the idea of Net Neutrality has been the topic of many debates. Net Neutrality is the idea that Internet service providers should not be allowed to block their users from any content regardless of its source. The Debate is still continuing in 2017 with the F.C.C planning to repeal Net Neutrality and allow internet providers to completely regulate what their users can see and charge the users extra for “luxuries” such as social media, messaging, email, and music. There are two sides of this argument, one side believes that Net Neutrality should be taken away, while others believe that it is unfair for the Internet providers to have the right to take away the access to any content. Internet providers should not be allowed to control what content one can view when surfing the internet.

I am Aric See and I am a senior in the Weidner School of Inquiry at Plymouth High School in Plymouth Indiana. Net Neutrality is a very important issue facing the United States, with many Republican members of Congress opposing the FCC’s Open Internet Order and the reclassifying of broadband to Telecommunication Services from Information Services. The members of the GOP who are completely against the Federal Communication Commission’s (FCC) reclassification, and attempts to keep the internet free, give many reasons that are simply not true, such as the FCC’s regulations will destroy the free nature of the internet. Because of the attempts by Congressmen with the GOP to fight the regulations, many Americans, especially small business owners that use the web as a base, feel that their equality and freedoms on the internet will be

There is no doubt the privacy of our online activities and the integrity of our communications have been the biggest casualty of the NSA’s surveillance of our lives. Although ongoing revelations of government eavesdropping have had a profound impact on many different aspects in life. The NSA must balance out their interference with citizens lives because it’s undermining the government's leadership on internet safety, deteriorating internet security, and is causing economic losses to U.S. businesses due to decreasing customer trust.

Net neutrality is becoming a rising topic that could take the large community of internet users by storm. Net neutrality according to Dictionary.com is: "The principle that basic Internet protocols should be non-discriminatory." This definition by itself is very bland and leaves out many important details. I agree whole-heartedly with this idea of a truly open internet. Nobody questioned the free internet until on January 14th, 2014, a federal court of appeals opposed the Federal Communications Commission or F.C.C's "Open Internet Order." This allowed for large internet companies, such as AT&T or Comcast to discriminate against content displayed on the internet. This change could end up costing users a lot more out of their

The emergence of the Internet and the World Wide Web brought upon a medium of communication with a range of opportunities for the world. However, this medium is, in due course, subject to the control of a few major companies. The enigma of information flow is the central concern of net neutrality. Consumers, competition and network owners would benefit directly from the regulation of network neutrality because it would provide a positive impact to those parties as well as provide equality.

The concept of network neutrality (more commonly referred to as net neutrality) has been a fixture of debates over United States telecommunications policy throughout the first decade of the twenty-first century. Based upon the principle that internet access should not be altered or restricted by the Internet Service Provider (ISP) one chooses to use, it has come to represent the hopes of those who believe that the internet still has the potential to radically transform the way in which we interact with both people and information, in the face of the commercial interests of ISPs, who argue that in order to sustain a competitive marketplace for internet provision, they must be allowed to differentiate their services. Whilst this debate has

Throughout time, privacy and security have been two heavily debated topics. There has always been a struggle to find middle ground between a private environment and a secure environment, but the dawn of technology and the Internet has made this struggle even more difficult. The Internet has drastically decreased the expectation of privacy of any and all individuals that have ever used it. Technology in general can pose a threat to an individual’s physical and virtual security. The Internet has also brought forth a sense of anonymity to those looking to conceal their true identities, some of which plan to commit horrific crimes. Privacy and security go hand in hand, however security is by far the most important.

Digital privacy concerns, which have been a major issue in our country since 2001, increasingly violate our basic human rights as global citizens. The growing amount of government surveillance has manifested in the enactment of acts such as SOPA and CISPA. Although their intent on stopping digital piracy and attacks were clear, both were immediately met with harsh criticism; they allowed big corporations to violate our privacy rights by sharing our personal information with both other companies and the government. Our President, although publicly expressing his acknowledgement of the issue, failed to discuss an array of other pressing dilemmas regulated by the recently exposed National Security Agency (NSA), especially those involving