Privacy Undertood

Over the course of the past few decades, technology has been on a fast track to more advanced opportunities for communication. These developments have increased efficiency in society, however, it is evident that the basic values, such as privacy of personal information, are compromised significantly. Privacy is an essential element of a free society and without which, individuals would lose the ability to interact with one another in private. With the advancements of technology there is a clash between an individuals right to guard their personal information and the power of the cyber world to penetrate that information. Innovative technologies such as various forms of social media and surveillance are invading the freedom to said privacy.

The privacy of human being has drastically changed with the advent of internet. On a scale of 1 to 10, the privacy of an internet user is a -1 or may be less. Social Networking sites such as Facebook, MySpace etc are mainly responsible for this privacy leakage. This short paper is dedicated to review the change of privacy policy by Facebook on December 2009 and its impact on public privacy and security.

Daniel Solove, a professor who specializes in internet privacy law, wrote this book to give his personal take on how the internet was transforming the way people connect through social mediums and how that could change in the future. An important thing to note about this book is that it was published in 2007, so some of the social and technological aspects of the book are slightly dated. Regardless of this though, this book provides an inquisitive perspective on the dynamic nature of the internet as a vessel of our society’s changing norms on privacy in the social sphere. Many of our learning points in class relate to topics discussed in this book and help to strengthen the context and significance of the underlying message.

Today, individuals are sacrificing privacy in order to feel safe. These sacrifices have made a significant impact on the current meaning of privacy, but may have greater consequences in the future. According to Debbie Kasper in her journal, “The Evolution (Or Devolution) of Privacy,” privacy is a struggling dilemma in America. Kasper asks, “If it is gone, when did it disappear, and why?”(Kasper 69). Our past generation has experienced the baby boom, and the world today is witnessing a technological boom. Technology is growing at an exponential rate, thus making information easier to access and share than ever before. The rapid diminishing of privacy is leaving Americans desperate for change.

It is shown, that one of the most prominent sources that prove a danger toward privacy, is through social media, specifically Facebook. This site alone

Privacy, over the years, has become something more or less irrelevant to people. People realize every social media website, every technological gadget acquired, every email, and more, is monitored by the government or by a disturbing next-door neighbor. Yet, it is as though people ignore such possibilities and move on with life. At first, the lack of privacy was due to a safety issue- understandable. Today, although it is still for safety, people with the wrong mentality have the ability to find information that is harmful to another person.

In his paper, Fried writes that trust is bought through “moral capital” (Fried 484). This moral capital is bought by revealing information that might otherwise be kept private to a friend, loved one, or individual whose trust the informer would like to gain. Moral capital is the trust that an individual will treat another with morality meaning, according to Fried, that they will“[respect] the basic rights of the other” (Fried 479). Fried also states that, “There can be no trust where there is no possibility of error,” suggesting that without privacy there can be no trust as privacy creates the risk of confidential information being disclosed by the receiver of said information (Fried 486). The idea that privacy creates trust has only become more evident with the rise of the internet. In their paper, “Young people online and the social value of privacy,” George Mason University professor Priscilla Regan and University of Ottawa professor Valerie Steeves explore how young people’s understanding and value of privacy has been shaped by the internet. The two found that while young people understand that information posted on the internet can be viewed by family members and the public, they trust that others will follow the unwritten social rules of the internet–essentially that they will act with morality–and respect their privacy by not looking at posts not directed at them (Regan and Steeves 302). This example shows that despite the interconnectedness

On April 21, 2000, Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) has come into effect[3]. This law states that no information about children under the age of 13 may be collected without prior parents’ consent[4]. Theoretically, the law only allows the data to be used as described to the parent. In practice, however, it does not prevent the operator (i.e. the collector of the information) from using the data in any way they like – so long as they mention the way of using the data. The reason for that is that many parents do not read the agreement, and in some instances, the child accessing the website is asked whether they have their parents’ permission, to which they just answer “yes” without actually checking in with their parent or legal guardian. It is partially due to those reasons that some companies have started overcompensating for the law; for instance, AOL has disabled accounts for all users that have specified that they are less than 13 years of age[5]. Currently, the service is “restricted” to 13-and-over users, which, as already

However, for some teenagers, even adults users, identity management poses a threat for their privacy. In a series of case study by Mary and Aaron (2010) reveals that the majority of SNS users(77%) have altered their privacy setting. At the mean time, it is also the case that only 6% users have bad experiences owing to their privacy exposure, which causes them feel embarrassed. Moreover, there are 12% social networking users feeling regret the content that they have posted and shared. As a result of analyzing case study, there are increasing number of people realized the significance of identity management on social networking sites. In the view of the

The words, “Arguing that you don’t care about privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don’t care about free speech because you have nothing to say” were said by Edward Snowden who is a computer professional in America. Similarly, the essays “Tracking Is an Assault on Liberty,” “Web Users Get as Much as They Give,” and “Facebook Is Using You” from Nicholas Carr, Jim Harper, and Lori Andrews respectively points out that the internet privacy is good and bad. However, the articles by Carr and Andrews are based on the negative side of the internet privacy, which means that the internet privacy is not good. On the other hand, Harper’s article is based on the positive side of the internet privacy, which means that the internet privacy is good and scary, but people need to be careful of their own information and browsing histories, and websites. Jim Harper’s essay is more relevant and reasonable than the Nicholas Carr and Lori Andrews’s essays. However, Harper seems more persuasive to readers because he believes that the internet is good if people use it in a right way, whereas Carr and Andrews believe that the internet is not good at all.

We share our feelings, exact locations, and activities so easily through means of social media. These types of posts generally give away too much personal information which can further result in safety issues. Privacy isn’t such a big deal for teenagers now. They don’t realize the implications that comes with posting all of their life details.. This is where privacy needs to be of greater demand to keep children’s lives and secrets safe.

With the advent of mobile phones, iPad and other smart technology, accessing information across the web has become very easy. You can sit at home and pay your phone bills, or talk to someone from across the world. Along with these benefits, it has also become easier to get access to information that would otherwise be restricted. In recent years, debates have taken place regarding the concern of the privacy of information that is uploaded on the internet, or that is taken from it. This research paper aims at comparing the controversies that surround the concept of privacy in the digital age.

Social Media is a current way in which people are using to interact with one another daily. Since the launch of various Social Networking Sites (SNS) its been a huge attraction in a new way to share information with others and correspond with interests of your choice in many different forms. Although social media sites allow users to share information with friends and other sites on the internet, many people are unaware of how their privacy is getting out. Now that the expansion of global connection through these social media networking sites are so highly present in todays society, giving us easy access to information, the lack of one's privacy is being diminished. Everyday peoples privacy rights are

Privacy concerns on the web have become an undesirable consequence that people face with cyber technology. The ability of computers to gather and store unlimited amount of information from the internet raises privacy issues concerning an individual’s informational privacy. A person’s right to informational privacy is the ability to control the flow of their personal information, including the transfer and exchange of that information. An invasion of informational privacy denies people the right to control who accesses their personal information. Many internet users are unaware that they are more likely to compromise their privacy when using the internet services such as search engines and social networking sites. The internet provides access to an incredible amount of information from all over the world. Some internet users use the internet exclusively as a source of information while other internet users use the internet to create and disseminate information for others to use. However, the vast amount of information floating on the internet would not

As a teenager, receiving one’s very first cell phone is the first step in establishing “popularity.” Tweeting, texting, Instagram-ing and publishing life’s “fails” and funnies are the teen social norm and staple to the lines of communication between other teens. Creativity is put to the test when language is turned into code (wyd, rotflmbo, ie.) and electronic communication between people sitting across the table from each other becomes a matter of national security. A peaceful co-existence between adults and teens continues as long as “actual” communication between both parties is kept to a minimum. But somewhere along the way, the secret behind the codes was made public, and parents everywhere were now able to decipher and share the coded information that was not [originally] meant for the rest of the world—communicational anarchy ensued. In the same manner, personal information not meant for the whole world can cause problems in the lives of those whose information is shared. The right to collect and share information should be limited to specific government programs or for specific purposes such as, Family Watchdog and the United States Department of Justice National Sex Offender Public Website (NSOPW), but not shared beyond that. In order to better understand the differences between American privacy and American security, we must first take a look at these three factors: whose information is being obtained or accessed, what and how is the