Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The importance of internet security to computer
The importance of internet security to computer
Internet privacy controversy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The importance of internet security to computer
How Much Does Internet Privacy Matter?
Thesis: Is the government watching online activity really warranted?
In this current day and age, there’s a lot of disagreement about the level of privacy one has on the Internet. With the government able to see things such as your credit card records, employment records, and more, it can be tempting to dismiss the entire idea of allowing the government to “spy” on Americans. In Daniel J. Solove’s paper “Why Privacy Matters Even if You Have ‘Nothing to Hide’” explores the issue of how the government uses the Internet to watch Americans and what they do while online. Solove states “In many instances, hardly anyone will see the information, and it won't be disclosed to the public.” So one must decide why it’s so important that the government watches online activity and whether or not it’s needed to the extreme that the government
…show more content…
Protecting America is a lifelong job, not just for the government, but for America’s people as well. The Patriot Act that allows the government to monitor the Internet is not without flaws. It is still a violation of privacy, but it is one that many were willing to give up in those days following the 9/11 attacks. When America was at her most vulnerable, laws were established in the hopes of never having it happen again. Looking at the Patriot Act as unconstitutional is both right and wrong. The biggest problem with the Patriot Act is that it is not a black and white matter. It is gray in its simplest and truest form. Without it, who knows how many terrorists may have gotten inside our borders. Without the Patriot Act that allows the spying on millions of Americans by the government, who knows how many violent acts like 9/11 may have taken place. The argument about Internet privacy comes down to one point: How far are you willing to let the government go to keep you and your loved ones
The Patriot Act violates many of the amendments in the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment, for example, gives American citizens freedom of speech, press, and religion. The Patriot Act allows the government to monitor the religious and political papers and institutions of citizens that are not even reasonable suspects for criminal activity. Church,
“Many opponents have come to see the patriot act as a violation of the fourth amendment to the U. S constitution.” (Belanger, Newton 2). The side effect of the patriot act is that it weakens many rights. This act weakens the fourth amendment which is our privacy protection. The fourth amendment allows citizens to be protected from unreasonable searches without a warrant. The police search suspects mainly because of their race or ethnic group.
Whether the U.S. government should strongly keep monitoring U.S. citizens or not still is a long and fierce dispute. Recently, the debate became more brutal when technology, an indispensable tool for modern live, has been used by the law enforcement and national security officials to spy into American people’s domestic.
It is a well-distinguished fact that the government loves using surveillance – a surveillance’s easy accessibility, regardless of the threat they pose, verifies the government’s love. Surveillance is a part of the government’s life. According to ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union), just six weeks after the September 11 attacks, the government passed quite a lot of legislative acts, such as the USA/Patriot Act, that would allow the government to watch doubtful actions. The act was a revision of the nation's surveillance laws that allowed the government's authority to spy on the citizens. The Patriot Act made it easier for the system to gain access to records of citizens' actions being held by a third party. Similarly, Section 215 of the Patriot Act allowed the FBI to force many people - including doctors, libraries, bookstores, universities, and Internet service providers - to turn in information on their clients (“Surveillance Under the USA PATRIOT Act”).
“Human beings are not meant to lose their anonymity and privacy,” Sarah Chalke. When using the web, web users’ information tend to be easily accessible to government officials or hackers. In Nicholas Carr’s “Tracking Is an Assault on Liberty,” Jim Harpers’ “Web Users Get As Much As They Give,” and Lori Andrews “Facebook is Using You” the topic of internet tracking stirred up many mixed views; however, some form of compromise can be reached on this issue, laws that enforces companies to inform the public on what personal information is being taken, creating advisements on social media about how web users can be more cautious to what kind of information they give out online, enabling your privacy settings and programs, eliminating weblining,
The breath-taking expansion of police power that the United States government took after 9/11 now poses as a troubling issue. Americans need to address the issues of government surveillance because it affects t...
Adam Penenberg’s “The Surveillance Society” reminds Americans of the tragic events of September 11, 2001 and the instant effects the that attacks on the World Trade Center had on security in the United States. Penenberg discusses how the airports were shut down and federal officials began to plot a military response. Although those were necessary actions, they were not as long lasting as some of the other safety precautions that were taken. The Patriot Act, which makes it easier for the government to access cell phones and pagers and monitor email and web browsing, was proposed. Politicians agreed that during a war civil liberties are treated differently. From there, Penenberg explains that for years before September 11th, Americans were comfortable with cameras monitoring them doing everyday activities.
Despite all the controversy and disagreements, most of the populous would agree that on an individual level, privacy is our space to be ourselves as well as to define ourselves through autonomy and protecting our dignity. Our interactions with others can define the level of our relationships with them through the amount of privacy we can afford in the relationship. As we age and immerse ourselves into society, we gain a sense of confidence and security from our privacy. A sense that others know only what we tell them and we know only what they tell us in exchange. What we fear is what others can access and what they might do if they knew of our vulnerabilities. Maintaining and keeping our vulnerable aspects private, we develop a false sense of personal safety from the outside.
Taylor, James Stacey. "In Praise of Big Brother: Why We Should Learn to Stop Worrying and Love Government Surveillance." Public Affairs Quarterly July 2005: 227-246.
The government gives each American citizen a set of unalienable rights that protect them from the government’s power. These rights cannot be broken, yet the government violates the Fourth Amendment daily to find ways to spy on the American public under the guise of protecting against terrorism. In 2007 President Obama said the American administration “acts like violating civil liberties is the way to enhance our securities – it is not.” Americans need to understand that their privacy is worth the fight. The people need to tell their neighbors, their congressmen, and their senators that they will not allow their internet privacy to be violated by needless spying. American citizens deserve the rights given to them and need to fight for the right to keep them by changing privacy laws to include Internet privacy.
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”). The fight for privacy rights is by no means a recent conflict.
Cookies play a significant role in our daily life, it brings lots of convenient when we use website. However, many people afraid that it will leak our privacy at the same time as it convenient to us. Although cookies are controversial, there is nothing wrong with them. The data collectors should take responsibility to protect users’ information, also users should be aware and careful when they use the website.
However, government agencies, especially in America, continue to lobby for increased surveillance capabilities, particularly as technologies change and move in the direction of social media. Communications surveillance has extended to Internet and digital communications. law enforcement agencies, like the NSA, have required internet providers and telecommunications companies to monitor users’ traffic. Many of these activities are performed under ambiguous legal basis and remain unknown to the general public, although the media’s recent preoccupation with these surveillance and privacy issues is a setting a trending agenda.
Today, many web sites on the internet can use "cookies" to keep track of passwords and usernames and track the sites a particular user visits (Cookiecentral.com). But, the use of cookies to track user's browsing habits is becoming a concern of many internet users. These concerned people are beginning to think of cookies as an invasion of privacy. Companies with web sites can use cookies to track what sites you visit frequently and then select specific ad banners to send to you on the web while surfing (Cookiecentral.com). Electronic Frontier Foundation's program director, Stanton McCandlish points out, "The potential problem is that companies without a sense of ethics could be doing [the] same thing and selling addresses to offline marketers" (news.cnet.com). The government should realize the hazards of internet cookies and enforce a ban on their use.
A major reason the U.S. needs to increase restrictions on the type and amount of data collected on individuals from the internet is due to the fact that the United States government can track communications and browsing histories of private citizens without warrant or cause. After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, ...