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.
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
Although they can be easily tracked, people overlook the invasion of privacy possibility because of the convenience they bring to every day life. Systems like OnStar installed in cars have made the tracking of stolen cars practically effortless. Similar tools are being used by law enforcement, Penenberg stated “cell phones have become the digital equivalent of Hansel and Gretel’s bread crumbs” (472). He then goes on to discuss how in Britain in 1996, authorities installed 300 cameras in East London. Although this didn’t affect the terrorism, it did affect the crime rate which fell 30 percent after the cameras were put into place. Penenberg closes his essay by mentioning that the surveillance is not only used to watch the citizens but also for citizens to keep an eye on the government. Through his organization, relevant information, and professional tone, Penenberg creates an effective
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.
In the Engineering and Technology Journal, two engineers, Gareth Mitchell and Guy Clapperton, gave their thoughts on both sides of the privacy issue. Is gathering information violating personal privacy? They made their arguments using currency as a metaphor for personal information and online services a product. Mitchell argues the case that giving out personal information is “too high a price to pay” (Mitchell, 2013, p. 26). He says that despite the option to opt out of cookies and certain information, many sites are more covert and make their opt out option less accessible than a pop up asking to opt out. The site makes it hard for the Internet user to say no to being tracked. Mitchell warns the reader to take more consideration into what information they are giving away and that “privacy is not to be taken for granted” (Mitchell, 2013, p. 26). Getting information from the Internet would mean tra...
We now accept the sharing and digital storage of our personal information as a necessary evil. We continue to incorporate, into our lives, technology that uses this data. Microsoft and Google are envisioning and developing ways to commercialize the use of even more of our stored personal information.
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
...n argued that by Goggle’s agreement to collaborate with the Chinese government in censoring the Internet and in its advertisement market they are violating their “don’t be evil” motto (Intelligence2, 2008). Nevertheless I agree with Esther Dyson, Jim Harper, and Jeff Jarvis that while such actions have occurred Google seeks to improve the information of people throughout the world. Google is willingly to sacrifice its interests, in this case its reputation, for the over all good of the world upholding its don’t be evil motto.
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.
“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,
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...
Google is the largest search engine across the globe, which has significantly transformed the use of the Internet as an information source. The influence of Google in Internet use as information source is evident in the fact that by June 2010, it accounted for more than 70 percent of total Internet searches in America. In addition to its success and profitability in the global market, Google is renowned as a highly ethical company as demonstrated in its corporate philosophy features. However, the firm’s behavior during the launch of its China-based search engine in 2006 generated huge skepticism from the United States government and several human rights organizations (Baker & Tang, p.2). Since the launch of Google’s Chinese search engine, the company complied with China’s censorship regulations by deciding to filter out terms that are considered politically sensitive. This decision attracted criticism from political leaders and human rights activists who accused Google of betraying its adopted ethical standards by ignoring the essence of freedom of expression and information access. As a result, Google faced a dilemma involving the clash between law and ethics. In the subsequent years, Google reacted to the dilemma by changing its rhetoric strategies in efforts to respond to the changing needs.
This report will describe the history of government regulations and FTC. How that applied to Google search and personal privacy. The changes made from the settlement between Google and the FTC, the difference Google's practices and policies from before the settlement and after the settlement, and the current demands and expectations from current and vocal Google users. The report will also draw a conclusion from the findings and will determine if additional regulations are needed or if the regulations currently in place are sufficient.
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.
Perhaps the founder of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, said it best when he claimed that privacy is no longer a “social norm.” Virtually everyone has a smart phone and everyone has social media. We continue to disclose private information willingly and the private information we’re not disclosing willingly is being extracted from our accounts anyway. Technology certainly makes these things possible. However, there is an urgent need to make laws and regulations to protect against the stuff we’re not personally disclosing. It’s unsettling to think we are living in 1984 in the 21st century.
Snyder, S.. "Google Maps: An Invasion of Privacy?." Time. Time Inc., 12 June 2007. Web. 15 Apr. 2014.