Privacy vs Security Of The World Wide Web

Source: http://disruptiveviews.com/nsa-vs-peoples-privacy-the-game-commences/

Some believe that security of the individual and country overrides the importance of privacy. Agree or Disagree?

We as a group would have to disagree as we believe that security of the individual and country shouldn’t override the importance of privacy among the society. It is crossing the border where our private lives are being discovered openly. A recent research says about a total of 60% disagree that the government should spy on its citizen. There is a line between spying on citizens to find out who’s the enemy, terrorists and non suspicious people. Thus to a certain extent the society should keep certain details private and confidential. Moreover, the government has no right to invade the people’s privacy as what they have done. We as citizens, should have the human entitlement of freedom and increase in security to prevent our private details being observed by someone who is proficient at computers, especially the hobbyist.

According to Human Rights Act, everyone has the right to respect for his/her private and family life, his/her home and correspondence. Most importantly, personal details are meant to be kept private with tight security. However, in today’s world, technology is advancing into a new level where hackers can easily infiltrate people’s privacy and data. This resulted a rise of insecurity feeling in people, causing them more defensive when their personal details are required. With the reports of hacking done by professional hackers, the government should take immediate action in tracing these people instead of the whole community. Therefore, spying on blameless residents obviously ruptures this understanding and is totally uncalled for to general society. In our opinion, we wouldn’t feel safe with the way that our private life could be uncovered at any given minute. For example, the government has a system in the computers where our important details are safely kept. This would put our safety at great risk professional hackers locate the date and utilise it against any one of us. As pointed out in the case of Edward Snowden revealing the NSA's misuse of public information is extremely daunting how emotionless and casual individuals view this sort of security interruption. Many people would just shrug it off saying that they do not have anything to stow away, however they do not undertand the fact the no on bargain should be made on common freedom. Notwithstanding, what vast majority don’t think seriously about this certainty is that it is not up to us to decide whether or not we have something to stow away. It relies upon when, how and whom the principles are changed. For instance, having been hitched to a Jew was no issue in the Weimar republic (1918-1933). In addition, the Nazis then changed the law in 1935. A possible sample for our time period could be the legislature concerning the financial circumstance chooses to prelude the private ownership of Gold (which they have done before “Crisis Banking Act” 1933). What’s more is at the end of the day you might have something to cover up hence, don’t lose your second trust or you won’t have anything to cover up.

Don't you individuals understand that these common freedoms should PROTECT YOURSELF FROM the Government. Also, it is the Government of all organizations you are surrendering these valuable rights to.

Benjamin Franklin once said, "The individuals who surrender opportunity for security won't have, nor do they merit, either one." We have turned out to be paranoid to the point where we permit our apprehensions to take control over us. As a country, we choose that guiding a weapon at every potential terrorist is superior to anything keeping up our rights as subjects. In the event that we permit our freedoms to be torn from us so effortlessly in view of our suspicion and self-satisfied lack of awareness, it won't be long until we surrender our right to speak freely for the “greater good”. For example, the most ghastly illustration was the point at which the U.S incomparable Court maintained the internment of Japanese Americans and the Second World War in light the fact that the legislature asserted they were a security danger. It took Congress approximately 50 years to endeavor to amend that awful feeling. The question is did we learn anything? We anxious not. Today, with this unending war on terrorism our administration has made strides again to drastically encroach on the privilege to direct sensible inquiry and seizure, the privilege to a fast and reasonable trial and other principal freedoms; inspired by the fear of losing our security. In the end, we see that the U.S. incomparable Court will subject these encroachments to genuine established examination. Most of the courts have verifiably respected wartime apprehensions and cases that our security intrigues would be imperiled. It was finished a little then later when they did the nation lamented the way that it had deserted the Constitution. However, the war on terrorism is distinctive. It’s a war on an old thought where one that has been utilized for hundreds, if not thousand of years. It is a frightfully damaging thought, yet history has demonstrated that you can’t execute a thought, but, by slaughtering the individuals who have it you could execute or supplant a thought by thinking of a superior one.

Consider 9/11! The NSA has been around since the frosty war, and consolidated with observation programs far and wide under the UKUSA settlement, it has been keeping an eye on the natives of the western world for a considerable length of time. The main question is why has it neglected to secure against the terrorist assaults? On and off the chance that it ceases to secure against dangers ordinary, why do we never find out about it? It may get a few terrorists, however, you can't get every one of them by reconnaissance. Not to say that it doesn't work, but rather that it doesn't act and ought to. The administration rather spend the billions of dollars to enhance instruction to fortify individuals' psyches with the goal that they don't fall prey to the unsafe belief systems of savage terrorist associations. However, the greatest predator is the government, with all its propaganda. For example, NSA uses three different programs to collect Gmail user data. These programs are based on three different technical eavesdropping capabilities where they rely on three different legal authorities. In addition, this also happens during phone calls, records, Internet tabs and cell phone location data. NSA also continues to lie about its capabilities, It hides behind tortured interpretations of words like “collect”, “incidentally”, “target” and “directed”. This cloaks the programs in multiple code names to obscure their full extend and capabilities. Officials testify that a certain particular surveillance activity is not done under one particular program or authority, however, conveniently omitting that is done under other programs or authority.

Taking a stand all in all, with the chosen side being that the so call security measures that the government takes which invades our privacy through the internet is unethical and morally wrong due to the fact that we as citizens have human rights where our lives should not be involved with the government. Therefore we have viewed that it is only an excuse or gateway to spy on our actions. The Government should not lock away our freedom and privacy. We as humans find the need to express ourselves, and sometime we need a little private time for our selves. Nevertheless, the Government should respect its citizens' privacy. Changes in the law should be made to increase the nation's security and efforts should be made to hunt down and punish cybercriminals. Therefore, we should be fully aware of the consequences before sharing our personal details concerning our families and ourselves to prevent any further problems in the future.

References:

Debate.org, (2015) Should governments spy on their citizens?. Available from: http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-governments-spy-on-their-citizens [Accessed 13 November 2015].

Debate.org, (2015) Should the government be able to spy on its citizens?. Available from: http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-the-government-be-able-to-spy-on-its-citizens [Accessed 5 November 2015].

Franchini, G. (2003) What Fear is Doing to Our Freedoms. Available from: http://www.vlrc.org/articles/126.html [Accessed 7 November 2015].

Schneier, B. (2014) How the NSA Threatens National Security - Schneier on Security. Available from: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2014/01/how_the_nsa_thr.html [Accessed 6 November 2015].

Sterner, E. (2014) The security vs. privacy debate is already over, and privacy lost. Available from: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/the-security-vs.-privacy-debate-is-already-over-and-privacy-lost/article/2545407 [Accessed 5 November 2015].

Editor: Zoriff

Writers: Xin Ying and Christianna Pillay

Researchers: Annie Gan and Sanmantha