After watching four TED Talk videos about how technology affects our privacy, I have learned an uncomfortable amount of new information.
The first video I watched was of Darieth Chisolm talking about revenge porn, or another title given by Chisolm, "digital domestic abuse". Chisolm's stalking, toxic, manipulative ex-boyfriend had taken explicit photos of her while she was asleep without her knowledge or consent, and posted them on a website with Chisolm's name on it. This guy even went as far as sending a link to the website to Chisolm's ex-husband.
This video affects me, my friends, and my family, because anyone's personal information or explicit content can be posted online without warning or consent, and it is quite a hassle to get it taken down by professionals, as Chisolm discusses in the video. Photos meant to be private and not released publicly could upend careers and damage reputations. The government should find a way to wipe this type of content from the internet much quicker and have less of a waiting process for victims.
As for how we can protect ourselves from revenge porn or having our explicit photos leaked, I have been told since the start of my teenage years to rethink who I belive I trust, and to be careful who I choose to put my trust in. When I was in middle school, a group of guys in my grade leaked a girl's explicit photos without her consent and sent them around school. That taught me from a young age that absolutely no age group is safe from digital abuse or cyberbullying at such a private and sinister level.
The second video I watched was of Christopher Soghoian talking about avoiding cell phone surveillance. Soghoian brought up wiretapping, stating that the U.S. government or even a foreign government could be wiretapping and listening to what's going on on your phone. He also said that iPhone users who text other iPhone users are less likely to get wiretapped, because it would be more difficult that way. Same goes for if someone with an iPhone were to FaceTime another person with an iPhone. I was a little relieved to hear that as an iPhone user myself.
These issues affect everybody, because we live in a generation majorly ruled by technology. I cannot think of one person that I know personally who does not carry around a smartphone of some sort. We rely so heavily on these things and use them so often without thinking about the risks of who has access to them besides ourselves.
Soghoian said in the video that if the government can intercept calls from a terrorist or a drug dealer, there should not be any reason why they cannot intercept anybody's phone calls and listen in. I think the government should only wiretap when they think it is necessary, for instance, in criminal investigations or to track someone who may pose as a threat. If I had to guess, the general public probably do not have very interesting phone conversations that the government needs to eavesdrop.
Soghoian mentions that the government would have to stop wiretapping every single device, thus losing track of bad guys in the process which could be dangerous, so I know that I cannot ask the government to stop wiretapping people altogether. In order to protect ourselves from government surveillance and the possibility of our devices getting wiretapped, we as a society should aim to only use communication services and apps that are protected by encryption, such as iMessage, FaceTime, and Whatsapp.
The next video I watched involved Catherine Crump discussing that the police can track our locations. People's locations are a sensitive piece of information. The police keep a record of every license plate that passes through the location trackers, and hundreds of photos of people's cars and their whereabouts. The police can also release information from cell towers to discover who was using a specific cell tower at what time. Crump made a point to say, "just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it's not there."
These issues affect me, because I drive a car back at home and was just made aware that the police have records of all the locations I have driven to at certain times in my life and possibly photographs of my car. If the government is doing this as a safety measure to track criminal vehicles or criminal cell phones, then I guess I am not as worried. However, I still do not want the government owning this stuff about me. Crump said that local police stations can be governed by the city councils who can make laws to dispose of innocent people's locations and other data. I hope that happens.
The last video I watched was a TED talk by Juan Enriquez, comparing your online footprint to a tattoo. He referred to a quote by Andy Warhol, where Warhol theorized that in the future, people would be world-famous for only fifteen minutes. Enriquez decided to flip the theory on its side, and theorized himself that maybe in the future, people will be anonymous for only fifteen minutes due to their "electronic tattoos".
There is no such thing as digital privacy, since multiple online platforms and applications hold onto the data and information that you choose to share with them. When you post something online or enter any personal information such as interests or personal preferences, it is out there for the world to see forever.
I have heard people say the internet is forever, but I was never aware of to what extent exactly. This issue affects me and the people I love, because I and everyone I know share things online with each other. A good amount of my friends and family have Instagram, Facebook, etc and update their statuses on there frequently. The government should not be holding on to all of our data, and should get rid of it. To protect ourselves from this type of invasion of privacy, I think we need to reflect on what we should allow ourselves to post online, and start being more private with our lives on social media.
No comments:
Post a Comment