CISC280 project 6

docx

School

Northampton County Area Community College *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

280

Subject

Computer Science

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by UltraTurtle1405

CISC280 - Project 6 1. Here is a summary of an argument presented by Canadian author Robert Sawyer in a promotion for one of his science fiction novels. (The argument includes a disclaimer that it is not necessarily Sawyer’s personal view.) Who needs privacy? With no privacy there would be far less crime and much less terrorism, and everyone would be safer. The only reason we desire privacy is that society has passed “silly laws” that in the past have made people feel ashamed for being nude or engaging in “natural human activities.” Perhaps Victorians had a reason for hiding certain activities, but “who really cares today if someone is gay, smokes pot, or watches porno films?. . . The message of history, most spectacularly driven home on September 11, 2001, is that preserving society as a whole is much more important than preserving an illusory personal freedom.” It’s unrealistic to pretend we can still have privacy in the modern world. Instead, we should demand the repeal of those obsolete laws trying to prohibit harmless conduct [106]. Do you agree with this argument? Why or why not? As someone who witnessed the destruction on 9/11 firsthand and who has relatives who experienced things that day that no one should ever have to experience, I can certainly see the merits in this argument. I might be inclined to agree with this argument ONLY if it were to be carried out clear across the board, with no exceptions made based on race, color, creed, sexual orientation, etc. After 9/11, certain races, skin tones, and religions were specifically targeted, while others pretty much got a free pass. My stepmother is Syrian. She was told to “go back to where you came from.” (Her response was, “Bay Ridge?”) Meanwhile, I was allowed to walk right up to the gate at a terminal at EWR without a boarding pass to meet my then-boyfriend flying in from a job meeting, no questions asked – even though Flight 93 took off from EWR. However, I’m not a fan of living in an Oceania-like world. Big Brother is watching you; it’s doubleplusungood. I agree that privacy is, for the most part, an illusion in today’s world. It is EXTREMELY difficult to go completely off-grid. You can turn off your location information on your phone, use a VPN while online, wear a disguise in public so cameras can’t see your face, and it is still possible for you to be identified and tracked. Our phones, tablets, and laptops are unlocked with facial recognition and fingerprints for “convenience.” The latest iOS update allows facial recognition to work when wearing a mask, which makes me wonder if now retinal scans are being used as well. You can disable Siri on your phone, but your phone is still listening. Have your phone nearby but no apps open, mention a product, then either go on Facebook and check out the suggested ads or go to Google and start typing the first few letters of the thing you were talking about – it will be the first suggested autocomplete item. “Frequent shopper” cards track your spending habits and sell your info to third-party companies, who then send you unsolicited ads either by email, text, or mail. 2. A database containing the DNA information of every citizen of a country could be a valuable resource to medical researchers. It could also help police solve crimes. Consider the following proposition: It would be in the best interests of society if the government constructed a DNA

CISC280 - Project 6 database of every resident and made the database available to medical researchers and police agencies. Do you agree or disagree? Why? I do not agree with this because employers running background checks on potential employees would be able to find out whether you have any chronic illnesses, such as cancer or diabetes, and may deny you employment based on your medical history. People with pre-existing conditions cost more to insure, and companies don’t want the extra expenditure. 3. What special responsibilities do you think computer professionals have with respect to understanding and protecting the privacy rights of their fellow citizens as it pertains to government surveillance? I think computer professionals have a moral and ethical obligation to ensure that the government doesn’t overstep their boundaries and violate state and federal laws. If an IT professional knows that the government is using, say, private social media posts or private messages to monitor citizens, they should speak up and refuse to comply. They should, as the late senator and civil rights activist John Lewis said, “get in good trouble , necessary trouble.” 4. Florida, Missouri, Ohio, and Oklahoma have passed laws that require lifetime monitoring of some convicted sex offenders after they have been released from prison. The offenders must wear electronic ankle bracelets and stay close to small GPS transmitters, which can be carried on a belt or in a purse. Computers monitor the GPS signals and alert law enforcement officials if the offenders venture too close to a school or other off-limits area. Police interested in the whereabouts of a monitored person can see location, traveling direction, and speed plotted on a map.  Do these laws represent an unacceptable weakening of personal privacy, or are they sensible public safety measures? They are sensible public safety measures that should be enacted everywhere, not just in a select few states.  Should they be repealed? Absolutely NOT.  Should people convicted of other crimes also be monitored for life? It depends on the crime. If you stole formula or a coat for your child, then no. If you were 18 and had consensual sex with a 16- year-old, then no. If you’ve committed violent offenses that were not in self-defense, then yes.  Would there be less crime if everyone in society were monitored? Probably, but I don’t think the trade-off of personal freedom is worth the possibility of less crime. 5. When asked about Google releasing personal information to law enforcement agencies, Google’s CEO Eric Schmidt said, “If you have something that you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it in the first place.” Discuss this perspective; do you agree or not and why. This thought process is the same as people who say, “if you’re not hiding anything, what’s the harm of allowing police to search your house or car?” Law enforcement agencies are, as a whole, notoriously corrupt. (And I say this with my aunt being a retired NYPD sergeant and my cousin being an NYPD officer.) I don’t want law enforcement knowing my every move, where

CISC280 - Project 6 and on what I choose to spend my money, what I have in my car, to whom I talk to on my phone, what I post on social media, etc. I have nothing to hide, but if law enforcement wants to search my stuff or enter my own private domicile, they better have a warrant. For me, it’s more a matter of making them abide by the very laws they’re supposed to be enforcing. I’ve had firsthand experience with police trying to overstep their boundaries. An old neighbor of mine had OD’d and was being put in the back of an ambulance just as her 7-year-old daughter was getting off the schoolbus. I brought her to my house and let her stepdad know where she was. He consented to me keeping her until things got sorted out. A few hours later, I got a knock at my door. A policeman and a social worker were there, and the LEO asked, “Mind if I come in?” as he stepped over the threshold of the door. I said, “Actually, I do. So unless you have a warrant, get the f*** out of my house. You’re free to stand right outside my door for as long as it takes to have the warrant delivered. You can sit in your car. Hell, I’ll make you coffee if you’d like. But you cannot come into my house without a warrant.” He got the warrant, and they came inside. I knew exactly what they were there for – to take the girl into child protective custody – but I wanted them to do it right. She wasn’t in immediate danger and there was no reason that the officer had to violate my rights. 6. How did the position of the US Supreme Court toward wiretapping evolve over time? Cite the key cases. In Olmstead v. United States, the Supreme Court (in a 5-4 decision) ruled that Roy Olmstead’s Fourth Amendment rights were not violated because the Fourth Amendment protected tangible assets alone. The federal agents wiretapped Mr. Olmstead’s phone; they did not search a physical place, nor did they seize a physical item. Hence, the Fourth Amendment’s provision against warrantless search and seizure did not apply. In 1934, Congress passed the Federal Communications Act, which (among other things) made it illegal to intercept and reveal wire communications. Three years later, the Supreme Court used the Federal Communications Act to reverse its position on warrantless wiretaps. In Nardone v. United States, the court ruled that evidence obtained by federal agents from warrantless wiretaps was inadmissible in court. In another decision, Weiss v. United States, it ruled that the prohibition on wiretapping applied to intrastate as well as interstate telephone calls. Subsequently, the attorney general announced that the FBI would cease wiretapping. Decades later, the FBI placed a bug on a public telephone booth which Charles Katz used to place bets; Katz was consequently found guilty of illegal gambling. In the 1967 case Charles Katz v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Katz, with Justice Potter Stewart writing, “the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places,” and stated that what a person “seeks to preserve as private, even in an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected.” 7. Give three examples of how information collected by a government for one purpose has been used for an entirely different purpose.  Information from the 1940 Census was secretly used to locate Japanese American citizens and place them in internment camps during WWII after the bombing of Pearl Harbor.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

CISC280 - Project 6  Population and demographic information gathered from the Census contributes to gerrymandering, which manipulates the balance of power in Congress and state legislatures by allowing elected officials to choose their voters, instead of the other way around.  Facial recognition software, originally intended for purposes such as verifying identities at ATM machines, preventing fraud at the DMV, and controlling access to restricted facilities, is now used to unlock our cell phones and identify people in photos on Facebook. 8. The US Department of Homeland Security is developing the Biometric Optical Surveillance System (BOSS). The purpose of the system, which consists of video cameras, computers, and a database of photographs, is to scan crowds and identify persons of interest with an accuracy of 80 to 90 percent. The BOSS research began as a way of helping American soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq identify potential suicide bombers, but in 2010 the project was taken over by the Department of Homeland Security, which plans to make the system available to police departments once it is reliable. In 2013 the system was tested at a sports arena in Kennewick, Washington, and found not yet ready for use. Research and development continue [107]. Do you support the development and implementation of BOSS as a crowd surveillance tool for police departments? Yes, I do. Police officers are notoriously bad at correctly identifying people of color, so maybe BOSS would improve their accuracy. I suspect that even at its 2013 success rate, it would still be better than relying on humans for facial identification accuracy. 9. In order to combat the counterfeiting of currency, the US Secret Service convinced several color laser printer manufacturers to add a secret code to every printed page. The code is invisible to the human eye but can be seen under a microscope. When decrypted, it reveals the serial number of the printer and the time and date the page was printed [110]. By agreeing to secretly insert the codes, did the printer manufacturers violate the privacy rights of their customers? Do you think counterfeiting using color lasers is a big enough issue to justify what the Secret Service did? Why or why not? I don’t believe the manufacturers violated consumers’ privacy rights. Printers have been embedding tracking codes in documents for decades now. I think counterfeiting is a major issue that affects not only our money’s value, but the cost of goods overall. It also hurts small businesses when they’re paid with counterfeit money. 10. Think about what you do when you get up in the morning. How would you act differently if you knew you were being watched? Would you feel uncomfortable? Do you think you would get used to being watched? I would definitely shower and get dressed differently! If I was constantly being watched, I would shower with my clothes on, then put a robe on, take off my wet clothes, and get dressed under my robe (it’s a skill you learn when you live in a dorm … and when you went to a summer camp that creepily made all the girls shower together with no barrier walls or curtains). I would definitely

CISC280 - Project 6 feel uncomfortable being watched all the time, and I don’t think I would ever get used to it. “1984” is one of my favorite books, but it wasn’t meant to be an instruction manual.

CISC280 project 6

Related Documents