Cryptography

The History and Mathematics of Codes and Code Breaking

Tag: privacy safety surveillance

Little Brother: A Hyperbolic Representation of Security vs. Privacy

On page 91 in the novel, while the narrator, Marcus was in the Turkish Coffee shop, he was dumbfounded by the idea that based on the new Patriot act, people could track his purchases on his debit card. He posed the rhetorical question to the reader, “You think it’s no big deal maybe? What’s the problem with the government knowing when you buy coffee?” This is essence to me sums up the idea of privacy vs. security, because it shows how when taken to far, surveillance becomes utterly useless. There is no good that can come out of the fact that the government knows when you buy coffee. Under no circumstances would that ever become relevant in figuring out who terrorists and criminals are. Furthermore, even if it somehow contributed in the most minute way to a terrorist prediction algorithm, someone could just pay cash and get away with it anyway.

Anyone who is trying to plan some sort of nefarious attack is probably going to take the time to figure out what the government is tracking. For example, if the government tracks bank transactions worth more than 10,000 dollars, then a halfway smart criminal would make 20 small transactions worth 500$ each, and the only people that would get flagged would be innocent. If the government is tracking debit card purchases, then a criminal will just use cash. In the end, all this will do is lead to violations of the Bill of Rights and waste a huge amount of money creating a haystack with no needles in it. This is why this particular section in the book stood out to me.

Is Your Safety Worth Losing Privacy?

What do you value more: your safety or your privacy? Essentially, this is the argument Michael Morris attempts to build through his emotional example of how horrific school shootings and other incidents could be avoided through data mining. He builds this thesis on the back of his statement that “universities must be prepared to use data mining to identify and mitigate the potential for tragedy.”

Like most, I started the article with the title, which is definitely very powerful. The idea of saving lives is always a step in the right direct in my opinion. As I began to read, Morris continued to pull me closer and closer to being totally on board with the idea. Several times he used the analogy of a “crystal ball” as being this omniscient safety blanket for all. These vivid heart-rending examples were what really drew me in. Morris relied heavily on the use of pathos, which is always a good idea for an argument. However, it did create bias that deterred me in more than one way. There were no examples of how this power could be abused, regulations that needed to be in place, or even how information could be misinterpreted. After all, there are no voice inflections over the internet and sarcasm is very hard to convey. Furthermore, for me, emotions alone are not a strong enough reason for the creation of more regulations.

I personally feel that desensitizing the public to agencies accessing personal information creates greater problems down the line. Slowly, our lives are already becoming more and more monitored. I do not believe that another layer is a step in the right direction. Also, by slowly implementing access to a plethora of our information, we further open ourselves up to people we could not even begin to imagine. While the average person would not be able to hop on the a school’s server and steal personal data, it is still a possibility that someone could. Apple was not even able to prevent their iCloud database from being compromised. So who is to say that we are really safe from data mining anywhere?

Both good and bad can be found in everything. I am sure a lot of good could come from data mining for public safety. In fact, I am sure it already exists to some extent and has prevented catastrophic events. However, I feel that once that door is publicly open, it is one that cannot be shut and will root too deep.

The Price We Must Pay For Safety

To set the premise of my argument, I would like to quote Cory Doctorow in his novel “Little Brother” where he uses the phrase ” The truth is I had everything to hide, and nothing”. I feel this statement expresses the thought that we all have our “dark secrets”, so to say, which are inconsequential in the grand scheme of things. However, we would not feel safe if someone were to suddenly be aware of these secrets. Drawing from this idea, I trust that data mining is a viable option provided that the inputted data remains confidential and that only algorithms and computing (not physical analysis by other humans) be used to read the data.

I firmly believe that most people only have a problem with surveillance if it has direct (or indirect) consequences in their daily lives. Taking into consideration that it is in human nature to judge while simultaneously avoid judgement, having people monitor other people, especially the ones they might have to interact on a daily basis i.e faculty surveilling students, might cause a lot of gratuitous paranoia. It is a harsh reality that absolute privacy and complete public safety cannot be achieved together and a bit of compromise has to be made at both ends depending on the situation. In our case, I believe privacy gets the shorter end of the stick. Firstly, the age group in schools is far more likely to be swayed into committing something horrific because they are more emotionally volatile. Secondly, the victims might include young, promising students. Lastly, we must not forget that while campus violence severely affects those party to it, it affects everyone on campus as well, broadcasting a sense of hatred and danger which tarnishes the protective atmosphere an institution is supposed to have.

To conclude, I reaffirm that I agree with ideas portrayed in the essay while setting certain parameters to them which might make it an easier sell. Public safety is essential while a certain degree of privacy must be reserved. It is up to us to come to a consensus on where to draw the line depending on the scenario.

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén