Outernet: 2012 Scenario

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZEvGFDsywY&feature=youtu.be

INFORMATIONAL PRIVACY DEFINITION -

Anita Allen differentiates between two different types of privacy, physical, and informational. Physical privacy is when we go home and close the shudders; Information privacy is data about an individual. For example, when you happen upon a man with a tarp over something, that is physical privacy, they do not want other people to see under the tarp. But when you are asked by someone what you and your friend were talking about yesterday, and you choose to keep it secret and not answer them, that is informational privacy.

It is easy to tell when physical privacy has been disturbed. In the example above, if someone were to move the tarp to see what is underneath, then the privacy that the man has been disturbed. It is perhaps a little less clear as to when informational privacy has been breached. Allen states it as being disturbed when “data, facts, or conversations that a person wishes to secret or anonymize are nonetheless acquired or disclosed”

What the internet has changed the dynamics of informational privacy in a number of ways. First of all, users use the internet to contact and communicate with other people, be it through email, instant messenger, or even voice calls. Secondly, users post information about themselves and their lives on any number of format, be it blogs, videos, social networking, or forums. All of this information exists, on some server, somewhere, leaving the user with little, if any, real access or control over it. Thirdly, 100 years ago, if someone wanted to read a correspondence between two people, they would have to physically get it. With the rise of the Internet and continued universal connectivity, the only action required is to hack an email account, or a computer. Someone could even hack into an entire server network or a company to gain say customers’ names, addresses, e-mail addresses, birth dates, gender, phone numbers, and logins of 24.6 million customers, as Sony discovered in April of 2011.

CHOICE WITH PRIVACY -

When looking at privacy on the internet, one may notice that the information being posted on social networking sights such as Facebook or Twitter is information that users purposefully place there. This is leaving the responsibility of the personal information being placed on the internet up to the user. The user is liable for everything posted under his/her name because it is voluntary what they share on the internet. There isn’t somebody there saying you must post this information now, therefore the blame must be put on the individuals who post the information and make the claims on social networking websites. Any information that is posted on the internet is no longer private information because it posted on a database overseen by the government. Anything said on the internet can be tracked back to the individual user who posted them, causing there to repercussions on that user. In terms of how quickly information can spread on the internet, as little as a picture can create serious repercussions for the photographer in the long haul. When looking at the video one notices that any video or type of media that can be seen by the public, can and may be used to create a stir somewhere else. In general individuals need to be careful about what is posted on the internet because it is a public source that allows others to publicly view anything that is posted on it.

GOVERNMENTAL PRIVACY -

While most citizens consider privacy to be a right granted to them, many forget that groups of individuals, i.e. the government, large corporations, businesses, etc., have their own private information that they don’t want to get out. Many would argue that if we grant an individual privacy rights, then we should also grant privacy rights to a coalition of citizens. Many would also demand that organizations that have information pertinent to the general public should be shared, especially if by withholding this information, it could put citizens’ lives in danger. There is some limit to this transparency, however. It would not be safe to release information that our enemies could use against us, even if the public might feel that they should know about it. This brings up the problem of where the line is between transparency and safekeeping harmful information. This problem can easily be applied to our 2012 scenario: does this information cause more harm than good?

The government saves many information and data. However, many information in being saved secretly. People should have to right to know all the information possible to make a transparent government. In the other hand they are certain information that government should be censor and never known by the public. This information is secretly saved because this information might bring panic to the public. If the information release by the government will create chaos and riots it is better to keep it secretly.

For example, hypothetically imagine that the NASA found a planet and found intelligent live in this planet. The government decides to keep save this information so people do not feel scared or panic with this new. Going back to our project, imagine that the Government has information that can prove that the world will end in 2012. However, this information will be keep secretly to prevent chaos and panic in the public in the entire world.

When government keeps information secret many people feel the public should have the right to know this information. Wikileaks has a very significant roll here. Where Wikileaks takes information the government is keeping secret to show to the public. However, we have seen that government is keeping many things secret that they should not.

PRIVACY EXPECTATIONS -

Our video brings to light many plausible examples where information, both in governmental institutions and the people could spread. There is a sense of the irreversible and irretrievable with private information that is exposed upon the internet. Information is vulnerable and subject to exposure in unintended ways. For example, we used Wikileaks to demonstrate this fact in terms of governmental information privacy. They cause unrest through creating transparency with the government by exposing their information in ways that cannot be reversed. Private information may not be so readily available to hack into, steal, or revealed by just anyone, but the fact is rather that the possibility exists in the digital environment. We need to be aware of this vulnerability of private information, and our video tries to highlight that.

DANGEROUS INFORMATION -

People want to have access to all the Information with the Internet. However certain information is dangerous to the public.

For example, imagine that the NASA found a meteor that is going to crush the Earth. This information its send to the government and the government decides to keep the information secretly. The government decision was not to produce panic and chaos in the public. However, Wikileaks breaks the NASA´s database and Wikileaks publishes this information in the Internet. In few minutes people will panic with this information and the result are shown in the video. Therefore it is important to keep certain information private.

On the other hand, the public does not know what information the government is keeping secretly. Therefore, we do not know if they are having relevant information for the public. When government keeps secret information many people feel the public should have the right to know this information. Wikileaks has a very significant roll here. Where Wikileaks takes information the government is keeping secret to show to the public. However, we have seen that government is keeping many things secret that they should not.

A solution to this private problem is that the public should decide what information should or should not the government maintained secret for the safety of the public. The public has to take the decision of what information could be relevant and what information could bring chaos and panic.