Internet Privacy
The Justice Department wants to see a record of online searches. They want to make a point that porn is easily accessible to 5 year olds. It should be the parents’ job to monitor their children’s Internet use, not a 3rd party. Google has not handed over the search records because they feel it is intrusion of customer privacy. Civil liberty groups praise Google for not handing over the records. The government wants to see a broad data search and not specifically one person so that the search results are still random. Here, raises the constitutional question of free speech versus government censorship.
Nowhere in the Constitution are the people given the right to privacy. We are not protected from the government walking in on us in the shower and setting up a video camera. This seizure of evidence isn’t pointed to one particular person. It’s the people as a whole. They want to know what we collectively are searching for. Using that information they want to make stricter laws about web-filtering.
Google, Yahoo, MSN, and AOL all have privacy policies. They all say they will comply with legal processes. Meaning if the courts see something illegal or potentially harmful, they may ask for a record of searches. That’s all they say. Google says they do the same thing any law-abiding company would do. The problem here is there is no crime happening, nor a potential threat happening so should search results be shared for research information?
We tend to want to harass the government about intrusion of privacy. Does it really bother or affect anyone for researchers to look at broad data? They see x amount of people search for pizza and x amount of people look for naked bodies. Then what? They say “see how easy it is to access this porn. Porn sites must be membership only.”
The problem is if they did that, they would be restricting the free speech of the site. Well, since they can’t do that anyways, why does it matter? I think sometimes we argue over the pettiest of things and forget what we’re arguing about.
This argument about children accessing online porn has been ongoing for years. A student may have a research paper about breast cancer and due to the government, may not be able to see a model of cancer in stage 4 inside the breast. Restricting free speech restricts the free flow of ideas which is the heart of the Internet and of communication.
It’s agreed that if a criminal act is being investigated then personal records should be obtained. If a 5 year old sees hardcore porn online is he/she going to shoot himself? Or jump off a bridge? They have easier access to late night HBO and MTV then figuring out how to search for porn on the internet. Who cares? And those who do, monitor your own children.
The Justice Department wants to see a record of online searches. They want to make a point that porn is easily accessible to 5 year olds. It should be the parents’ job to monitor their children’s Internet use, not a 3rd party. Google has not handed over the search records because they feel it is intrusion of customer privacy. Civil liberty groups praise Google for not handing over the records. The government wants to see a broad data search and not specifically one person so that the search results are still random. Here, raises the constitutional question of free speech versus government censorship.
Nowhere in the Constitution are the people given the right to privacy. We are not protected from the government walking in on us in the shower and setting up a video camera. This seizure of evidence isn’t pointed to one particular person. It’s the people as a whole. They want to know what we collectively are searching for. Using that information they want to make stricter laws about web-filtering.
Google, Yahoo, MSN, and AOL all have privacy policies. They all say they will comply with legal processes. Meaning if the courts see something illegal or potentially harmful, they may ask for a record of searches. That’s all they say. Google says they do the same thing any law-abiding company would do. The problem here is there is no crime happening, nor a potential threat happening so should search results be shared for research information?
We tend to want to harass the government about intrusion of privacy. Does it really bother or affect anyone for researchers to look at broad data? They see x amount of people search for pizza and x amount of people look for naked bodies. Then what? They say “see how easy it is to access this porn. Porn sites must be membership only.”
The problem is if they did that, they would be restricting the free speech of the site. Well, since they can’t do that anyways, why does it matter? I think sometimes we argue over the pettiest of things and forget what we’re arguing about.
This argument about children accessing online porn has been ongoing for years. A student may have a research paper about breast cancer and due to the government, may not be able to see a model of cancer in stage 4 inside the breast. Restricting free speech restricts the free flow of ideas which is the heart of the Internet and of communication.
It’s agreed that if a criminal act is being investigated then personal records should be obtained. If a 5 year old sees hardcore porn online is he/she going to shoot himself? Or jump off a bridge? They have easier access to late night HBO and MTV then figuring out how to search for porn on the internet. Who cares? And those who do, monitor your own children.
posted by shortynspice at 12:54 PM
0 comments
