Cell Phones make you an open book
“The case stemmed from surveillance rules passed by Congress that included protection from legal liability for telecommunications companies that allegedly helped the U.S. spy on Americans without warrants…”
“Professor Daniel J. Solove’s deconstruction of the ‘I’ve got nothing to hide’ position, and related justifications for government surveillance, is the best brief analysis of this issue I have found. These arguments are not easy to zap because, once they are on the table, they can set the terms of the argument. As Solove explains, ‘the problem with the nothing to hide argument is with its underlying assumption that privacy is about hiding bad things.’ He warns, ‘Agreeing with this assumption concedes far too much ground and leads to an unproductive discussion of information people would likely want or not want to hide.’ Solove’s bottom line is that this argument ‘myopically views privacy as a form of concealment or secrecy…’ ” [more]
“..Security proponents just focus on the benefits of these technologies, but we also must think about what happens if they fail. This doesn’t mean not adopting the technologies, but it means we should be cautious…”
“The more we do online, the more data we leave behind: search histories, chat logs, tagged photos, friend lists, credit card information.
Once our personal information is collected, analyzed, and stored, what’s to keep it from being used or abused by a snooping government?
But, you shouldn’t have to choose between using new technology and keeping control of our personal info.Learn why privacy protections need to keep pace with the digital world we live in, and how you can demand control of your personal information.”