In 1999, Charles J. Sykes, published a book titled: "The End of Privacy". In the same year, Lawrence Lessig published: "CODE and other laws of cyberspace". The references below give a flavor of their arguments.
Read the references below. Feel free to seek your own sources.
Among other things Sykes says, "
.... Some commentators suggest that privacy is the essence of
being human, but, in fact, it is quite possible to be human
without privacy. It is more accurate to say that privacy is
essential to being a free human being."
...
"Privacy may be all well and good, but the economics of direct
marketing is often far more compelling. The hypercompetitive
environment of the new media makes reticence seem an
unaffordable and archaic luxury, and, anyway, what are
you trying to hide? Indeed attempts to protect privacy are
frequently regarded with suspicion."
...
"Privacy is not an absolute; like free speech, or any other right, it must be weighed in the balance against such values as freedom of information, free trade, national security, and the public's need to know. Indeed, there are so many competing claims that privacy can hope to survive the balancing tests only if it is well established and well understood as a basic principle."
... (earlier)
"Snoops have always been with us. From time immemorial,
gossips, nags, governments, and journalists have tried to
listen in on our conversations, follow our comings and
goings, and hunt for grist for their endlessly turning
mills. What's new, however, is the tools they now have
at hand to watch, listen, and record. Technology makes
the fears of the paranoiac of the past seem Pollyannaish
compared with the realities of the present and the
prospects for the future. "
Lessig says,
... (Preface)
"The challenge of our generation is to reconcile these
two forces. How do we protect liberty when the architectures
of control are managed as much by the government as by the
private sector? How do we assure privacy when the ether
perpetually spies? How do we guarantee free thought when
the push is to propertize every idea? How do we guarantee
self-determination when the architectures of control are
perpetually determined elsewhere? How, in other words,
do we build a world of liberty when the threats are as
Vinge and Maddox together described them?"
... (Conclusion) ...
"We live life in real space, subject to the effects of code.
We live ordinary lives, subject to the effects of code.
We live social and political lives, subject to the effects
of code. Code regulates all these aspects of our lives,
more pervasively over time than any other regulator in our
life. Should we remain passive about this regulator? Should
we let it affect us without doing anything in return?"
...
"I've advocated a different response. We need to think collectively and sensibly about how this emerging reality will affect our lives. Do-nothingism is not an answer; something can and should be done."
The paper
Eight years have passed since the authors expressed these thoughts.
The European Union has acted on Information Privacy (much enacted
in 1998). The US has not done much as evidenced in the
Privacy International Survey .
Note that the US ranks lowest
with Russia and China in statutory protection and
privacy enforcement. Most EU countries seem to do better
on these metrics.
Find out what the EU
position is on information privacy. Consider the US situation.
In your paper, briefly summarize your understanding of the US
and EU approaches to information privacy. Then address the
challange of Lessig: "Do-nothingism is not an answer;
something can and should be done." Either argue that the
US is doing just fine with regard to information privacy or
suggest what can and should be done.
Your draft is due by noon Wednesday 12 November.
Email your draft to me at cfk@cs.swarthmore.edu by noon Wednesday, 12 Nov.
On Wednesday, I'll pass out a sign-up sheet for you to schedule a meeting with our WA Anne-Marie. Revised, polished versions of this paper will be due on Sunday, 23 Nov. Also email a copy of the final version to me at: cfk@cs.swarthmore.edu. This time I plan to share final versions with all students as a background for a discussion. Again, assume the audience for your paper has participated in our seminar. Give your paper a title. Use the introduction of your paper to engage our interest. What makes your approach interesting and significant? The body of your paper may be a reporting of others' thoughts on the topic (appropriately referenced). But preferably, it will be your own response to the issue (possibly synthesizing the ideas of others). In any case, you should make your work as convincing as possible by means of appropriate analysis, argumentation, and the use of evidence.